CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE PROPOSED PANELS FOR LAW AND SOCIETY ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE, MAY 2010, CHICAGO
We plan to meet for an informal CRN Regulatory Governance dinner on the evening of Friday 28 May 2010. We will send out an email about this closer to the conference. Please contact Vibeke Nielsen (vln@ps.au.dk) if you need information about this.
PANEL 1: CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE: CORPORATE SELF-REGULATION AND COMPLIANCE: EVIDENCE AND THEORY
The papers in this session address the development and effectiveness of various initiatives aimed at enhancing corporate self-regulation and compliance. Is there any evidence that internal corporate compliance structures work and if so, in what circumstances? What is the role of official enforcement vis a vis informal regulation on corporate compliance? And how do they relate to each other. These papers provide original empirical evidence, case study material and analysis of previous literature to help develop answers to these questions.
Chair/Discussant : Neil Gunningham (ANU)
Institutionalizing Self-Regulation: The Effect of Threat, Surveillance and Commitment
Jodi L. Short (Georgetown University Law Center)
Michael W. Toffel (Harvard Business School)
Testing the Correspondence Between State Enforcement and Compliance.
Dr Michelle Welsh (Department of Business Law and Taxation, Monash University)
From Voluntary to Regulatory: Third Party Verification in Environmental Law
Lesley K. McAllister (University of San Diego School of Law)
The Emergence of Nuclear Fleets as Self-Regulatory Systems."
Joe Rees (Virginia Tech)
PANEL 2: CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE--GOVERNANCE IN ACTION: ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF THE REGULATION OF ORGANIZATIONAL PROCESSES
The rise of the concept of governance has signaled a shift from top-down, rule-based regulation to new modes of regulation focusing on the adoption of the “right” processes and the implementation of monitoring systems. This process entails a significant change in our understanding of the nature of law and the relationship between rules and the social life it seeks to regulate. Yet, while new modes of regulation contribute to blurring the boundaries between “formal (State) law” and informal norms, they leave the “issue of the gap” between norms (or standards) and “real life” unsettled.
An important issue in this respect concerns the reactions of individuals to the implementation of new standards and reporting systems. Does the heightened proximity of regulation increase commitment to the goal it seeks to further, and thus normative efficiency, or does it lead to the development of new parallel informal norms? What are the advantages and drawbacks of these modes of regulation on the performance of firms? And what impact do they have on our conception of the individuals who form organizations and the relationships in and across organizations?
Chair/Discussant Susan Silbey (MIT)
The role of law in the regulation of African stock exchanges
June McLaughlin (Queen Mary, School of Law, at the University of London)
Global firms and the regulation of industrial relations
Christian Lévesque (HEC Montreal)
Managing contracts and relationships: Trust and cooperation in industrial clusters
Julie Paquin (HEC Montreal)
The redefinition of dignity within the firm through corporate governance regulation
Isabelle Martin (McGill University)
PANEL 3: CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE: ORAGNISATIONAL COMPLIANCE 1: EXPLAINING ORGANISATIONAL COMPLIANCE THROUGH MOTIVATIONS, INTERESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS
This is one of three panels that brings into dialogue leading empirical scholars whose focus of research is on understanding and explaining organisational “compliance” with (or responses to) regulation. The aim is to foster the development of plural theoretical understandings of organisational compliance through scholars’ reflective summaries of their own empirical work and the theoretical lessons to be drawn from it in dialogue with others working on different aspects of organisational responses to regulation. The aim is also to add to the developing social science of regulatory governance through collective thinking about “the other side” of regulation - the responses to regulation by powerful organisational and business actors. This panel includes papers by leading researchers who seek to explain organisational compliance by reference to the motives or interests of the firms (eg fear of punishment versus normative value motivation) or by reference to characteristics of the organisation as a whole and by reference to characteristics of individual members of the organisation..
