It’s called “Measuring the formal independence of regulatory agencies”, it’s written together with Christel Koop, and it’s available online through JEPP.

The argument we make is quite simple, even if the graphs and models we use aren’t.

We take an existing index of independence, and we test whether all the items in the index fit, and whether the different item response categories are correctly ordered.

We find that items on method of appointment and the powers of the regulator aren’t related to the rest of the items, and so should be dropped.

Unfortunately, the article is a bit hard to understand unless you’ve read the original Gilardi article and have an idea of what the different response categories are. To see the different response categories, and full descriptives for the data we used, check out our previous report.

In a letter to Professor Nutt, Mr Johnson writes: “I cannot have public confusion between scientific advice and policy, and have therefore lost confidence in your ability to advise me as chair of the ACMD… I would therefore ask you to step down from the council with immediate effect.”