Andrej Christian Lindholst, Kurt Klaudi Klausen, Morten Balle Hansen, Peter Sørensen
The unsettling conditions of contemporary society, marked by recurrent transboundary crises and turbulence, stimulate discussions about the resilience of different governing models. Public bureaucracy and its governing instruments are confronted with the virtues and vices of models dominated by markets and networks. We present a case study demonstrating how the governing instruments within a system resembling a neo‐Weberian state model with a reformed and modernized bureaucracy effectively facilitated the seamless integration of Ukrainian war refugees arriving unexpectedly in 2022. The findings show that the model's short‐term resilience is rooted in a combined and adaptive utilization of legal and financial provisions, expertise embedded within existing bureaucratic structures, ad hoc coordinative organizational structures, and active collaboration with and support from civil society. These findings support arguments on the relative virtues and the resilience of the neo‐Weberian state model. Normative caveats, however, indicate several long‐term challenges.
{"title":"The governing instruments for resilience in the neo‐Weberian state: The challenge of integrating Ukrainian war refugees","authors":"Andrej Christian Lindholst, Kurt Klaudi Klausen, Morten Balle Hansen, Peter Sørensen","doi":"10.1111/rego.12608","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12608","url":null,"abstract":"The unsettling conditions of contemporary society, marked by recurrent transboundary crises and turbulence, stimulate discussions about the resilience of different governing models. Public bureaucracy and its governing instruments are confronted with the virtues and vices of models dominated by markets and networks. We present a case study demonstrating how the governing instruments within a system resembling a neo‐Weberian state model with a reformed and modernized bureaucracy effectively facilitated the seamless integration of Ukrainian war refugees arriving unexpectedly in 2022. The findings show that the model's short‐term resilience is rooted in a combined and adaptive utilization of legal and financial provisions, expertise embedded within existing bureaucratic structures, ad hoc coordinative organizational structures, and active collaboration with and support from civil society. These findings support arguments on the relative virtues and the resilience of the neo‐Weberian state model. Normative caveats, however, indicate several long‐term challenges.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141448146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Interfirm self-regulation through trade associations is common but its effectiveness is debated and likely varies by time, country, and industry. This study examines self-regulation of pharmaceutical marketing, characterized by delegation of major regulatory responsibilities to trade associations' self-regulatory bodies. In addressing critical research gaps, this study first analyzes 1,776 complaints against pharmaceutical companies in the UK over 18 years (2004–2021). Findings regarding severe, repeat, and complex offending, and delays in complaint resolution raise significant concerns about the adequacy of UK's self-regulation in deterring wrongdoing. Second, the study conducts international comparisons using recent complaints data from 30 European pharmaceutical industry self-regulatory bodies. Despite shortcomings of UK's self-regulation, it appears more adept at identifying potential breaches compared to most other countries, suggesting significant underdetection or underreporting of drug company misconduct in Europe. On balance, our findings are concerning given the negative effects of poorly regulated pharmaceutical marketing on medical practice and health.
{"title":"Patterns of company misconduct, recidivism, and complaint resolution delays: A temporal analysis of UK pharmaceutical industry self-regulation within the European context","authors":"Shai Mulinari, Dylan Pashley, Piotr Ozieranski","doi":"10.1111/rego.12609","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12609","url":null,"abstract":"Interfirm self-regulation through trade associations is common but its effectiveness is debated and likely varies by time, country, and industry. This study examines self-regulation of pharmaceutical marketing, characterized by delegation of major regulatory responsibilities to trade associations' self-regulatory bodies. In addressing critical research gaps, this study first analyzes 1,776 complaints against pharmaceutical companies in the UK over 18 years (2004–2021). Findings regarding severe, repeat, and complex offending, and delays in complaint resolution raise significant concerns about the adequacy of UK's self-regulation in deterring wrongdoing. Second, the study conducts international comparisons using recent complaints data from 30 European pharmaceutical industry self-regulatory bodies. Despite shortcomings of UK's self-regulation, it appears more adept at identifying potential breaches compared to most other countries, suggesting significant underdetection or underreporting of drug company misconduct in Europe. On balance, our findings are concerning given the negative effects of poorly regulated pharmaceutical marketing on medical practice and health.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141435867","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Worker cooperatives in the gig economy can involve large and heterogeneous memberships, which makes them vulnerable to member opportunism depleting collective resources. External shocks may present another challenge for collective resource management. This raises the question of how heterogeneous cooperatives design rules to mitigate opportunistic behavior and whether these rules evolve in the face of external shocks. We study the case of Smart Belgium between 2017 and 2022, thereby covering the COVID-19 pandemic and new cooperative legislation as external shocks. Building on the institutional grammar methodology, we analyze 412 rules of Smart. The findings indicate that external shocks with sudden resource scarcity do not necessarily motivate rule changes (COVID-19) while external shocks without an effect on collective resources can motivate rule changes (national policy change). The study also shows what kind of rules heterogeneous cooperatives may design to mitigate opportunism.