Chair/Discussant: Christine Parker (Melbourne)
Fear, Duty, and Regulatory Compliance: Lessons from Three Research Projects
Robert A. Kagan (Berkeley)
Normative motivations for compliance
Tom Tyler (NYU)
Organizational Personality and the Propensity to Comply and Overcomply
Cary Coglianese (Penn)
Impact of employees and whistle-blowers on compliance
Yuval Feldman (Bar Ilan University)
Orly Lobel (University of San Diego)
PANEL 4: CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE: ORGANISATIONAL COMPLIANCE 2: UNDERSTANDING ORGANISATIONAL “COMPLIANCE” AS PROCESS OF NEGOTIATION AND SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION
This is one of three panels that brings into dialogue leading empirical scholars whose focus of research is on understanding and explaining organisational “compliance” with (or responses to) regulation. The aim is to foster the development of plural theoretical understandings of organisational compliance through scholars’ reflective summaries of their own empirical work and the theoretical lessons to be drawn from it in dialogue with others working on different aspects of organisational responses to regulation. The aim is also to add to the developing social science of regulatory governance through collective thinking about “the other side” of regulation - the responses to regulation by powerful organisational and business actors. This panel includes papers by leading scholars who’s research suggests that it makes more sense to understand organisational “compliance” as a complex process of response to attempts at official legal regulation and other forms of regulation. This is a multi-layered process in which organisations as a whole negotiate and socially construct the meaning of regulation and compliance – and individuals within organisations also play an important part in negotiating the response of their organisations to regulation.
Chair/discussant: Chair still to be determined
To Comply or Not to Comply—That Isn’t the Question: How Organizations Construct the Meaning of Compliance
Lauren B. Edelman & Shauhin A. Talesh (Berkeley)
Inside the Organization: The Social Construction of Compliance
Garry Gray (Harvard) and Susan Silbey (MIT)
Facing the Compliance Challenge: Hercules, Houdini or the Charge of the Light Brigade?
Fiona Haines
Business Compliance as Fact or Process?
Vibeke Nielsen and Christine Parker
PANEL 5: CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE: ORGANISATIONAL COMPLIANCE 3: THE INFLUENCE OF REGULATION: OFFICIAL ENFORCEMENT STYLE AND VOLUNTARY REGULATION
This is one of three panels that brings into dialogue leading empirical scholars whose focus of research is on understanding and explaining organisational “compliance” with (or responses to) regulation. The aim is to foster the development of plural theoretical understandings of organisational compliance through scholars’ reflective summaries of their own empirical work and the theoretical lessons to be drawn from it in dialogue with others working on different aspects of organisational responses to regulation. The aim is also to add to the developing social science of regulatory governance through collective thinking about “the other side” of regulation - the responses to regulation by powerful organisational and business actors. This panel includes papers by leading scholars addressing the impact of different enforcement styles on organisational compliance with regulation including responsive regulation (the leading account of flexible regulation) and “naming and shaming”. This panel also considers whether and how we can test the influence of non-official, voluntary or “non-state market driven” regulation on firm behaviour.
Chair/Discussant:
Vibeke Lehmann Nielsen (University of Aarhus)
Regulatory Enforcement Styles and Compliance
Peter May (University of Washington)
Soren Winter (The Danish National Research Centre for Social Policy)
Responsive Regulation and Compliance
Neil Gunningham (ANU)
Naming and shaming in regulatory enforcement
Judith van Erp (Erasmus University)
The impact of private, industry and transnational civil society regulation and their interaction with official regulation
Benjamin Cashore (Yale)
PANEL 6: CRN08 LABOR RIGHTS AND CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE--GOOD GOVERNANCE, BAD GOVERNANCE, OR NO GOVERNANCE: STRUCTURING THE LAW OF WORK AND OF LABOR MARKETS
The session will examine both norm creation and norm implementation in connection with alternative modes of governing work and relations within workplaces. One paper will present the result of empirical research conducted in Israel regarding influences upon employee preferences regarding the choice between setting conditions of employment through individual employment contract bargaining versus collective bargaining. A second paper will consider whether the idea of regulating through mandatory disclosure of information, a notion embedded in many areas of investor as well as consumer protection law, could beneficially be applied to labor/employment law. It will conclude that mandatory information disclosure has a role to play, both within the ambit of existing substantive employment mandates and among the many terms and conditions that are above or beyond the reach of substantive mandates. A third paper will examine the increasing reliance upon anti-retaliation litigation in maintaining enforceability and a modicum of employer compliance with federal and state labor and employment laws in the U.S. That paper will suggest that those in European and other countries proposing elimination of employment protection laws should first consider the role the American employment-at-will doctrine plays in placing a premium upon anti-retaliation cases.
