Recent literature calls for scholars to bridge the divide that has emerged between criminology and regulation and governance. In the current work, we propose that criminological opportunity theories provide one fruitful pathway to that end. Specifically, we introduce the notion of regulatory guardianship based on the concepts of guardians, guardian capability, and guardian willingness to intervene, and connect them to the regulation and governance literature. We demonstrate the utility of this perspective as the building blocks for improving theoretical understanding of the effectiveness of a broad range of parties engaged in compliance work in specific regulatory environments. Considering new empirical insights into regulatory guardianship in the design of future legislation and systems of oversight and accountability may also improve governance implementation and effectiveness.
{"title":"Reengaging Criminology in Regulation and Governance: A Synergistic Research Agenda on Regulatory Guardianship","authors":"Carole Gibbs, Fiona Chan, Rachel Boratto, Tyler Hug","doi":"10.1111/rego.70024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70024","url":null,"abstract":"Recent literature calls for scholars to bridge the divide that has emerged between criminology and regulation and governance. In the current work, we propose that criminological opportunity theories provide one fruitful pathway to that end. Specifically, we introduce the notion of regulatory guardianship based on the concepts of guardians, guardian capability, and guardian willingness to intervene, and connect them to the regulation and governance literature. We demonstrate the utility of this perspective as the building blocks for improving theoretical understanding of the effectiveness of a broad range of parties engaged in compliance work in specific regulatory environments. Considering new empirical insights into regulatory guardianship in the design of future legislation and systems of oversight and accountability may also improve governance implementation and effectiveness.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143849387","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}
Michael Giesen, Thomas Gehring, Simon Linder, Thomas Rixen
Assigning the preparation of decisions to specialized committees composed of member state representatives is a widespread response to the ‘governor's dilemma’, that is, the tension between competence and control, in international organizations (IOs). We theorize a causal mechanism referring to self‐selection and agenda‐setting effects and show how the resulting division of labor among IO bodies produces organizational influence beyond current accounts of committee governance. We demonstrate why specialized committees develop a distinct rationale of accommodating expertise with member state preferences, even if composed of member state representatives, and why agreed committee proposals are difficult to overcome by final decision‐making bodies. We argue that the organization of IO decision processes constitutes an important source of IO autonomy beyond the activities of IO administrations and independent from socialization or predispositions of individual committee members. Empirically, we show that IO committees meet the theoretically derived prerequisites for activating the causal mechanism and trace how committee influence according to the mechanism has shaped an important IO decision.
{"title":"Specialized Committees of International Organizations an Important Source of Organizational Autonomy","authors":"Michael Giesen, Thomas Gehring, Simon Linder, Thomas Rixen","doi":"10.1111/rego.70022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70022","url":null,"abstract":"Assigning the preparation of decisions to specialized committees composed of member state representatives is a widespread response to the ‘governor's dilemma’, that is, the tension between competence and control, in international organizations (IOs). We theorize a causal mechanism referring to self‐selection and agenda‐setting effects and show how the resulting division of labor among IO bodies produces organizational influence beyond current accounts of committee governance. We demonstrate why specialized committees develop a distinct rationale of accommodating expertise with member state preferences, even if composed of member state representatives, and why agreed committee proposals are difficult to overcome by final decision‐making bodies. We argue that the organization of IO decision processes constitutes an important source of IO autonomy beyond the activities of IO administrations and independent from socialization or predispositions of individual committee members. Empirically, we show that IO committees meet the theoretically derived prerequisites for activating the causal mechanism and trace how committee influence according to the mechanism has shaped an important IO decision.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"183 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143813511","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}
Primavera de Filippi, Morshed Mannan, Wessel Reijers
Emerging technologies pose many new challenges for regulation and governance on a global scale. With the advent of distributed communication networks like the Internet and decentralized ledger technologies like blockchain, new platforms emerged, disrupting existing power dynamics and bringing about new claims of sovereignty from the private sector. This special issue addresses a gap in the literature by focusing the discourse on the issue of trust and confidence in the digital realm. In particular, looking at the evolution of the web (from Web 1.0, to Web 2.0, and then Web 3), this article analyses how every iteration reflects a different way of dealing with the problem of trust online, resulting in a different regulation and governance landscape. Technology is often regarded as a new lever of regulation, attempting to resolve the problem of “trust” online, either through the introduction of a new trusted authority (Web 2.0) or through the introduction of technological guarantees that provide more assurance—or “confidence”—in the way interactions can be operationalized (Web 3). Yet, each of these technologies also introduce new risks and governance costs, ultimately shifting the problem of trust in a new direction rather than resolving it or removing the need for trust altogether. The main contribution of the articles in this special issue is providing a better understanding of the trust challenges faced and posed by emerging technologies and demonstrating how they affect institutional governance—in both theory and practice—with a view to help policymakers find appropriate answers to these challenges.
