Trust In Regulation Research Articles

The Crowdsourcing of Regulatory Monitoring and Enforcement

Abstract Crowdsourced regulation has been discussed to date by legal and social science scholars mainly in the context of legislation and rulemaking, without paying sufficient attention to non-legislative regulatory functions. This article provides a richer theory of crowdsourced regulation which extends to all regulatory functions, focusing on monitoring and enforcement. Regulatory agencies worldwide harness the power of the public using digital platforms to carry out monitoring and enforcement tasks in regulated markets and sectors. For example, agencies operate online complaint databases that invite the public to report mistreatment of consumers and environmental nuisances by regulated firms. Agencies also publish information concerning corporate misbehavior to publicly shame companies into compliance. Crowdsourcing regulatory monitoring and enforcement can help minimize some prominent ailments of the regulatory task, such as poor resources, diminishing deterrence, declining legitimacy, and capture. It can also promote goals and values such as public participation, increased transparency, public trust in regulators, administrative efficiency, and effectiveness in achieving regulatory objectives. However, crowdsourcing regulatory monitoring and enforcement is subject to a new set of legal, administrative, and democratic failures that need to be acknowledged and addressed. The article develops a theory of crowdsourced regulation that supplies justifications and rationales for crowdsourced regulatory monitoring and enforcement, points out its main pitfalls, and normatively evaluates law and policy implications.

Australian and New Zealand doctors' experiences of disciplinary notifications, investigations, proceedings and interventions relating to alleged mental health impairment: a qualitative analysis of interviews

When poor mental health impairs a doctor's ability to safely practise medicine, poor patient outcomes can result. Medical regulators play a critical role in protecting the public from impaired doctors, by requiring monitoring and treatment. However, regulatory processes may paradoxically harm doctors, with potential adverse implications for the community. There is little prior research examining the experiences of doctors with prior mental health or substance use challenges who are subject to regulatory notifications and processes relating to their health. Therefore, we explored this issue through the thematic analysis of semi-structured qualitative interviews. Participants reported that mandated treatment improved aspects of their health, but that fear of regulatory processes delayed them seeking treatment. Participants recognised being significantly unwell at the time of regulatory notification. Participants told us that regulatory processes triggered psychological distress, symptom relapse, and adverse financial and vocational implications. They also told us that these processes eroded their trust in regulators and regulatory processes. To improve health outcomes for unwell doctors and to create safer healthcare for the community, we propose: 1) greater awareness and education of the medical profession about the thresholds and requirements for mandatory reporting of health impairment; 2) better integrating specialised doctors' health services into existing regulatory pathways; and 3) adoption of a more therapeutic approach to regulation by medical regulators.

Trusting COVID-19 vaccines as individual and social goal.

Trust in vaccines and in the institutions responsible for their management is a key asset in the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. By means of a structured multi-scales survey based on the socio-cognitive model of trust, this study investigates the interplay of institutional trust, confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, information habits, personal motivations, and background beliefs on the pandemic in determining willingness to vaccinate in a sample of Italian respondents (N = 4096). We observe substantial trust in public institutions and a strong vaccination intention. Theory-driven structural equation analysis revealed what factors act as important predictors of willingness to vaccinate: trust in vaccine manufacturers (which in turn is supported by trust in regulators), collectivist goals, self-perceived knowledgeability, reliance on traditional media for information gathering, and trust in institutional and scientific sources. In contrast, vaccine hesitancy, while confined to a minority, is more prominent in less educated and less affluent respondents. These findings can inform institutional decisions on vaccine communication and vaccination campaigns.

Collaboration over competition? Regulatory reform and inter-organisational relations in the NHS amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

BackgroundIn 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic, England’s Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) released a White Paper outlining proposed legislative reform of the National Health Service (NHS). Key to the proposals is the shift from relationships between providers based on competition, to cooperation, as the central driver of improved performance and quality. Against this background we explore potential regulatory barriers and enablers to collaboration identified by key NHS stakeholders and assess whether the proposed policy changes are likely to deliver the desired improvement in collaborative relationships, in the context of challenges experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe conducted 32 semi-structured interviews with 30 key stakeholders, taking place during the COVID-19 pandemic from Jan 2020 to May 2021. Participants were selected for their expertise regarding collaboration and were recruited purposively. Interviews were conducted online with the use of video conferencing software. The interviews were thematically analysed to identify themes. Proposals contained in the DHSC White Paper helped to structure the thematic analysis, interpretation, and reporting of the results.ResultsRequirements to compete to provide services, regulatory ability to block collaborative arrangements, lack of collaboration between providers and Clinical Commissioning Groups, and current lack of data sharing were found to hamper collaborative efforts. These issues often negatively affected collaborative relations by increasing bureaucracy and prompted leaders to attempt to avoid future collaborations. Other barriers included opaque accountability arrangements, and erosion of trust in regulators. The COVID-19 pandemic was found to foster collaboration between organisations, but some changes mandated by the new legislation may stifle further collaboration.ConclusionsMany of the proposed legislative changes in the White Paper would help to remove existing barriers to service integration and collaboration identified by stakeholders. However, the proposed shift in the concentration of power from NHS England to the DHSC may exacerbate historically low levels of trust between providers and regulators. Many of the proposed changes fail to address endemic NHS policy issues such as chronic understaffing. Further dialogue is needed at all levels of the health and social care system to ensure future legislative changes meet the needs of all stakeholders.

