IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/fubipe/82011.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Round table regulation: How sectoral corporatism makes Norway's offshore petroleum industry safer

Author

Listed:
  • Bubenheimer, Filip

Abstract

The blow-out on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in April 2010 and the ensuing oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico drew strong public attention to the environment and safety standards in the offshore petroleum industry and their enforcement. While it quickly became clear that there were significant deficits in these regards in the U.S., Norway was repeatedly praised for the allegedly unparalleled level of safety in its offshore petroleum industry. A number of different characteristics of the Norwegian regulatory approach were advanced as being crucial to maintaining such a high level of safety. Based primarily on semistructured interviews with stakeholders in the Norwegian petroleum sector, this working paper demonstrates that certain features of Norway's variety of capitalism go a long way toward explaining the safety performance of its oil and gas industry. The petroleum sector is characterized by the strong corporatist arrangements for which Norway has been known among students of political economy for a long time. These arrangements facilitate information exchange and consensus-based problem solving and they serve as arenas for strong labour unions to confront the industry with their claims and requests for safety improvements. As environmental and safety concerns often coincide, the unions play to a certain extent a watchdog role that is normally reserved for environmental NGOs. As most safety and environmental issues are dealt with in a trialogue between public authorities, industry organizations and trade unions, both environmental NGOs and statutory law play a limited role in the safety politics of the petroleum sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Bubenheimer, Filip, 2011. "Round table regulation: How sectoral corporatism makes Norway's offshore petroleum industry safer," PIPE - Papers on International Political Economy 8/2011, Free University Berlin, Center for International Political Economy.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:fubipe:82011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/60250/1/683490915.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baldwin, Robert & Cave, Martin & Lodge, Martin, 2011. "Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy, and Practice," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199576098.
    2. Lijphart, Arend, 1971. "Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 682-693, September.
    3. Scruggs, Lyle, 2001. "Is There Really a Link Between Neo-Corporatism and Environmental Performance? Updated Evidence and New Data for the 1980s and 1990s," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 686-692, October.
    4. Neumayer, Eric, 2003. "Are left-wing party strength and corporatism good for the environment? Evidence from panel analysis of air pollution in OECD countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 203-220, June.
    5. Lijphart, Arend & Crepaz, Markus M. L., 1991. "Corporatism and Consensus Democracy in Eighteen Countries: Conceptual and Empirical Linkages," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 235-246, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Isabel Gallego-Alvarez & Mª Purificación Vicente-Galindo & Mª Purificación Galindo-Villardón & Miguel Rodríguez-Rosa, 2014. "Environmental Performance in Countries Worldwide: Determinant Factors and Multivariate Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-26, November.
    2. Isabel Gallego-Álvarez & Mª Galindo-Villardón & Miguel Rodríguez-Rosa, 2015. "Analysis of the Sustainable Society Index Worldwide: A Study from the Biplot Perspective," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 120(1), pages 29-65, January.
    3. Bernauer, Thomas & Koubi, Vally, 2009. "Effects of political institutions on air quality," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1355-1365, March.
    4. Matthijs Bogaards, 2000. "The Uneasy Relationship between Empirical and Normative Types in Consociational Theory," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(4), pages 395-423, October.
    5. Neumayer, Eric, 2003. "Are left-wing party strength and corporatism good for the environment? Evidence from panel analysis of air pollution in OECD countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 203-220, June.
    6. Andrew Cheon & Johannes Urpelainen, 2013. "How do Competing Interest Groups Influence Environmental Policy? The Case of Renewable Electricity in Industrialized Democracies, 1989–2007," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(4), pages 874-897, December.
    7. Yves Steinebach, 2022. "Instrument choice, implementation structures, and the effectiveness of environmental policies: A cross‐national analysis," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 225-242, January.
    8. Gallego-Álvarez, Isabel & García-Rubio, Raquel & Martínez-Ferrero, Jennifer, 2018. "Environmental performance concerns in Latin America: Determinant factors and multivariate analysis," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 206-221.
    9. AlHussaini, Wissam & Molz, Rick, 2009. "A post-Keynesian regulatory model of privatization," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 391-398, March.
    10. Petteri Repo & Kaisa Matschoss, 2019. "Social Innovation for Sustainability Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. John R. Freeman & Jude C. Hays & Helmut Stix, 1999. "Democracy and Markets: The Case of Exchange Rates," Working Papers 39, Oesterreichische Nationalbank (Austrian Central Bank).
    12. Panasiuk Aleksander, 2020. "Policy of Sustainable Development of Urban Tourism," Polish Journal of Sport and Tourism, Sciendo, vol. 27(2), pages 33-37, June.
    13. Kenworthy, Lane, 2000. "Quantitative indicators of corporatism: A survey and assessment," MPIfG Discussion Paper 00/4, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    14. Mavisakalyan, Astghik & Tarverdi, Yashar, 2019. "Gender and climate change: Do female parliamentarians make difference?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 151-164.
    15. Jennifer Robinson, 2011. "Cities in a World of Cities: The Comparative Gesture," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 1-23, January.
    16. Gustav Lidén, 2013. "What about theory? The consequences on a widened perspective of social theory," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 213-225, January.
    17. Gisselquist, Rachel M., 2020. "How the cases you choose affect the answers you get, revisited," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    18. Luc Baumstark & Claude Ménard & William Roy & Anne Yvrande-Billon, 2005. "Modes de gestion et efficience des opérateurs dans le secteur des transports urbains de personnes," Post-Print halshs-00103116, HAL.
    19. Artur Santoalha & Ron Boschma, 2021. "Diversifying in green technologies in European regions: does political support matter?," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(2), pages 182-195, February.
    20. Jan Fischer & Simon Guy, 2009. "Re-interpreting Regulations: Architects as Intermediaries for Low-carbon Buildings," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 46(12), pages 2577-2594, November.

    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:zbw:fubipe:82011. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.polsoz.fu-berlin.de/polwiss/forschung/oekonomie/ipoe/index.html .

    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.