The policy drivers for preventing system risks – risks that threaten vital parts of society – represent an as-yet understudied subject. A fundamental characteristic of an effective prevention policy for system risks is long-term investment. This article presents evidence that long-term investment in prevention follows a cyclical rather than a stable pattern, which implies large costs to the welfare of future generations. This cycle is usually triggered by a shock that shifts the set of preventive policies that are acceptable to or even demanded by society. After a rapid rise in preventive investment, however, attention often wanes, and the downturn of the prevention cycle sets in. While policy shocks from crises and disasters are commonly studied, their policy legacies rarely have been. This article offers a theoretical framework for this “prevention cycle”, demonstrates its applicability in understanding policy investment in several system risks and offers suggestions for its fundamental causes.
{"title":"The Prevention Cycle: State Investments in Preventing System Risks over Time","authors":"Bas Heerma van Voss","doi":"10.1017/err.2023.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.12","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The policy drivers for preventing system risks – risks that threaten vital parts of society – represent an as-yet understudied subject. A fundamental characteristic of an effective prevention policy for system risks is long-term investment. This article presents evidence that long-term investment in prevention follows a cyclical rather than a stable pattern, which implies large costs to the welfare of future generations. This cycle is usually triggered by a shock that shifts the set of preventive policies that are acceptable to or even demanded by society. After a rapid rise in preventive investment, however, attention often wanes, and the downturn of the prevention cycle sets in. While policy shocks from crises and disasters are commonly studied, their policy legacies rarely have been. This article offers a theoretical framework for this “prevention cycle”, demonstrates its applicability in understanding policy investment in several system risks and offers suggestions for its fundamental causes.","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43723988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"ERR volume 14 issue 2 Cover and Front matter","authors":"Marjolein van Asselt","doi":"10.1017/err.2023.39","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.39","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":" ","pages":"f1 - f4"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47283594","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
French whistleblower legislation establishes a unified legal regime for the treatment of reports and for the protection of whistleblowers. Drawing on French whistleblower law, recently amended by the transposition of Directive 2019/1937 of 23 October 2019, this article examines whether the specific features of whistleblowing in relation to public health and environmental risks are adequately addressed by this unified regime. The article identifies four key factors for the effective handling of whistleblowing relating to public health and the environment: (1) the possibility of protecting whistleblowers who report facts gathered outside the workplace; (2) the possibility of protecting legal persons as whistleblowers; (3) the possibility of carrying out in-depth investigations to characterise the reality of the risks reported; and (4) the possibility of archiving whistleblowing in order to detect weak signals of risks over the long term. In these four areas, the article provides a nuanced diagnosis of the situation in French law and offers suggestions for improvement.
{"title":"One Size Fits All? Handling Public Health and Environmental Risks in French Whistleblowing Legislation","authors":"O. Leclerc","doi":"10.1017/err.2023.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.14","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 French whistleblower legislation establishes a unified legal regime for the treatment of reports and for the protection of whistleblowers. Drawing on French whistleblower law, recently amended by the transposition of Directive 2019/1937 of 23 October 2019, this article examines whether the specific features of whistleblowing in relation to public health and environmental risks are adequately addressed by this unified regime. The article identifies four key factors for the effective handling of whistleblowing relating to public health and the environment: (1) the possibility of protecting whistleblowers who report facts gathered outside the workplace; (2) the possibility of protecting legal persons as whistleblowers; (3) the possibility of carrying out in-depth investigations to characterise the reality of the risks reported; and (4) the possibility of archiving whistleblowing in order to detect weak signals of risks over the long term. In these four areas, the article provides a nuanced diagnosis of the situation in French law and offers suggestions for improvement.","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45998712","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"To Address “Greenwashing” and Misleading Environmental Claims, the European Commission Publishes a Proposal on “Green Claims” and Their Substantiation","authors":"I. Carreño","doi":"10.1017/err.2023.36","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.36","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41857980","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Openness of decision-making and policy-shaping activities is a fundamental tenet of the European integration project. Article 1 TEU expressly defines the European Union (EU) as a Union in which “decisions are taken as openly as possible”.1 Openness, and its corollary principles of transparency and participation, are essential parts of the EU’s constitutional commitments to democratic principles of representative and participatory democracy.2 According to Article 11 TEU, the institutions shall give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to voice and publicly exchange their views in all areas of Union action. Citizen participation is, however, possible only where transparency and access to information are ensured to the public, being through access to documents or publication of information. Thus, Article 15 TFEU clearly establishes “a right of access to documents of the Union’s institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, whatever their medium” – a right later enshrined also in Article 42 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Such fundamental commitments to transparency and participation apply to legislative3 as well as to administrative activities.4 The benefits of decision-making procedures based on an open and transparent dialogue with citizens are widely recognised in the literature, which connects them to aspects relating to input-, throughput-5 and output-orientated legitimacy.6 Transparency, in particular,