Examining the Role of Trust in Regulators in Food Safety Risk Assessment: A Cross-regional Analysis of Three Chinese Societies Using an Integrative Framework

Considerable efforts have been made to depict the causal patterns of trust, risk perception, and risk acceptance. Yet, it remains far from clear whether the established models are over-simplistic and to what extent the observed associations are contingent upon risk contexts. Extending the theorizing based on the Causal Chain model, this study adopts a comparative approach to examining the role of trust in regulators in the case of post-Fukushima food imports in Hong Kong, Mainland China, and Taiwan. Consistent with the proposed integrative framework, all three samples exhibited indirect relationships between trust in regulators and behavioral intentions through two types of risk perception (affective and cognitive risk perceptions) and risk acceptance. Findings showed that risk acceptance was the most prominent mediator in explaining the extended model and supported the necessity of distinguishing risk acceptance and behavioral intention as two self-contained constructs working in sequence. Moreover, trust in regulators showed the strongest predictivity in behavioral intentions in the Mainland China sample, while risk perception played a more important role in explaining outcome variables in the Hong Kong and Taiwan samples. In addition to contributing to theory building by presenting the external validity of the integrative framework across different political and food regulatory systems, the study demonstrates practical implications for regulatory authorities and risk communicators.

Alone in the campaign: Distrust in regulators and the coping of front‐line workers

AbstractTrust is the “glue” connecting state and society and particularly relevant to how front‐line workers, who are the face of public administration vis‐à‐vis citizens, implement policy. Therefore, it is important to examine how front‐line workers' absence of trust in regulators influences the ways they cope with their clients. Our study investigates this question empirically through interviews and focus groups with 80 Israeli social service providers. Our results show that front‐line workers' distrust in regulators is a product of four factors: perceived lack of protection, clash of values, politicization in implementation processes, and regulators' “disconnection” from the field. It leads them to adopt two coping strategies: acts of self‐protection and deviation from formal policy. A further derivative is their turnover intention.

Exposure to online news about air pollution and public trust in regulators in China: a moderated mediation analysis of perceived risk and perceived news credibility

ABSTRACT Public trust in regulators is critical to the effective management of environmental risks. This study proposes a model to explicate how people’s online news exposure, perceived risk, and perceived news credibility influence their trust in regulators concerning the issue of air pollution in China. An online survey showed that perceived risk fully mediated the relationship between online news exposure and trust in regulators. Through moderating the association between online news exposure and perceived risk, perceived news credibility also moderated the indirect effect: the negative indirect effect of online news exposure on trust in regulators via perceived risk was stronger when the level of perceived news credibility was high than when it was low. The results suggest that online news that attempts to make the public more conscious of air pollution hazards reduces public trust in regulators, especially when people perceive the news as highly credible. News media are supposed to inform the public of the issue and thus help air pollution management. However, the findings alert us that the amplification of public risk perception resulting from frequent online news exposure and the subsequent decline in public trust in regulators might impede the effective regulation of air pollution.

PUBLIC TRUST AND BIOTECH INNOVATION: A THEORY OF TRUSTWORTHY REGULATION OF (SCARY!) TECHNOLOGY

AbstractRegulatory agencies aim to protect the public by moderating risks associated with innovation, but a good regulatory regime should also promote justified public trust. After introducing the USDA 2020 SECURE Rule for regulation of biotech innovation as a case study, this essay develops a theory of justified public trust in regulation. On the theory advanced here, to be trustworthy, a regulatory regime must (1) fairly and effectively manage risk, must be (2) “science based” in the relevant sense, and must in addition be (3) truthful, (4) transparent, and (5) responsive to public input. Evaluated with these norms, the USDA SECURE Rule is shown to be deeply flawed, since it fails appropriately to manage risk, and similarly fails to satisfy other normative requirements for justified trust. The argument identifies ways in which the SECURE Rule itself might be improved, but more broadly provides a normative framework for the evaluation of trustworthy regulatory policy-making.

