Harvard University.
Am J Pol Sci. 2012;56(1):98-114. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00544.x.
Public agencies have discretion on the time domain, and politicians deploy numerous policy instruments to constrain it. Yet little is known about how administrative procedures that affect timing also affect the quality of agency decisions. We examine whether administrative deadlines shape decision timing and the observed quality of decisions. Using a unique and rich dataset of FDA drug approvals that allows us to examine decision timing and quality, we find that this administrative tool induces a piling of decisions before deadlines, and that these “just-before-deadline” approvals are linked with higher rates of postmarket safety problems (market withdrawals, severe safety warnings, safety alerts). Examination of data from FDA advisory committees suggests that the deadlines may impede quality by impairing late-stage deliberation and agency risk communication. Our results both support and challenge reigning theories about administrative procedures, suggesting they embody expected control-expertise trade-offs, but may also create unanticipated constituency losses.
公共机构在时间方面有自由裁量权,而政客们则部署了大量政策工具来限制这种自由裁量权。然而,人们对于影响时间安排的行政程序如何也会影响机构决策的质量知之甚少。我们研究了行政最后期限是否会影响决策时间安排和观察到的决策质量。我们利用 FDA 药品批准的独特而丰富的数据集,对决策时间安排和质量进行了研究,发现这种行政工具会促使决策在最后期限前堆积,而这些“就在最后期限前”的批准与更高的上市后安全问题(市场撤回、严重安全警告、安全警报)有关。对 FDA 咨询委员会数据的研究表明,最后期限可能会通过阻碍后期审议和机构风险沟通来降低质量。我们的研究结果既支持也挑战了现行的行政程序理论,表明它们体现了预期的控制-专业知识的权衡,但也可能造成意想不到的选区损失。