Discretion gives decision makers choices as to how resources are allocated, or how other aspects of state largesse or coercion are deployed. Discretionary state power challenges aspects of the rule of law, first by transferring decisions from legislators to departments, agencies and street-level bureaucrats and secondly by risking the uniform application of key fairness and equality norms. Concerns to find alternative and decentred forms of regulation gave rise to new types of regulation, sometimes labeled ‘regulatory capitalism’. Regulatory capitalism highlights the roles of a wider range of actors exercising powers and a wider range of instruments. It includes also new forms of discretion, for example over automated decision making processes, over the formulation and dissemination of league tables or over the use of behavioural measures. This paper takes a novel approach by linking and extending the significant literature on these changing patterns of regulatory administration with consideration of the changing modes of deployment of discretion. Using this specific lens, we observe two potentially contradictory trends: an increase in determining and structuring administrative decision, leading to a more transparent use of discretion; and the increased use of automated decision making processes which have the potential of producing a less transparent black box scenario.

中文翻译：

---

监管自由裁量权：监管资本主义时代的权力结构

自由裁量权让决策者可以选择如何分配资源，或者如何部署国家慷慨或胁迫的其他方面。自由裁量的国家权力挑战法治的各个方面，首先是将决策从立法者转移到部门、机构和基层官僚，其次是冒着统一适用关键公平和平等规范的风险。对寻找替代性和去中心化监管形式的关注催生了新型监管，有时被称为“监管资本主义”。监管资本主义突出了行使权力的更广泛的行为者和更广泛的工具的作用。它还包括新形式的自由裁量权，例如自动决策过程、排行榜的制定和传播或行为测量的使用。本文采用了一种新颖的方法，将有关这些不断变化的监管管理模式的重要文献联系起来并加以扩展，同时考虑到自由裁量权部署模式的变化。使用这个特定的镜头，我们观察到两个可能相互矛盾的趋势：决定和构建行政决策的增加，导致更透明地使用自由裁量权；以及更多地使用自动化决策过程，这些过程有可能产生不那么透明的黑匣子场景。增加行政决定的确定和结构，从而使自由裁量权的使用更加透明；以及更多地使用自动化决策过程，这些过程有可能产生不那么透明的黑匣子场景。增加行政决定的确定和结构，从而使自由裁量权的使用更加透明；以及更多地使用自动化决策过程，这些过程有可能产生不那么透明的黑匣子场景。