IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v5y2011i1p118-144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Addressing the risk, reading the landscape: The role of agency in regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Fiona Haines

Abstract

The literature pertinent to regulation presents disparate views of the role of human agency in regulatory compliance. Some authors assume regulators' and regulatees' capacity for agency to be self‐evident; others show that human agency may be constrained and as a consequence tends toward sustaining the legitimacy of their respective organizations rather than achieving the risk reduction goals prescribed by the regulatory regime. Drawing on Margaret Archer's work (among others'), this article explores how the agency of regulatory actors is critical to the regulatory project yet contingent. This contingency is explored through a comparative analysis of the regulatory responses to an industrial disaster and to counterterrorism efforts at seaports and airports in the wake of the 11 September 2001 (“9/11”) terrorist attacks. This analysis found that problem solving in the pursuit of regulatory goals was most effective when there was political support for the authority of the regulators and respect for their expertise and when the risk of concern could be narrowly defined. These conditions could also reap benefits at the worksite level. However, the capacity of regulators to mobilize resources, exert authority, and transform constraints into opportunities in order to reduce risk could be limited. Tight political control, limited knowledge of the environment to be regulated, and a potentially limitless exposure to risk meant that while agency could still be expressed, it was aimed at goals that included shoring up political legitimacy, enhancing personal authority, and allaying public concern.

Suggested Citation

  • Fiona Haines, 2011. "Addressing the risk, reading the landscape: The role of agency in regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), pages 118-144, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:5:y:2011:i:1:p:118-144
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01097.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01097.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01097.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Parker,Christine, 2002. "The Open Corporation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521818902, January.
    2. Sunstein, Cass R, 2003. "Terrorism and Probability Neglect," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 26(2-3), pages 121-136, March-May.
    3. Susan S. Silbey & Ruthanne Huising & Salo V. Coslovsky, 2009. "The Sociological Citizen : Recognizing Relational Interdependence in Law and Organizations," Post-Print hal-02311931, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stephen Mustchin & Miguel Martínez Lucio, 2023. "The fragmenting occupation of labour inspection and the degradation of regulatory and enforcement work inside the British state," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 44(2), pages 526-546, May.
    2. Ola Michalec & Sveta Milyaeva & Awais Rashid, 2022. "Reconfiguring governance: How cyber security regulations are reconfiguring water governance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 1325-1342, October.
    3. Na Li & Benjamin Rooij, 2022. "Law Lost, Compliance Found: A Frontline Understanding of the Non-linear Nature of Business and Employee Responses to Law," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(3), pages 715-734, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Roberto R. C. Pires, 2011. "Beyond the fear of discretion: Flexibility, performance, and accountability in the management of regulatory bureaucracies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), pages 43-69, March.
    2. Olivier Chanel & Graciela Chichilnisky, 2009. "The influence of fear in decisions: Experimental evidence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 271-298, December.
    3. Krieger, Tim & Meierrieks, Daniel, 2014. "How to deal with international terrorism," Discussion Paper Series 2014-03, University of Freiburg, Wilfried Guth Endowed Chair for Constitutional Political Economy and Competition Policy.
    4. Thomas Kourouxous & Thomas Bauer, 2019. "Violations of dominance in decision-making," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 209-239, April.
    5. Bruno Frey & Simon Luechinger & Alois Stutzer, 2009. "The life satisfaction approach to valuing public goods: The case of terrorism," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 317-345, March.
    6. Akay, Alpaslan & Bargain, Olivier & Elsayed, Ahmed, 2020. "Global terror, well-being and political attitudes," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    7. Braithwaite, John, 2006. "Responsive regulation and developing economies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 884-898, May.
    8. Marc Helbling & Daniel Meierrieks, 2020. "Transnational terrorism and restrictive immigration policies," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(4), pages 564-580, July.
    9. Bruno S. Frey & Simon Luechinger & Alois Stutzer, 2007. "Calculating Tragedy: Assessing The Costs Of Terrorism," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(1), pages 1-24, February.
    10. Ummad Mazhar, 2021. "Terrorism Risk and the Mediating Role of Manager Experience: Empirical Evidence," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 317-337, September.
    11. Rob Imrie & Emma Street, 2009. "Risk, Regulation and the Practices of Architects," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 46(12), pages 2555-2576, November.
    12. Jodi L. Short & Michael W. Toffel & Andrea R. Hugill, 2016. "Code Contingencies: Designing Monitoring Regimes to Promote Improvement in Supply Chain Working Conditions," Harvard Business School Working Papers 17-001, Harvard Business School, revised Mar 2019.
    13. Luc Brès & Sébastien Mena & Marie‐Laure Salles‐Djelic, 2019. "Exploring the formal and informal roles of regulatory intermediaries in transnational multistakeholder regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 127-140, June.
    14. Salo Coslovsky, 2013. "Enforcing Food Quality and Safety Standards in Brazil," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 649(1), pages 122-138, September.
    15. Ingo Pies & Philipp Schreck & Karl Homann, 2021. "Single-objective versus multi-objective theories of the firm: using a constitutional perspective to resolve an old debate," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 779-811, April.
    16. Rodrigo Canales, 2014. "Weaving Straw into Gold: Managing Organizational Tensions Between Standardization and Flexibility in Microfinance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 1-28, February.
    17. Sanne R. Van Duin & Henri C. Dekker & Jacco L. Wielhouwer & Juan P. Mendoza, 2018. "The Tone from Above: The Effect of Communicating a Supportive Regulatory Strategy on Reporting Quality," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 467-519, May.
    18. Marcelo Bergolo & Rodrigo Ceni & Guillermo Cruces & Matias Giaccobasso & Ricardo Perez-Truglia, 2023. "Tax Audits as Scarecrows: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 110-153, February.
    19. Ruthanne Huising & Susan S. Silbey, 2011. "Governing the gap: Forging safe science through relational regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), pages 14-42, March.
    20. Benjamin Van Rooij & Adam Fine, 2018. "Toxic Corporate Culture: Assessing Organizational Processes of Deviancy," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-38, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:5:y:2011:i:1:p:118-144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.