Novelty and the demand for private regulation: Evidence from data privacy governance

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Business and Politics Pub Date : 2023-07-26 DOI:10.1017/bap.2023.16
Guillaume Beaumier
{"title":"Novelty and the demand for private regulation: Evidence from data privacy governance","authors":"Guillaume Beaumier","doi":"10.1017/bap.2023.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Private regulations are often presented as low-cost and flexible institutions that can act as policy incubators. In this article, I question under which conditions they go beyond legal compliance and experiment with new rules. Based on a content analysis of 126 data privacy regulations adopted between 1995 and 2016 in the European Union and the United States and thirty-five semistructured interviews, I show that most private regulations include no regulatory novelties. By disaggregating the temporal and spatial distribution of the few novelties, I add nuance to this overall finding and show that private regulations adopted in the United States before 2000 experimented more than others. I argue that this variation reflects the different demands for private regulation in the two jurisdictions and their evolution over time. In the European Union, the early adoption of privacy laws led public regulators and businesses to look for private regulations to reduce transaction costs and thus limited their interest in experimenting with new requirements. In the United States, businesses hoped to gain a first-mover advantage by including new data privacy rules in their private regulations. However, the growing use of private regulations to ease transnational data flows also led to their use as tools to reduce transaction costs.","PeriodicalId":39749,"journal":{"name":"Business and Politics","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bap.2023.16","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Private regulations are often presented as low-cost and flexible institutions that can act as policy incubators. In this article, I question under which conditions they go beyond legal compliance and experiment with new rules. Based on a content analysis of 126 data privacy regulations adopted between 1995 and 2016 in the European Union and the United States and thirty-five semistructured interviews, I show that most private regulations include no regulatory novelties. By disaggregating the temporal and spatial distribution of the few novelties, I add nuance to this overall finding and show that private regulations adopted in the United States before 2000 experimented more than others. I argue that this variation reflects the different demands for private regulation in the two jurisdictions and their evolution over time. In the European Union, the early adoption of privacy laws led public regulators and businesses to look for private regulations to reduce transaction costs and thus limited their interest in experimenting with new requirements. In the United States, businesses hoped to gain a first-mover advantage by including new data privacy rules in their private regulations. However, the growing use of private regulations to ease transnational data flows also led to their use as tools to reduce transaction costs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新颖性和私人监管的需求:来自数据隐私治理的证据
私人监管往往被描述为低成本和灵活的机构,可以作为政策孵化器。在本文中,我质疑在哪些条件下他们会超越法律遵从并尝试新的规则。基于对欧盟和美国1995年至2016年间通过的126项数据隐私法规的内容分析和35次半结构化访谈,我表明大多数私人法规不包括监管创新。通过对少数创新的时间和空间分布进行分解,我为这一总体发现添加了细微差别,并表明2000年之前美国采用的私人法规比其他国家更具实验性。我认为,这种差异反映了两个司法管辖区对私人监管的不同要求及其随时间的演变。在欧盟,隐私法的早期采用导致公共监管机构和企业寻找私人法规来降低交易成本,从而限制了他们试验新要求的兴趣。在美国,企业希望通过将新的数据隐私规则纳入其私人法规来获得先发优势。然而,越来越多地使用私人法规来缓解跨国数据流动,也导致它们被用作降低交易成本的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Business and Politics
Business and Politics Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Business and Politics solicits articles within the broad area of the interaction between firms and political actors. Two specific areas are of particular interest to the journal. The first concerns the use of non-market corporate strategy. These efforts include internal organizational design decisions as well as external strategies. Internal organizational design refers to management structure, sourcing decisions, and transnational organization with respect to the firm"s non-market environment. External strategies include legal tactics, testimony, lobbying and other means to influence policy makers at all levels of government and international institutions as an adjunct to market strategies of the firm.
期刊最新文献
Housebuilding, land, and structural power: the case of mortgage market support schemes in England Blue versus red: partisan firm leaders and corporate culture The Paradox of Algorithms and Blame on Public Decision-makers Tycoon candidates, electoral strategies, and voter support: a survey experiment in South Africa Why is there no investor-state dispute settlement in RCEP? bargaining and contestation in the investment regime
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1