Amalgamation of Professional Regulators: Conflicting Perceptions and Beliefs Among Canadian Regulatory Leaders

Abstract

<h3>Background</h3> In Canada and the United Kingdom, there is discussion about amalgamating nursing and other professional regulatory bodies to improve efficiency; however, there is a dearth of research on the advantages and disadvantages of amalgamation. <h3>Purpose</h3> To begin to address this gap, this article explores Canadian regulatory leaders' views about professional regulator amalgamation. <h3>Methods</h3> In-depth interviews were conducted with 83 Canadian regulatory leaders (in regulatory bodies, government, and other related roles). Qualitative description analyses were conducted on interview transcripts. <h3>Results</h3> Participants identified several advantages of amalgamation, believing it was valuable for small, under-resourced regulators, as well as for regulators in the same field, such as nursing and oral healthcare. Some participants anticipated improvements in regulatory effectiveness that would benefit regulators, governments, and society. However, participants also raised concerns about amalgamation: prioritizing efficiency over effectiveness, lack of evidence of success, and concerns about inequality. Participants also provided advice to facilitate amalgamation. <h3>Conclusion</h3> Limited evidence and conflicting views on this regulatory change encourage caution among those pursuing amalgamation of professional regulators. It is clear that collaboration is key to successful amalgamation; thus, it should not be forced or mandated.