Explaining public risk acceptance of a petrochemical complex: A delicate balance of costs, benefits, and trust

Communities adjacent to polluting industrial facilities understand and evaluate risk in often ambivalent and contextualized ways, not only balancing economic and environmental concerns but also reflecting cultural practices, social worldviews, and trust relationships. In this case study of the Antwerp petrochemical complex, the largest in Europe, a residents’ survey and interviews are used to examine how two middle-class communities coexist with the nearby petrochemical plants. The findings show that citizens in both communities are generally aware of the environmental impact and public health risk but are predominantly accepting of the industry. For both communities, the most important factor explaining acceptance is the perceived socio-economic benefit for the community, while a direct individual benefit in terms of employment does not play a significant role. In one community, risk acceptance is further strengthened by trust in companies’ risk management, while in the other community, trust in regulators is more critical. The different results for both communities stress the importance of a socio-cultural perspective on risk and underline the criticality of relationships of trust. The article further discusses the implications of these findings for environmental decision-making, considering the delicate balance and the significant minority of the population who is less accepting. The present study adds to the risk perception literature by providing one of the first quantitative analyses explaining industrial risk acceptance, instead of perception, using the increasingly contested petrochemical industry as an exemplary case.

Explaining the Market Acceptance of Artificial Sweeteners in a Developing Country: Evidence from Female Young Adults in Zimbabwe

ABSTRACT This paper examines whether a proposed set of factors explains consumers’ acceptance of artificial food sweeteners in a selected developing country. A quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted on 938 female respondents aged between 18 and 24 who resided in the three largest cities in Zimbabwe (i.e., Harare, Bulawayo, and Gweru). Data collected in 2019 and 2020 were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling. The ‘health consciousness’ and ‘preference for natural products’ variables had a significant negative predictive influence on the ‘acceptance of artificial sweeteners’ variable. However, ‘trust in regulators’ had a positive effect on the same outcome variable. Moreover, the ‘negative attitude toward sugars’ variable significantly moderated the relationship between ‘preference for natural products’ and ‘acceptance of artificial sweeteners.’ These findings have fundamental practical implications related to the marketing of food innovations in Zimbabwe where deceptive marketing strategies continue to threaten consumers’ welfare and affect their receptiveness to new products.

Understanding Self-Rated Health and Unconventional Oil and Gas Development in Three Colorado Communities

Domestic, onshore oil and gas production has increased substantially in the United States in the last ∼20 years, creating a range of positive and negative impacts on communities. In this paper, we add to the growing literature on unconventional oil and gas production (a.k.a., “fracking”) and well-being by evaluating the association between self-reported stress induced by local oil and gas development and subjective well-being in the form of self-rated health. We also ask how the intensity of local drilling and trust in regulators influences self-rated health. Using novel survey data, we compare three Colorado communities with differential amounts of oil and gas development. Results from ordinal logistic regression models suggest that living in a community that hosts extraction is associated with lower self-rated health and that stress from local oil and gas operations is associated with lower self-rated health. To some degree, trust in regulators seems to improve self-rated health. We discuss implications for research and policy.

TRUST IN TRANSLATION: A CASE STUDY OF COPYRIGHT AS A LEGAL TRANSPLANT IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY IN MYANMAR

This paper highlights non-Western views on trust in regulation and governance through a comparative legal analysis of copyright and the music industry in Myanmar. Legal transplanting, taking a law from one legal system and implanting it, was a common practice throughout colonial history. Standardized copyright, in the form of the TRIPs Agreement, is an example of a post-colonial legal transplant, enforced by the WTO. The South-east Asian nation of Myanmar is the process of a major transition both politically and technologically that is heavily impact its creative industries in general, and music industry in particular. This interdisciplinary comparative legal analysis considers the implications of transplanting copyright regulation into an informal creative economy. Data were collected from fourteen interviews with music industry professionals and legal experts in Myanmar conducted in January 2019. While some informants expressed trust in foreign transplants and a belief in the efficacy of a new copyright law, others expressed concern that these foreign laws would fail to address issues unique to the Myanmar music industry. This study argues that the way forward involves a deeper understanding of the local system of governance.

