Measuring design diversity: A new application of Ostrom's rule types

Abstract

We draw on the Institutional Grammar Tool's rule types to empirically

analyze the design of four major procedural regulatory

instruments in the 27 member states of the European Union and

the UK. They are: consultation, regulatory impact assessment,

freedom of information, and the Ombudsman. By adopting the

Institutional Grammar Tool as conceptual lens we end up with

a single measurement template applicable to a variety of action

situations. We derive measures that are conceptually robust and

suitable for comparative analysis. With original data gathered on

the official legal base in the 28 cases, we carry out principal components

analysis. We identify design patterns across countries

and instruments; the specialization of each instrument in terms

of rule type; and the components that best explain cross-country

variation. In the conclusions we argue that to reframe the design

features of the four instruments in conceptual, theoretical

categories is not simply a taxonomical exercise but it extends to

the territory of comparative policy analysis, practice and reform.