{"title":"Transparency and Participation in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: Concluding Remarks","authors":"Annalisa Volpato, M. Eliantonio, Kathryn Wright","doi":"10.1017/err.2023.34","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.34","url":null,"abstract":"Openness of decision-making and policy-shaping activities is a fundamental tenet of the European integration project. Article 1 TEU expressly defines the European Union (EU) as a Union in which “decisions are taken as openly as possible”.1 Openness, and its corollary principles of transparency and participation, are essential parts of the EU’s constitutional commitments to democratic principles of representative and participatory democracy.2 According to Article 11 TEU, the institutions shall give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to voice and publicly exchange their views in all areas of Union action. Citizen participation is, however, possible only where transparency and access to information are ensured to the public, being through access to documents or publication of information. Thus, Article 15 TFEU clearly establishes “a right of access to documents of the Union’s institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, whatever their medium” – a right later enshrined also in Article 42 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Such fundamental commitments to transparency and participation apply to legislative3 as well as to administrative activities.4 The benefits of decision-making procedures based on an open and transparent dialogue with citizens are widely recognised in the literature, which connects them to aspects relating to input-, throughput-5 and output-orientated legitimacy.6 Transparency, in particular,","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":"14 1","pages":"371 - 381"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41569206","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Regulation by design is an increasingly common approach in the governance of digital technologies. Under this approach, the developers of digital systems must adopt technical measures that implement the specific requirements mandated by law in their software. Some jurisdictions, notably the European Union (EU), have turned to regulation by design as a mechanism to automatically enforce legal requirements, but this article argues that such an approach can have important implications for long-term governance. Drawing from examples of regulation by design in EU law, it shows that by-design provisions delegate rule-making power to software designers, whose interpretations of the law become entrenched in digital systems. This delegation process suffers from legitimacy deficits, which are compounded whenever digital systems continue to enforce the designer-made rules as they operate for years and, sometimes, decades. Yet, these legitimacy deficits are not unavoidable, as regulation by design can be used to force designers to adopt technical and organisational practices that mitigate the risks of rule entrenchment to future generations. By mapping the long-term risks of regulation by design and potential solutions to them, this article provides a first step towards approaches to regulation by design that do not sacrifice the future for present interests.
{"title":"Regulation by Design and the Governance of Technological Futures","authors":"Marco Almada","doi":"10.1017/err.2023.37","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.37","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Regulation by design is an increasingly common approach in the governance of digital technologies. Under this approach, the developers of digital systems must adopt technical measures that implement the specific requirements mandated by law in their software. Some jurisdictions, notably the European Union (EU), have turned to regulation by design as a mechanism to automatically enforce legal requirements, but this article argues that such an approach can have important implications for long-term governance. Drawing from examples of regulation by design in EU law, it shows that by-design provisions delegate rule-making power to software designers, whose interpretations of the law become entrenched in digital systems. This delegation process suffers from legitimacy deficits, which are compounded whenever digital systems continue to enforce the designer-made rules as they operate for years and, sometimes, decades. Yet, these legitimacy deficits are not unavoidable, as regulation by design can be used to force designers to adopt technical and organisational practices that mitigate the risks of rule entrenchment to future generations. By mapping the long-term risks of regulation by design and potential solutions to them, this article provides a first step towards approaches to regulation by design that do not sacrifice the future for present interests.","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46477522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article provides information on the importance of transparency in decision-making processes, particularly in relation to scientific advice and the COVID-19 pandemic. It highlights the need for clear communication and proactive publication of information, as well as the disclosure of changes in advice based on new scientific evidence, in order to maintain public trust and counter disinformation.