Lay-people's knowledge about toxicology and its principles in eight European countries

The procedures of risk assessment related to substances consumed or used by consumers (e.g., food additives, cleaning products) are highly complex and there exists some controversy between experts in regards to the uncertainty linked to it. This contributes to the well documented divergence in experts and lay-people's judgments, particularly for synthetic or man-made chemicals. By investigating lay-people's knowledge gaps and misconceptions related to toxicology, we hope to contribute to facilitating the communication between experts and the lay public. For this, a large-scale survey measuring knowledge of toxicological principles, trust in regulators, the irrational fear of chemicals and health concern was distributed in eight European countries (Total: N = 5631). Results suggest that large gaps exist regarding people's knowledge of toxicological principles and that a lack of knowledge is significantly associated with higher levels of chemophobia. Particular attention for future communication efforts should be placed on the stigma associated with the terminology, principles of dose-response associations and the comparability of substances of natural and synthetic origin.

Reasons for being in favour of or against genome modification: a survey of the Dutch general public.

What are the general public's reasons for being in favour of or against the use of genome modification for five potential applications? Overall, 43 reasons for being in favour, 45 reasons for being against as well as 26 conditional reasons for the use of genome modification were identified. Various applications of somatic genome modification are progressing towards clinical introduction and several recent studies have reported on germline genome modification. This has incited a debate on ethical and legal implications and acceptability. There is a growing plea to involve the general public earlier on in the developmental process of science and (bio)technology including genome modification. In April 2016, a cross-sectional survey was launched online among the Dutch general public. A documentary on genome modification on public television and calls in social media invited viewers and non-viewers, respectively, to participate. The questionnaire introduced five potential future applications of genome modification: modified wheat for individuals with gluten intolerance; somatic modification for individuals with neuromuscular diseases; germline modification to prevent passing on a neuromuscular disease; germline modification to introduce resistance to HIV; and germline modification to increase intelligence. Participants were asked to indicate whether and why they would make use of genome modification in these scenarios. The reasons mentioned were analysed through content analysis by two researchers independently. The proportion of respondents that was willing to modify was described per scenario and associations with respondent characteristics were analysed. The survey was completed by 1013 participants. Forty-three reasons for being in favour, 45 reasons for being against as well as 26 conditional reasons for the use of genome modification were identified. These could be categorized into 14 domains: safety of the individuals concerned; effectiveness; quality of life of the individuals concerned; existence of a clinical need or an alternative; biodiversity and ecosystems; animal homo sapiens (i.e. relating to effects on humans as a species); human life and dignity; trust in regulation; justice; costs; slippery slope; argument of nature; parental rights and duties; and (reproductive) autonomy. Participants' willingness to use genome modification was dependent on the application: most participants would eat modified wheat if gluten intolerant (74%), would use genome modification to cure his/her own neuromuscular disease (85%) and would apply germline modification to prevent passing on this neuromuscular disease (66%). A minority would apply germline modification to introduce resistance to HIV (30%) or increase intelligence (16%). Being young (odds ratio (OR) = 0.98 per year increase), being male (OR = 2.38), and having watched the documentary (OR = 1.82) were associated with being willing to apply genome modification in more scenarios. Inquiring for reasons through open questions in a survey allowed for a larger sample size and intuitive responses but resulted in less depth than traditional face-to-face interviews. As the survey was disseminated through social media, the sample is not representative of the overall Dutch population, and hence the quantitative results should not be interpreted as such. Further public consultation and a more in-depth ethical and societal debate on principles and conditions for responsible use of (germline) genome modification is required prior to future clinical introduction. Funded by the University of Amsterdam and University Medical Centre Utrecht. No conflict of interest. Not applicable.

Does Trust Matter? Analyzing the Impact of Trust on the Perceived Risk and Acceptance of Nuclear Power Energy

Recently, trust has been in vogue in the social sciences. However, in risk studies, there have been few causal models of trust. This study proposes and tests a causal model of trust in which (1) source credibility influences trust and (2) two kinds of trust—i.e., trust in government and trust in regulation—affect the perceived risk and acceptance of nuclear energy. Based on survey data with a sample of 1014 local residents living near a nuclear power station, we tested a causal model using structural equation modeling. As for the results of the analysis: first, we confirmed the validity of the proposed causal model of trust. Second, on the causal path, credibility directly influenced trust in government and trust in regulation and indirectly affected the perceived risk and acceptance of nuclear power. Third, the two kinds of trust had (in)direct impacts on perceived risk and acceptance. Trust in regulation had more power to explain perceived risks and acceptance than trust in government. Trust is important, but the kind of trust is more important.