{"title":"Using the institutional grammar to understand collective resource management in a heterogenous cooperative facing external shocks","authors":"Damion Jonathan Bunders, Tine De Moor","doi":"10.1111/rego.12607","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12607","url":null,"abstract":"Worker cooperatives in the gig economy can involve large and heterogeneous memberships, which makes them vulnerable to member opportunism depleting collective resources. External shocks may present another challenge for collective resource management. This raises the question of how heterogeneous cooperatives design rules to mitigate opportunistic behavior and whether these rules evolve in the face of external shocks. We study the case of Smart Belgium between 2017 and 2022, thereby covering the COVID-19 pandemic and new cooperative legislation as external shocks. Building on the institutional grammar methodology, we analyze 412 rules of Smart. The findings indicate that external shocks with sudden resource scarcity do not necessarily motivate rule changes (COVID-19) while external shocks without an effect on collective resources can motivate rule changes (national policy change). The study also shows what kind of rules heterogeneous cooperatives may design to mitigate opportunism.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141333920","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Bureaucratic overburdening has emerged as an important theme in public policy and administration research. The concept signifies a state where public administrators are overwhelmed with more tasks and responsibilities than they can effectively handle. Researchers attribute this phenomenon to several key factors, such as an increasing assault on the public sector, a growing volume of policies to enforce, and “external” shocks. These studies converge on the perception that the public sector's capacity to effectively implement policies and to address societal problems is progressively diminishing. However, there is a clear knowledge gap regarding the breadth, dynamics, and pervasiveness of this issue, as existing research often narrows its focus on the implementation of specific policies or policy sectors. This paper addresses this research gap by mapping the frequency of bureaucratic overload reports in newspaper articles from Italy, Ireland, and Germany, spanning two decades from 2003 to 2022. In the second step, we describe the drivers of overload that we coded in a random sample of articles. Our research reveals that the overburdening of public administration is indeed an escalating problem resulting from an “explosive” cocktail of external and internal challenges that simultaneously affect public authorities.
{"title":"Mapping bureaucratic overload: Dynamics and drivers in media coverage across three European countries","authors":"Alexa Lenz, Yves Steinebach, Mattia Casula","doi":"10.1111/rego.12606","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12606","url":null,"abstract":"Bureaucratic overburdening has emerged as an important theme in public policy and administration research. The concept signifies a state where public administrators are overwhelmed with more tasks and responsibilities than they can effectively handle. Researchers attribute this phenomenon to several key factors, such as an increasing assault on the public sector, a growing volume of policies to enforce, and “external” shocks. These studies converge on the perception that the public sector's capacity to effectively implement policies and to address societal problems is progressively diminishing. However, there is a clear knowledge gap regarding the breadth, dynamics, and pervasiveness of this issue, as existing research often narrows its focus on the implementation of specific policies or policy sectors. This paper addresses this research gap by mapping the frequency of bureaucratic overload reports in newspaper articles from Italy, Ireland, and Germany, spanning two decades from 2003 to 2022. In the second step, we describe the drivers of overload that we coded in a random sample of articles. Our research reveals that the overburdening of public administration is indeed an escalating problem resulting from an “explosive” cocktail of external and internal challenges that simultaneously affect public authorities.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141299164","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article reports findings of a Q Methodology study in which we explored the opinions of employees from eight Dutch regulatory agencies on how agencies gain their reputation. This is the largest study to date examining employee's views on the relative importance of different factors in reputation acquisition by public organizations, and the first analyzing employees in regulatory agencies. Results reveal five distinct “profiles” of opinion among employees about the factors most important in reputation acquisition. Regression analysis, further, supports that different regulatory agencies are dominated by employees with different opinions on how reputation is formed. These findings contribute to the growing empirical literature on how regulatory agencies, and their various employees, understand and approach reputation management.
