Self-Regulation as Policy Process: The Multiple and Criss-Crossing Stages of Private Rule-Making

Porter, Tony; Ronit, Karsten

doi:10.1007/s11077-006-9008-5

Cited by 85 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A new global order of regulatory capitalism is emerging, where the state is restructuring itself as a regulator of social, economic and political life. This new order opens new avenues for social and political control over the economy (Cutler, Porter and Haufler, 1999;Buthe, 2004;Porter and Ronit, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regulatory capitalism and the reassertion of the public interest

Levi‐Faur

2009

Policy and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neoliberalism has not led to the retreat of the state but instead to the restructuring of the state. This has led to new forms of governance where regulation represents the expanding part of government, and where the various modes of governance compete and sometimes are synthesized into global forms of regulation. It will be discussed where such forms have emerged, and where they are yet to emerge. In this new order, best described as regulatory capitalism, the regulatory state meets the regulatory society and actors' demand for and supply of regulation is ever expanding. Rule-making, monitoring and enforcement are becoming increasingly important for democratic policy making. It is being asserted that varieties of regulatory capitalism are produced by the interaction of varying degrees of civil-and state-regulation and variations in the composition of the networks that serve as the backbone that transform autonomous jurisdictions to interdependent ones. Accordingly the paper distinguishes between Corporatists, Pluralist, Command & Control and Laissez-Faire forms of regulatory capitalism.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regulatory capitalism and the reassertion of the public interest

Levi‐Faur

2009

Policy and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If a Bureau found evidence of deceptive selling, it would contact the business in question to seek redress. Should a firm refused to engage with BBB officials, they would publicize the incident in its publications (what scholars of business regulation would now call a strategy of "shaming") and even suggest that media outlets refuse its advertising business (a form of "shunning") (Gunningham & Rees, 1997;King & Lennox, 2000;Porter & Ronit, 2006).…”

Section: Originsmentioning

confidence: 99%

American Better Business Bureaus, the Truth-in-Advertising Movement, and the Complexities of Legitimizing Business Self-Regulation over the Long Term

Balleisen

2017

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay considers the question of how strategies of legitimatizing private regulatory governance evolve over the long term. It focuses on the century-long history of the American Better Business Bureau (BBB) network, a linked set of businessfunded non-governmental organizations devoted to promoting truthful marketing. The BBBs took on important roles in standard-setting, monitoring, public education, and enforcement, despite never enjoying explicit delegation of authority from Congress or state legislatures. This effort depended on building legitimacy with three separate groups with very different perspectives and interests-the business community, a fractured American state, and the American public, in their roles as consumers and investors. The BBBs initially managed to build a strong reputation with each constituency during its founding period, from 1912 to 1933. The Bureaus then in many ways adapted successfully to the emergence of a more assertive regulatory state from the New Deal through the mid 1970s. Eventually, however, the resurgence of conservative politics in the United States exposed the challenges of satisfying such divergent stakeholders, and led the BBBs to focus resolutely on shoring up its support from the business establishment. That choice, over time, undercut the Bureaus standing with other stakeholders, and especially the wider public. This history illustrates: the salience of generational amnesia within private regulatory institutions; the profound impact that the shifting nature of public faith in government can have on the strategies and reputation of private regulatory bodies; and the extent to which private regulators face long-term trade-offs among strategies to sustain legitimacy with different audiences. It also suggests a rich set of research questions for longer-term histories of other private regulatory institutions, in the United States, other societies, and at the international level.

show abstract

“…One of the most significant areas in need of further research concerns the relationship between states and private transnational governance mechanisms. A number of scholars writing on private transnational governance systems have recognised that conceptualising the phenomenon under discussion as purely 'private' is somewhat misleading and that analysing and comparing the nature and extent of states' involvement in these governance arrangements will contribute to empirical and conceptual clarification (Ougaard 2008;Vogel 2008;Porter and Ronit 2006;Nölke and Graz 2008;Büthe 2010). Vogel sees the role of governments as one of two critical factors that will determine the future impact and effectiveness of what he calls 'civil regulation' (Vogel 2010).…”

Section: Privatementioning

confidence: 99%

National Government Responses to Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Fisheries Certification: Insights from Atlantic Canada

Foley

2013

New Political Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last decade, the proliferation of social and environmental certification programmes has attracted the attention of a growing number of political scientists interested in new forms of 'private' transnational governance. However, we still lack analyses on the nature and extent of different state responses to and involvement in new private transnational governance arrangements in particular sectors and in different jurisdictions. This paper advances our understanding of the interactions between nation-state and private transnational modes of governance by analysing the role of national government authorities in Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) fisheries certification in Atlantic Canada, known more for the disastrous collapse of Northern cod stocks than good marine stewardship. Focusing on the 2008 certification of Northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) fisheries off the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, the analysis finds that the implementation and maintenance of MSC certification in this case depended on significant support from government authorities. The delicate legitimacy of both authorities face a period of uncertainty in this case since some certified shrimp stocks appear to be in decline and perhaps also migrating northward off Newfoundland and Labrador.

show abstract

Self-Regulation as Policy Process: The Multiple and Criss-Crossing Stages of Private Rule-Making

Cited by 85 publications

References 31 publications

Regulatory capitalism and the reassertion of the public interest

Regulatory capitalism and the reassertion of the public interest

American Better Business Bureaus, the Truth-in-Advertising Movement, and the Complexities of Legitimizing Business Self-Regulation over the Long Term

National Government Responses to Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Fisheries Certification: Insights from Atlantic Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About