{"title":"How to Govern the Confidence Machine?","authors":"Primavera de Filippi, Morshed Mannan, Wessel Reijers","doi":"10.1111/rego.70017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70017","url":null,"abstract":"Emerging technologies pose many new challenges for regulation and governance on a global scale. With the advent of distributed communication networks like the Internet and decentralized ledger technologies like blockchain, new platforms emerged, disrupting existing power dynamics and bringing about new claims of sovereignty from the private sector. This special issue addresses a gap in the literature by focusing the discourse on the issue of <jats:italic>trust</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>confidence</jats:italic> in the digital realm. In particular, looking at the evolution of the web (from Web 1.0, to Web 2.0, and then Web 3), this article analyses how every iteration reflects a different way of dealing with the problem of <jats:italic>trust</jats:italic> online, resulting in a different regulation and governance landscape. Technology is often regarded as a new lever of regulation, attempting to resolve the problem of “trust” online, either through the introduction of a new trusted authority (Web 2.0) or through the introduction of technological guarantees that provide more assurance—or “confidence”—in the way interactions can be operationalized (Web 3). Yet, each of these technologies also introduce new risks and governance costs, ultimately shifting the problem of trust in a new direction rather than resolving it or removing the need for trust altogether. The main contribution of the articles in this special issue is providing a better understanding of the trust challenges faced and posed by emerging technologies and demonstrating how they affect institutional governance—in both theory and practice—with a view to help policymakers find appropriate answers to these challenges.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143813512","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}
Although political economy (PE) has long engaged with environmental issues, climate change has remained at the margins of the field until very recently. This article argues that fully addressing the transformative challenges brought up by climate change requires a fundamental rethinking of core PE concepts related to the state, distributional struggles, economic growth, varieties of capitalism, and markets. Rather than treating the state as a neutral regulator or market facilitator, we conceptualize the green state as actively structuring transitions through mitigation policies, adaptation strategies, and the governance of just transition conflicts. Green transitions generate new distributional conflicts—within and across countries, between incumbent and emerging industries, and among social groups with unequal exposure to climate risks and transition costs. Climate policy also challenges growth-centered economic models, raising questions about the viability of green growth versus degrowth strategies. Different varieties of capitalism are evolving in response, with distinct institutional pathways shaping the speed and character of transition efforts. Finally, we critique market-based approaches that assume price mechanisms alone can drive decarbonization, highlighting the role of non-economic values, institutional constraints, and distributional struggles in shaping green markets. By linking climate change to core debates in comparative and international political economy, we identify new research agendas for understanding the uneven and contested pathways of green transitions across economic systems. This article, along with the others in this special issue on Greening the Economy: Toward a New Political Economy, aims to bridge some of these critical gaps.