{"title":"Regulatory agency reputation acquisition: A Q Methodology analysis of the views of agency employees","authors":"Lauren A. Fahy, Erik-Hans Klijn, Judith van Erp","doi":"10.1111/rego.12603","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12603","url":null,"abstract":"This article reports findings of a Q Methodology study in which we explored the opinions of employees from eight Dutch regulatory agencies on how agencies gain their reputation. This is the largest study to date examining employee's views on the relative importance of different factors in reputation acquisition by public organizations, and the first analyzing employees in regulatory agencies. Results reveal five distinct “profiles” of opinion among employees about the factors most important in reputation acquisition. Regression analysis, further, supports that different regulatory agencies are dominated by employees with different opinions on how reputation is formed. These findings contribute to the growing empirical literature on how regulatory agencies, and their various employees, understand and approach reputation management.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141299270","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Koen Verhoest, Martino Maggetti, Edoardo Guaschino, Jan Wynen
Trust is expected to play a vital role in regulatory regimes. However, how trust affects the performance and legitimacy of these regimes is poorly understood. Our study examines how the interplay of trust and distrust relationships among and toward political, administrative, and regulatory actors shapes perceptions of performance and legitimacy. Drawing on cross-country survey data measuring trust and distrust among various actors within regulatory regimes, our analysis reveals that relationships of watchful trust in terms of a “trust but verify” attitude among actors are conducive to higher regulatory performance. Conversely, the combination of high trust with low distrust fosters regime legitimacy, while high levels of watchfulness even have a detrimental impact on legitimacy. Our research underscores that actors within regulatory regimes adopt a logic of consequentiality when evaluating and contributing to regime performance. In contrast, for fostering regime legitimacy, a logic of appropriateness appears to be more relevant.
{"title":"How trust matters for the performance and legitimacy of regulatory regimes: The differential impact of watchful trust and good-faith trust","authors":"Koen Verhoest, Martino Maggetti, Edoardo Guaschino, Jan Wynen","doi":"10.1111/rego.12596","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12596","url":null,"abstract":"Trust is expected to play a vital role in regulatory regimes. However, how trust affects the performance and legitimacy of these regimes is poorly understood. Our study examines how the interplay of trust and distrust relationships among and toward political, administrative, and regulatory actors shapes perceptions of performance and legitimacy. Drawing on cross-country survey data measuring trust and distrust among various actors within regulatory regimes, our analysis reveals that relationships of watchful trust in terms of a “trust but verify” attitude among actors are conducive to higher regulatory performance. Conversely, the combination of high trust with low distrust fosters regime legitimacy, while high levels of watchfulness even have a detrimental impact on legitimacy. Our research underscores that actors within regulatory regimes adopt a logic of consequentiality when evaluating and contributing to regime performance. In contrast, for fostering regime legitimacy, a logic of appropriateness appears to be more relevant.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141251999","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Cooperative forms of policy implementation bear the promise of being an answer to the policy delivery challenge resulting from policy growth, with the quality of network management often rated as a key success factor. The positive relationship between network management and performance in networks, however, is primarily supported by theoretical reasoning rather than empirical evidence. The present study empirically investigates this relationship in the context of rapid policy growth resulting from a change in the governance structure in the field of smoking prevention in Switzerland. The results of the analyzed 13 Swiss smoking prevention networks and the 187 associated projects show that network management improves the performance of new policy projects by facilitating access to implementing partners and target groups, but has no impact on output delivery in existing interventions. The study shows that networks, if actively managed, can be a means to ensure adequate enforcement in the context of increasing numbers of new policies.
{"title":"Come together: Does network management make a difference for collaborative implementation performance in the context of sudden policy growth?","authors":"Susanne Hadorn, Fritz Sager","doi":"10.1111/rego.12595","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12595","url":null,"abstract":"Cooperative forms of policy implementation bear the promise of being an answer to the policy delivery challenge resulting from policy growth, with the quality of network management often rated as a key success factor. The positive relationship between network management and performance in networks, however, is primarily supported by theoretical reasoning rather than empirical evidence. The present study empirically investigates this relationship in the context of rapid policy growth resulting from a change in the governance structure in the field of smoking prevention in Switzerland. The results of the analyzed 13 Swiss smoking prevention networks and the 187 associated projects show that network management improves the performance of new policy projects by facilitating access to implementing partners and target groups, but has no impact on output delivery in existing interventions. The study shows that networks, if actively managed, can be a means to ensure adequate enforcement in the context of increasing numbers of new policies.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141185261","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The governing attributes of authority, legitimacy, and accountability are essential to any type of governance to be able to function effectively. For public forms of governing, the attributes are part of the structures and institutions of democratic states, for example, through the tripartition of power, voting, and legal structures. For private forms of governance, such as multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs), these attributes need to be built or attained. This paper sets out to examine how MSIs increase their governing capacity through public–private interactions. Empirically, the paper investigates two national MSIs in mining: the Finnish Sustainable Mining Network and the Chilean Dialogo Territorial. I find that as part of the interactions within the governance sphere of mining, the roles, governance capacity, and expectations toward public and private actors are rearranged. I propose the term “governance transference” to denote the shift of authority, legitimacy, and accountability from one governing body to another. This phenomenon occurs through three mechanisms: lending legitimacy, emulating decision-making, and enmeshing expectations. The findings extend the previous literature on the outcomes of public–private governance interactions and governance spheres.