{"title":"Preface of the European Ombudsman: Transparency and Participation in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty","authors":"Emily O’Reilly","doi":"10.1017/err.2023.35","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.35","url":null,"abstract":"The article provides information on the importance of transparency in decision-making processes, particularly in relation to scientific advice and the COVID-19 pandemic. It highlights the need for clear communication and proactive publication of information, as well as the disclosure of changes in advice based on new scientific evidence, in order to maintain public trust and counter disinformation.","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":"14 1","pages":"231 - 234"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48852473","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In its evaluation cycle, the European Commission emphasises the importance of good data and the systematic involvement of a plurality of policy stakeholders, including citizens. Findings from European Union policy evaluation should inform further law-making, encourage learning and provide accountability. Transparent and inclusive formal procedures and tools are seen as essential for securing citizen participation in risk regulation; however, the Commission faces numerous challenges in securing engagement, particularly concerning the complexity of policy issues and the formal procedures for institutionalised consultations. Considering the Commission’s work from a proceduralist perspective, the article engages with Vivien Schmidt’s notion of “throughput legitimacy” to explore recent procedural innovations emerging since the Better Regulation agenda that have sought to enhance accountability, transparency, inclusiveness and openness, ensuring fairer and more balanced input on EU policy performance. The article argues in favour of greater throughput legitimacy in ex post policy evaluation but recognises challenges to the promotion of evaluation tools and their use by citizens.
{"title":"Exploring the Throughput Legitimacy of European Union Policy Evaluation: Challenges to Transparency and Inclusiveness in the European Commission’s Consultation Procedures and the Implications for Risk Regulation","authors":"Paul Stephenson","doi":"10.1017/err.2023.33","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.33","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In its evaluation cycle, the European Commission emphasises the importance of good data and the systematic involvement of a plurality of policy stakeholders, including citizens. Findings from European Union policy evaluation should inform further law-making, encourage learning and provide accountability. Transparent and inclusive formal procedures and tools are seen as essential for securing citizen participation in risk regulation; however, the Commission faces numerous challenges in securing engagement, particularly concerning the complexity of policy issues and the formal procedures for institutionalised consultations. Considering the Commission’s work from a proceduralist perspective, the article engages with Vivien Schmidt’s notion of “throughput legitimacy” to explore recent procedural innovations emerging since the Better Regulation agenda that have sought to enhance accountability, transparency, inclusiveness and openness, ensuring fairer and more balanced input on EU policy performance. The article argues in favour of greater throughput legitimacy in ex post policy evaluation but recognises challenges to the promotion of evaluation tools and their use by citizens.","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":"14 1","pages":"351 - 370"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47618868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In a world of rising long-term risks and their ensuing syndromes, the mitigation and financing of long-term risks are therefore arguably some of the most critical issues facing society. However, long-term thinking involving future generations draws limited attention in current political and social systems. Private insurance has received increased attention due to its expert role in risk management and its risk transfer mechanisms, and it has played an important role in dealing with some types of long-term risk, such as floods and earthquakes. Increasingly, insurance also contributes to disaster mitigation through regulating the conduct of policyholders by creating incentives for policyholders to counter short-termism and invest in reduction measures regarding long-term risks. In addition, it has been shown that supply-side problems and behavioural anomalies make it difficult to insure against long-term risks. Innovative long-term insurance solutions and a combination of public and private partnerships are proposed to overcome these restrictions.
{"title":"Mitigation of Long-Term Risks and the Role of Insurance: A Behavioural Law and Economics Perspective","authors":"Qihao He, M. Faure","doi":"10.1017/err.2023.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.13","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In a world of rising long-term risks and their ensuing syndromes, the mitigation and financing of long-term risks are therefore arguably some of the most critical issues facing society. However, long-term thinking involving future generations draws limited attention in current political and social systems. Private insurance has received increased attention due to its expert role in risk management and its risk transfer mechanisms, and it has played an important role in dealing with some types of long-term risk, such as floods and earthquakes. Increasingly, insurance also contributes to disaster mitigation through regulating the conduct of policyholders by creating incentives for policyholders to counter short-termism and invest in reduction measures regarding long-term risks. In addition, it has been shown that supply-side problems and behavioural anomalies make it difficult to insure against long-term risks. Innovative long-term insurance solutions and a combination of public and private partnerships are proposed to overcome these restrictions.","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47594985","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","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：