{"title":"Green Transitions: Rethinking Political Economy in the Context of Climate Change","authors":"Basak Kus, Gregory Jackson","doi":"10.1111/rego.70013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70013","url":null,"abstract":"Although political economy (PE) has long engaged with environmental issues, climate change has remained at the margins of the field until very recently. This article argues that fully addressing the transformative challenges brought up by climate change requires a fundamental rethinking of core PE concepts related to the state, distributional struggles, economic growth, varieties of capitalism, and markets. Rather than treating the state as a neutral regulator or market facilitator, we conceptualize the green state as actively structuring transitions through mitigation policies, adaptation strategies, and the governance of just transition conflicts. Green transitions generate new distributional conflicts—within and across countries, between incumbent and emerging industries, and among social groups with unequal exposure to climate risks and transition costs. Climate policy also challenges growth-centered economic models, raising questions about the viability of green growth versus degrowth strategies. Different varieties of capitalism are evolving in response, with distinct institutional pathways shaping the speed and character of transition efforts. Finally, we critique market-based approaches that assume price mechanisms alone can drive decarbonization, highlighting the role of non-economic values, institutional constraints, and distributional struggles in shaping green markets. By linking climate change to core debates in comparative and international political economy, we identify new research agendas for understanding the uneven and contested pathways of green transitions across economic systems. This article, along with the others in this special issue on <i>Greening the Economy: Toward a New Political Economy</i>, aims to bridge some of these critical gaps.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143798576","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}
New governance models increasingly employ self-regulation tools like pledges and nudges to achieve regulatory compliance. These approaches premise that voluntary compliance emerges from intrinsic motivation to cooperate rather than coercive measures. Central to their success is trust—both in government institutions and among citizens. However, rising societal polarization raises critical questions about the continued effectiveness of self-regulatory approaches. This paper examines how ideological extremity, a key dimension of polarization, affects cooperation in self-regulatory contexts. We theorize that ideological extremity erodes trust in government and interpersonal trust, thereby diminishing cooperative behavior and threatening self-regulation's viability. Furthermore, we propose that extremity transforms authority dynamics, with ideological orientation and partisan alignment increasingly determining cooperation levels. Using data from the European Social Survey (ESS) and World Value Survey (WVS), we find robust evidence that ideological extremity undermines cooperation through distinct mechanisms across the ideological spectrum. While our data has limitations, our findings have important implications for policymakers implementing self-regulation tools in polarized societies. The results suggest the need to carefully consider how ideological dynamics shape the effectiveness of voluntary compliance mechanisms.
{"title":"Polarization and Voluntary Compliance: The Impact of Ideological Extremity on the Effectiveness of Self-Regulation","authors":"Libby Maman, Yuval Feldman, Tom Tyler","doi":"10.1111/rego.70020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70020","url":null,"abstract":"New governance models increasingly employ self-regulation tools like pledges and nudges to achieve regulatory compliance. These approaches premise that voluntary compliance emerges from intrinsic motivation to cooperate rather than coercive measures. Central to their success is trust—both in government institutions and among citizens. However, rising societal polarization raises critical questions about the continued effectiveness of self-regulatory approaches. This paper examines how ideological extremity, a key dimension of polarization, affects cooperation in self-regulatory contexts. We theorize that ideological extremity erodes trust in government and interpersonal trust, thereby diminishing cooperative behavior and threatening self-regulation's viability. Furthermore, we propose that extremity transforms authority dynamics, with ideological orientation and partisan alignment increasingly determining cooperation levels. Using data from the European Social Survey (ESS) and World Value Survey (WVS), we find robust evidence that ideological extremity undermines cooperation through distinct mechanisms across the ideological spectrum. While our data has limitations, our findings have important implications for policymakers implementing self-regulation tools in polarized societies. The results suggest the need to carefully consider how ideological dynamics shape the effectiveness of voluntary compliance mechanisms.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143775964","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}
Skills formation is a pressing issue for middle-income countries given the pace of technological change. In Latin America, scholars point to the hierarchical type of capitalism and its segmentalist skills formation system as the main roadblocks to exiting the middle-income trap. Yet we contend that focusing on national models of capitalism is limited because they do not explain within-country variations in highly unequal contexts. That is the case of the emergence of state-business cooperation for skills formation in the Mexican state of Nuevo León, which seems to contradict the national hierarchical pattern. Hence, subnational analysis might uncover alternative pathways. This paper presents a framework for understanding subnational dynamics in middle-income countries, where concerted skills formation systems may emerge. We claim that a combination of external competitive threats and state-led initiatives, like the creation of organizational clusters, can harness business collective action toward coordination in skills formation. To illustrate and further develop our model, we first identify Nuevo León's superior skills availability as well as its state and business associative capacities against the rest of the Mexican states. Next, we conduct a qualitative case study of Nuevo León as a pathway case to process-trace the operation of the hypothesized mechanisms. Our analysis underscores the joint relevance of local state and business associative capacities for skills formation in adverse institutional contexts.