Chair/Discussant: Michael Fischl (University of Connecticut)
What Workers Really Want: Voice, Unions, and Personal Contracts
Yuval Feldman (Bar-Ilan University)
Amir Falk (Bar-Ilan University)
Miri Katz (Bar-Ilan University)
Just the Facts: Toward Workplace Transparency
Cynthia Estlund (NYU)
Integrative Transnational Labor Regulation
Kevin Kolben (Rutgers)
Anti-Retaliation Law, Employment Protection Law, and Effective Regulation of the Workplace
Marley S Weiss (University of Maryland)
PANEL 7: CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE - EARLY CAREER RESEARCHERS IN REGULATORY GOVERNANCE
This will be a panel in which research students and early career scholars present their new research. Editorial representatives from two of the major international journals that publish papers in regulation and governance - Law & Policy and Regulation & Governance - will participate in this session to provide feedback to the paper presenters on their work and on getting published in this area more generally.
Chair: Jeroen van der Heiden (Delft University of Technology)
Discussant on behalf of Law & Policy
Nancy Reichman (University of Denver)
Discussant on behalf of Regulation & Governance
Bob Kagan (University of California, Berkeley)
Cui Bono? A Critical Analysis of the development of the Irish National Quality Standards for Residential Care Settings for Older People in Ireland
Ciara O’Dwyer (Social Policy and Ageing Research Centre (SPARC), Department of Social Work and Social Policy, Trinity College Dublin)
Improving food safety through self-regulation: Exploring the applicability of the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points system to the spinach and peanut industries
A. Bryce Hoflund (School of Public Administration University of Nebraska at Omaha)
Nuclear Power Regulation in Russia and France: Innovation and Public
Michelle Pautz (Department of Political Science, University of Dayton)
Interest as Determinants of Sustainable Development
Theocharis N. Grigoriadis (University of California, Berkeley)
Political Economy of the Network Neutrality in Europe
Meelis Kitsing (Center for Digital Government, Department of Political Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst)
NPM and Craftsmanship: an explorative case study in a utilities company into a neglected relationship
Yannis Bacharias (Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam)
Peter Mascini (Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam)
PANEL 8: CRN05: THEORETICAL RATIONALES FOR REGULATORY GOVERNANCE POLICIES AND THEIR TRANSFORMATION AND EVALUATION
The papers in this session interrogate the theoretical rationale behind various regulatory initiatives, showing up gaps and contradictions in regulatory governance on the basis of empirical evidence and theory, and contributing to recommendations for reform. This session also addresses the reasons for regulatory governance policy transformation and the inclusion of regulatory governance in policy evaluation.
Chair/Discussant: Peter May (University of Washington)
Fairness, Utility, and Market Risk
Jeff Schwartz (California Western School of Law)
Exempting Rule Violations as Heritage of the Denounced Sixties?
Peter Mascini (Erasmus University)
Dick Houtman
Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology Coexistence in the EU: ‘Soft Law’ or ‘Hard Governance’?
Thijs Etty(Faculty of Law,Vrije Universiteit)
‘The legal framework wasn’t built in one day.’ Conversion, layering and drift in the development of Dutch construction policy
Jeroen van der Heijden (Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology)
Regulatory governance and evaluations on public policy interventions
Christopher Decker
PANEL 9: CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE: FEASIBILITY AND COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS ROUNDTABLE
This roundtable discussion focuses on the question of what sort of criteria and analysis should govern regulatory decision-making. A split has developed among scholars, with many environmental law specialists favoring feasibility-based approaches to standard setting, while many less specialized scholars contributing to the theoretical debate on regulation favor cost-benefit analysis. This panel will debate the merits of the feasibility and cost-benefit approaches.
Specialists have long argued that feasibility-based regulation enjoys immense practical advantages over cost-benefit approaches, or any other approach highly dependent on quantitative risk assessment. More recently, David Driesen has created a theoretical model of the feasibility principle employed in many technology-based standard setting exercises, and argued that those taking distributional questions seriously should find this model at least as rational as CBA. In work appearing soon in the Chicago Law Review, Eric Posner and Jonathan Masur question this point of view, claiming that CBA is normatively superior from a “welfarist” perspective. This panel includes many of the leading participants in this debate and will reconsider the merits of these two approaches in light of recent and forthcoming work.
