Innovations in Globalized Regulation : Opportunities and Challenges
This paper lays out a comparative framework for assessing the potential, limitations and challenges of a variety of emerging institutional innovations in globalized regulation. The framework highlights two dimensions of effectiveness -- the...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Policy Research Working Paper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
2012
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/main?menuPK=64187510&pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theSitePK=523679&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=64187283&siteName=WDS&entityID=000158349_20111011144542 http://hdl.handle.net/10986/3607 |
Summary: | This paper lays out a comparative
framework for assessing the potential, limitations and
challenges of a variety of emerging institutional
innovations in globalized regulation. The framework
highlights two dimensions of effectiveness -- the
comprehensiveness of coverage, and the credibility of the
regulatory regime. Performance in relation to these two
dimensions is assessed for three distinctive approaches to
globalized regulation: i) Government-centric approaches,
including treaties, extra-territorial regulation and
government networks -- seven examples are assessed in the
paper. ii) Civil regulation, including both joint
initiatives by private firms and civil society, and wholly
private self-regulatory approaches -- with eight examples
assessed. iii) Hybrid approaches, involving multiple
governmental and non-governmental stakeholders -- with three
examples assessed. Overall, the assessment points to an
abundance of innovation -- but a seeming failure of the many
innovations to deliver more than, at best, partial successes
in meeting the credibility and comprehensiveness criteria
for effectiveness. The paper concludes by suggesting ways in
which the distinct elements of different approaches might be
combined so that the whole can be more, rather than less,
than the sum of its parts. The way forward is likely to be
incremental and cumulative, bottom-up as well as top down --
transcending a too neat, and ultimately unhelpful,
bifurcation between civil society advocacy and technocratic rule-making. |
---|