{"title":"From Hierarchical Capitalism to Developmental Governance: The Emergence of Concerted Skills Formation in Middle-Income Countries","authors":"Aldo Madariaga, Mariana Rangel-Padilla","doi":"10.1111/rego.70015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70015","url":null,"abstract":"Skills formation is a pressing issue for middle-income countries given the pace of technological change. In Latin America, scholars point to the hierarchical type of capitalism and its <i>segmentalist</i> skills formation system as the main roadblocks to exiting the middle-income trap. Yet we contend that focusing on national models of capitalism is limited because they do not explain within-country variations in highly unequal contexts. That is the case of the emergence of state-business cooperation for skills formation in the Mexican state of Nuevo León, which seems to contradict the national hierarchical pattern. Hence, subnational analysis might uncover alternative pathways. This paper presents a framework for understanding subnational dynamics in middle-income countries, where <i>concerted</i> skills formation systems may emerge. We claim that a combination of external competitive threats and state-led initiatives, like the creation of organizational clusters, can harness business collective action toward coordination in skills formation. To illustrate and further develop our model, we first identify Nuevo León's superior skills availability as well as its state and business associative capacities against the rest of the Mexican states. Next, we conduct a qualitative case study of Nuevo León as a pathway case to process-trace the operation of the hypothesized mechanisms. Our analysis underscores the joint relevance of local state and business associative capacities for skills formation in adverse institutional contexts.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143745372","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}
Given the ongoing climate crisis, the frequency and severity of natural disasters are increasing. These events result in enormous reconstruction costs, pose a high burden on state budgets, and potentially drive homeowners into private insolvency. One policy instrument for collectively covering such costs is a compulsory insurance scheme for natural hazards. As the impact of natural disasters is uneven, introducing mandatory insurance regulation has a range of social and financial implications. While some European countries have introduced compulsory schemes, others have adopted different policy responses. Taking this variation as the main puzzle, I consider what factors can explain the introduction of compulsory insurance for natural hazards. Building on public risk and quiet politics literature, I identify several factors and test these against three empirical cases: Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. This analysis finds that focusing events are necessary for policy change, but the position and power of interest groups, as well as exogenous shocks within the EU context, were also crucial to explaining the introduction, rejection, and even termination of compulsory insurance schemes for natural hazards.
{"title":"Taking Eco-Social Risks Seriously: Explaining the Introduction of Compulsory Insurance for Natural Hazards","authors":"Anne-Marie Parth","doi":"10.1111/rego.70019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70019","url":null,"abstract":"Given the ongoing climate crisis, the frequency and severity of natural disasters are increasing. These events result in enormous reconstruction costs, pose a high burden on state budgets, and potentially drive homeowners into private insolvency. One policy instrument for collectively covering such costs is a compulsory insurance scheme for natural hazards. As the impact of natural disasters is uneven, introducing mandatory insurance regulation has a range of social and financial implications. While some European countries have introduced compulsory schemes, others have adopted different policy responses. Taking this variation as the main puzzle, I consider what factors can explain the introduction of compulsory insurance for natural hazards. Building on public risk and quiet politics literature, I identify several factors and test these against three empirical cases: Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. This analysis finds that focusing events are necessary for policy change, but the position and power of interest groups, as well as exogenous shocks within the EU context, were also crucial to explaining the introduction, rejection, and even termination of compulsory insurance schemes for natural hazards.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143736954","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 paper proposes a transdisciplinary approach to design future degrowth-oriented industrial policies in pursuing a well-being economy in the case of a specific growth model. Specifically, we show that the case of the Visegrad countries (Czechia, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, V4s) is a clarion call for the degrowth literature to be much more modest and self-critical. It addresses the puzzling question of whether the future degrowth policies of the V4s are influenced by their unique industrialization path, which has historically relied on foreign capital. It proposes a transdisciplinary framework (based on political economy and ecological economics) to root degrowth-compatible industrial policies for the degrowth transition. It then analyzes the V4s' capital-dependent growth models historically to improve degrowth-oriented industrial policy research. It concludes with implications for future study on degrowth-oriented industrial policy, based on V4s' experience anticipated to remain in a wayward FDI-dependent mode, to make the well-being economy-seeking endeavor more scientifically sound.