Chair: Eric Posner (University of Chicago Law School)
Chair/Participant: David M. Driesen (Syracuse Unviersity)
Participant: Jonathan Masur (University of Chicago Law School)
Participant: Wendy Wagner (University of Texas Law School)
Participant: Adam Babich (Tulane Law School)
PANEL 10: CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE: REGULATORY MIGRATION, REFORM AND COORDINATION ACROSS JURISDICTIONS
This set of papers analyse different case studies of the migration, reform and coordination of regulatory governance approaches across different jurisdictions, and the challenges of regulatory coordination. Papers address the challenges of developing a coordinated, transnational and legitimate set of standards for financial regulation in the wake of the financial crisis; and seek to explain the quite different approaches to personal finance regulation reform in different jurisdictions to date. The session also explores the difference in approach to patentability of software in the US vis a vis Europe. The fourth paper puts current differences between the US and Europe in historical perspective by showing how the precautionary principle migrated from the continent to Britain in the late 19 th century.
Chair/Discussant: Errol Meidinger (Buffalo, SUNY)
Regulatory Reform in Everyday Life: Pay Equity and Financial Regulation
Nancy Reichman (University of Denver)
Consultation in Multi-level Governance
Caroline M. Bradley (University of Miami)
The Global Development of Personal Finance Regulation: A Critical Comparative Study
Toni Williams (Kent Law School)
Arenas and Monopolies: Software patents in the U.S. and in Europe
Thomas R. Eimer (Freie Universität Berlin)
Common Law, Civil Law and Precautionary Regulation: Lessons from the Transplantation of Continental-Modeled Regulation into Victorian Britain.
Noga Morag-Levine (Michigan State University College of Law)
PANEL 11: CRN05: REGULATORY GOVERNANCE: ACCOUNTABILITY, PARTICIPATION AND DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY IN REGULATORY GOVERNANCE
The papers in this session address the practice of regulatory governance in democracy using theory and evidence. This session includes new insights into how regulatory agencies are and could be held accountable in deliberative democracy? And how they are made accountable in practice? How is accountability throughout the implementation process possible? Is it justifiable to ask regulatory agencies to connect their decisions more clearly to political goals? Is it possible for marginalized stakeholders to participate in and transform decision-making? How can we better theorise deliberation and participation in regulatory governance? Does new governance provide a robust theoretical basis for democratising political decision-making and the production of law?
Chair:
Jason Solomon (University of Georgia)
It’s Not Easy To Be Accountable: The Challenges Facing the IRS In Its Quest For Transparency
Dorit Rubinstein Reiss (UC Hastings College of the Law)
Political Reasons, Deliberative Democracy, and Administrative Law
Glen Staszewski (Michigan State University College of Law)
Writing the Rules of Socio-Economic Assessment: Adaptation Through Participation
Sari M. Graben (Queen's Institute for Energy and Environmental Policy and Osgoode Hall Law School York University)
Governance Legalism: Hayek and Sabel on Reason and Rules, Organization and Law
Amy J. Cohen (The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law)
Promise and Paradox in post-GFC Regulation: Incrementalism, Complexity, and Regulatory Competition
Cristie Ford (UBC)
PANEL 11: CRN05 REGULATORY GOVERNANCE ROUNDTABLE- RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY STUDYING REGULATION AND GOVERNANCE - INPUT TO A FUTURE RESEARCH AGENDA
This roundtable discussion aims to open up for questions and perspectives what we do and what needs to be done in research on regulation.
Chair: Vibeke Nielsen (University of Aarhus)
Participant: Benjamin Cashore (Yale)
Participant: Cary Coglianese (Penn)
Participant: Rick Lempert (Michigan)
Participant: Gerry C. Gray (Harvard)
PANEL 12: CRN05 - CAN SMARTER GOVERNANCE IMPROVE HEALTH?
This panel will examine how new forms of regulation and governance affect prospects for health systems change and improvement. New governance includes a wide variety of processes but all differ from top-down, command and control style regulation. Recent examples of new governance in action include public-private partnerships in electronic record adoption, public disclosure of hospital infection rates in Europe, standardized metrics for cancer treatment, and private rulemaking in organ transplantation. These innovations feature a participatory model of regulation in which multiple stakeholders collaborate to achieve a common purpose.
Chair/Discussant: Tom Oliver
Organiser: Louise Trubek (Wisconsin)
Designing a Decision-Making Process for a Responsive Regulatory Institution:A case Study of the national Quality Forum's Consensus Development Process
Bryce Hoflund (University of Nebraska at Omaha)
The politics of Vigilance in international economic integration:Regulating goods, services and people in the EU
Scott Greer (Michigan)
Constructing a Better Cancer care System:Networks and Frameworks
Louise G. Trubek (Wisconsin), Tom Oliver ,Chih Ming Liang (Wisconsin)
Health, Inequality and the Potential of new Governance
Nan Hunter (Georgetown)