{"title":"Governance transference and shifting capacities and expectations in multi-stakeholder initiatives","authors":"Johanna Järvelä","doi":"10.1111/rego.12597","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12597","url":null,"abstract":"The governing attributes of authority, legitimacy, and accountability are essential to any type of governance to be able to function effectively. For public forms of governing, the attributes are part of the structures and institutions of democratic states, for example, through the tripartition of power, voting, and legal structures. For private forms of governance, such as multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs), these attributes need to be built or attained. This paper sets out to examine how MSIs increase their governing capacity through public–private interactions. Empirically, the paper investigates two national MSIs in mining: the Finnish Sustainable Mining Network and the Chilean Dialogo Territorial. I find that as part of the interactions within the governance sphere of mining, the roles, governance capacity, and expectations toward public and private actors are rearranged. I propose the term “governance transference” to denote the shift of authority, legitimacy, and accountability from one governing body to another. This phenomenon occurs through three mechanisms: lending legitimacy, emulating decision-making, and enmeshing expectations. The findings extend the previous literature on the outcomes of public–private governance interactions and governance spheres.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141156558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Making security has been Leviathan's home turf and its prime responsibility. Yet, while security states in advanced democracies share this uniform purpose, there is vast variation in how they legitimize and how they make security policies. First, the political authority of elected policy‐makers is sometimes superseded by the epistemic authority of experts. Second, states make security, in some instances, by drawing on their own capacities, whereas in other fields they rely on rules to manage non‐state actors. Based on this variation in authority foundations and policy instruments, we disentangle Leviathan into different types of (i) positive, (ii) managing, (iii) technocratic, and (iv) regulatory security states. Our typology helps better understand contemporary security policy‐making; it advances regulatory governance theory by conceptualizing the relationship between expertise and rules in a complex and contested issue area; and it provides insights into the “new economic security state” and the domestic underpinnings of weaponized interdependence.
{"title":"Disentangling Leviathan on its home turf: Authority foundations, policy instruments, and the making of security","authors":"Andreas Kruck, Moritz Weiss","doi":"10.1111/rego.12594","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12594","url":null,"abstract":"Making security has been <jats:italic>Leviathan's</jats:italic> home turf and its prime responsibility. Yet, while security states in advanced democracies share this uniform purpose, there is vast variation in how they legitimize and how they make security policies. First, the political authority of elected policy‐makers is sometimes superseded by the epistemic authority of experts. Second, states make security, in some instances, by drawing on their own capacities, whereas in other fields they rely on rules to manage non‐state actors. Based on this variation in authority foundations and policy instruments, we disentangle <jats:italic>Leviathan</jats:italic> into different types of (i) positive, (ii) managing, (iii) technocratic, and (iv) regulatory security states. Our typology helps better understand contemporary security policy‐making; it advances regulatory governance theory by conceptualizing the relationship between expertise and rules in a complex and contested issue area; and it provides insights into the “new economic security state” and the domestic underpinnings of weaponized interdependence.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140640237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
How does regulatory statehood develop from the regulatory work which governments have always done? This article challenges conventional views that regulatory statehood is achieved by transition to arm's length agencies and that it replaces court‐based enforcement or displaces legislatures in favor of less accountable executive power. To do so, we examine the major 19th‐century surge in development of micro‐economic regulatory statehood in Britain, which had followed more gradual development in early modern times. We show that when the transformation of the Board of Trade is understood properly, a richer appreciation emerges of how regulatory statehood is institutionalized generally and of British state‐making in particular. To demonstrate this, we introduce a novel conceptual framework for analyzing and assessing change on multiple dimensions of regulatory statehood, distinguishing depth of regulatory capacity and regulatory capability along six dimensions.
{"title":"The Board of Trade and the regulatory state in the long 19th century, 1815–1914","authors":"Perri 6, Eva Heims","doi":"10.1111/rego.12593","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12593","url":null,"abstract":"How does regulatory statehood develop from the regulatory work which governments have always done? This article challenges conventional views that regulatory statehood is achieved by transition to arm's length agencies and that it replaces court‐based enforcement or displaces legislatures in favor of less accountable executive power. To do so, we examine the major 19th‐century surge in development of micro‐economic regulatory statehood in Britain, which had followed more gradual development in early modern times. We show that when the transformation of the Board of Trade is understood properly, a richer appreciation emerges of how regulatory statehood is institutionalized generally and of British state‐making in particular. To demonstrate this, we introduce a novel conceptual framework for analyzing and assessing change on multiple dimensions of regulatory statehood, distinguishing depth of regulatory capacity and regulatory capability along six dimensions.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140622869","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：