Models of Assurance

Assurance—an intermediary’s guarantee of compliance with regulatory standards—is critical for legitimate governance within the sustainability field. This legitimacy classically depends on the degrees of separation that are needed between the RIT roles to create trust in regulators and enforce the compliance of targets. Following the emergence of the ISEAL Alliance—an apex organization of sustainability standards-setters—there has been a general shift in the sustainability field whereby standard-setters have delegated some of their authority to certifiers and accreditors. This article examines this movement, through the analysis of four different models of assurance, and reveals increasing complexity being built into private systems of regulation in the sustainability field. There is an increasing incidence of multiple actors who engage in processes of intermediation and accreditation, which is rising in importance. The result is empirical and conceptual confusion around previously sacred notions such as independence and conflict of interest as measures of regulatory effectiveness.

Modeling of Public Risk Perception and Risk Communication Research: In A Social-Cognitive Direction

This study begins with a review of commonly discussed dimensions of public risk perception that may influence public opinion toward risks. Factors that have been revealed by the literature to have substantial impact on risk perception, such as demographic background, trust, and media environment, are also discussed. Meanwhile, we evaluate two well-known research models in the realm of risk analysis: 1) the psychometric paradigm, and 2) the social amplification of risk framework (SARF). Based on a literature review, this study suggests that, besides the psychological and social approach, models of risk perception and risk communication research should shift to a more comprehensive one by considering the interrelations between laypeople and the environment. This study proposes a research model from the perspective of social cognitive theory (SCT) as a potential framework for future studies: 1) in the societal environment, individuals' risk perception and information seeking behavior, which is determined by risk perception will be influenced by trust in regulators and interpersonal trust; 2) in the media environment, individuals' risk perception and information seeking behavior will be influenced by individuals' perceived information characteristics. Knowledge about risk accumulated through information seeking will change risk perception in a longitudinal process.

The consumer’s perception of artificial food additives: Influences on acceptance, risk and benefit perceptions

Food additives, such as food colours or sweeteners, play an important part in food supply. For a variety of reasons, some consumers might regard the use of food additives, especially artificial ones, with suspicion; food additives are considered unnatural, unhealthy or even a public health risk. The goal of this study was to investigate consumers’ perceptions and the most essential variables related to the acceptance of food additives. Two versions of a paper-and-pencil questionnaire, one investigating artificial food colours and the other investigating artificial sweeteners, were distributed to a large sample of Swiss German households. The final samples for artificial food colours and artificial sweeteners comprised 506 and 487 participants respectively. The questionnaires contained items on consumers’ acceptance, risk and benefit perception, trust in regulators, knowledge of regulation and their preference for natural products. The relationships between variables were investigated in a path model, which was constructed based on a review of previous literature. The path coefficients suggested that risk and benefit perceptions significantly influence the acceptance of the two selected food additives. The risk and benefit perceptions were influenced by consumers’ knowledge of regulation, their trust in regulators, and their preference for natural products. In the discussion, the study’s findings are examined in terms of their implications for further research and for the development of concrete communication materials.

Understanding shifting perceptions of nanotechnologies and their implications for policy dialogues about emerging technologies

Communications from scientists and engineers indicate concern about the potential for public aversion to nanotechnologies. Recommendations that policy dialogues occur early and often as public perceptions emerge have followed, and multiple surveys indicate high benefit ratings. This paper explores instead the mobile and conditional quality of current perceptions of the risks and benefits of nanotechnologies, and of judgments of trust in regulation. Drawing from a nationally representative phone survey of 1,100 US residents, we found that presenting risk information after benefit information had a significant impact on acceptability ratings as compared to the reverse order. Trust judgments were also mobile, and interacted with affective predispositions towards nanotechnologies. Overall, for policy purposes and dialogues, we find high attitudinal uncertainty suggesting considerable openness to context-specific considerations as linked to acceptability of new technologies. We also caution against over promotion of benefits and an avoidance of appropriate risk discussions in the short term.

Régulation et confiance

Regulation and Trust. Trust is an asset of utmost importance for the smooth functioning of modern economies. The recent crisis witnessed the gradual devaluation of this asset among financial system’s participants. The notion of credit crunch is the economic manifestation of such a collapse in value. To combat it, public authorities have used their own credit and put it at risk. This intervention, necessary as it was, cannot substitute for robust and sound financial regulation. The latter is of fundamental importance to build and maintain agents’ trust in the financial system : it protects economic agents ; it addresses market failures ; it limits risk-taking when it exceeds what financial stability requires. A challenge when designing regulation is, however, to minimize the risks of unintended (adverse) consequences. For the future, three goals should drive our efforts : to restore trust in banks, a goal the recently agreed new Capital Accord significantly helps to achieve ; to expand trust in financial products and infrastructure, through greater standardization and more systematic use of robust and supervised clearing and trading venues ; to safeguard trust in regulators, without succumbing to the false assurance associated with automatic prudential rules. Classification JEL : G28, P16.