{"title":"Well-Being Economy in the Visegrad Countries: Lessons for Degrowth-Oriented Industrial Policy","authors":"Oliver Kovacs, Endre Domonkos","doi":"10.1111/rego.70014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70014","url":null,"abstract":"This paper proposes a transdisciplinary approach to design future degrowth-oriented industrial policies in pursuing a well-being economy in the case of a specific growth model. Specifically, we show that the case of the Visegrad countries (Czechia, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, V4s) is a clarion call for the degrowth literature to be much more modest and self-critical. It addresses the puzzling question of whether the future degrowth policies of the V4s are influenced by their unique industrialization path, which has historically relied on foreign capital. It proposes a transdisciplinary framework (based on political economy and ecological economics) to root degrowth-compatible industrial policies for the degrowth transition. It then analyzes the V4s' capital-dependent growth models historically to improve degrowth-oriented industrial policy research. It concludes with implications for future study on degrowth-oriented industrial policy, based on V4s' experience anticipated to remain in a wayward FDI-dependent mode, to make the well-being economy-seeking endeavor more scientifically sound.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143640752","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}
Though often framed as a technocratic tool, impact assessment is a core element of the political agenda-setting process. In this article, we show that decisions about what is subject to legislative debate are made during impact assessment; specifically, during the drafting of the assessment report. Using a social process tracing methodology, we analyze the removal from the agenda of provisions for stronger alcohol advertising rules during the revision of the EU's Audiovisual Media Services Directive. We identify and test three possible explanations for this non-decision, drawing on material not previously in the public domain, and exploring how procedural politicking in the context of the EU's Better Regulation agenda shapes the drafting process. Concluding that the non-decision on alcohol advertising regulation was most likely prompted by combined political pressure from within and outwith the Commission, we argue for greater attention to impact assessment as a tool for mobilizing bias and agenda-setting.
{"title":"Impact Assessment as Agenda-Setting: Procedural Politicking and the Mobilization of Bias in the European Union's Audiovisual Media Services Directive","authors":"Eleanor Brooks, Kathrin Lauber","doi":"10.1111/rego.70016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70016","url":null,"abstract":"Though often framed as a technocratic tool, impact assessment is a core element of the political agenda-setting process. In this article, we show that decisions about what is subject to legislative debate are made during impact assessment; specifically, during the drafting of the assessment report. Using a social process tracing methodology, we analyze the removal from the agenda of provisions for stronger alcohol advertising rules during the revision of the EU's Audiovisual Media Services Directive. We identify and test three possible explanations for this non-decision, drawing on material not previously in the public domain, and exploring how procedural politicking in the context of the EU's Better Regulation agenda shapes the drafting process. Concluding that the non-decision on alcohol advertising regulation was most likely prompted by combined political pressure from within and outwith the Commission, we argue for greater attention to impact assessment as a tool for mobilizing bias and agenda-setting.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143619010","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 do provisions for administrative sanctioning affect the implementation of loose legal norms? To streamline regulation, governments have increased their penal capacity by authorizing administrative sanctioning, and they have decentralized regulatory responsibility by loosening legal norms. A case study of Norway's animal welfare governance shows how using administrative sanctions to enforce loose legal norms led to unpredictable sanctioning and, thereby, subverted regulatees' trust in law enforcement. Ensuing resistance from regulatees pressured inspectors to regain legitimacy by tightening loose legal norms and by backing down on administrative sanctioning. Inspectors thus reversed streamlining policies to protect the primary purpose of their profession: to motivate compliance with animal welfare law. The case highlights unintended consequences of streamlining regulation. It also illustrates how frontline workers may protect their primary purpose by disregarding policies they perceive as disruptive.
{"title":"Administrative Sanctions and Loose Legal Norms: Resistance and Street-Level Policy Reversal in Norway","authors":"Stig S. Gezelius","doi":"10.1111/rego.70011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70011","url":null,"abstract":"How do provisions for administrative sanctioning affect the implementation of loose legal norms? To streamline regulation, governments have increased their penal capacity by authorizing administrative sanctioning, and they have decentralized regulatory responsibility by loosening legal norms. A case study of Norway's animal welfare governance shows how using administrative sanctions to enforce loose legal norms led to unpredictable sanctioning and, thereby, subverted regulatees' trust in law enforcement. Ensuing resistance from regulatees pressured inspectors to regain legitimacy by tightening loose legal norms and by backing down on administrative sanctioning. Inspectors thus reversed streamlining policies to protect the primary purpose of their profession: to motivate compliance with animal welfare law. The case highlights unintended consequences of streamlining regulation. It also illustrates how frontline workers may protect their primary purpose by disregarding policies they perceive as disruptive.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143575424","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：