Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- List of abbreviations
- Preface
- 1 Non-state actors as standard setters: framing the issue in an interdisciplinary fashion
- PART I New actors and processes in contemporary standard setting
- PART II The legitimacy and accountability of actors and standards
- 8 Democratic governance beyond the state: the legitimacy of non-state actors as standard setters
- 9 Legitimacy, accountability and polycentric regulation: dilemmas, trilemmas and organisational response
- 10 Accountability of transnational actors: is there scope for cross-sector principles?
- 11 Non-state environmental standards as a substitute for state regulation?
- 12 Limiting violence – culture and the constitution of public norms: with a case study from a stateless area
- PART III The authority and effectiveness of actors and standards
- Index
- References
9 - Legitimacy, accountability and polycentric regulation: dilemmas, trilemmas and organisational response
from PART II - The legitimacy and accountability of actors and standards
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 January 2010
By
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- List of abbreviations
- Preface
- 1 Non-state actors as standard setters: framing the issue in an interdisciplinary fashion
- PART I New actors and processes in contemporary standard setting
- PART II The legitimacy and accountability of actors and standards
- 8 Democratic governance beyond the state: the legitimacy of non-state actors as standard setters
- 9 Legitimacy, accountability and polycentric regulation: dilemmas, trilemmas and organisational response
- 10 Accountability of transnational actors: is there scope for cross-sector principles?
- 11 Non-state environmental standards as a substitute for state regulation?
- 12 Limiting violence – culture and the constitution of public norms: with a case study from a stateless area
- PART III The authority and effectiveness of actors and standards
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
It has been said that governments can ‘puzzle as well as power’. Shamelessly misappropriating this comment, it could be said that academic papers can do the same. Some puzzle their way through an issue, raising more questions than they answer; others ‘power’ on through, setting out the path that others must follow to find a solution to whatever problem is being addressed.
This chapter is of the former type. The issue that it considers is that of the accountability and legitimacy of decentred regulatory regimes. Decentred regulatory regimes are those in which the state is not the sole locus of authority or indeed in which it plays no role at all. They are marked by fragmentation, complexity and interdependence between actors, in which state and non-state actors are both regulators and regulated and their boundaries are marked by the issues or problems with which they are concerned, rather than necessarily by a common solution. Such regimes pose a number of challenges which writers across a range of disciplines – law, political science, international relations, development studies – are all engaged in delineating and addressing. Indeed, the issues to which the ‘governance turn’ is giving rise is drawing commentators like moths round a light.
These challenges include the functional, the systemic, the democratic and the normative. Functional challenges revolve around the problem of coordination: networks of organisations within a regulatory regime are characterised by complex interdependencies and can lack a central locus of authority.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Non-State Actors as Standard Setters , pp. 241 - 269Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2009
References
and 2006, ‘What's Measured is What Matters: Targets and Gaming in the English Public Healthcare System’, Public Administration, vol. 84, no. 3, 517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2001, ‘Decentring Regulation: Understanding the Role of Regulation and Self-Regulation in a “Post-Regulatory” World’, Current Legal Problems, vol. 54, 103–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002, ‘Regulatory Conversations’, Journal of Law and Society, vol. 29, no. 1, 163–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 2005, Pathways to Accountability: the GAP Framework, London, Global Accountability Partnership, available at www.oneworldtrust.org.Google Scholar
2007, ‘Analysing and Assessing Public Accountability: A Conceptual Framework’, European Law Review, vol. 13, no. 4, 447.Google Scholar
et al. 1994, ‘Regulatory Styles, Motivational Postures and Nursing Home Compliance’, Law and Policy, vol. 16, no. 16, 363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2007, ‘Taxation Threat, Motivational Postures and Responsive Regulation’, Law and Policy, vol. 29, nos. 1–22, 137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2000, ‘An Institutionalist Perspective on Performance Measurement and Management in the New Public Service’, Management Accounting Research, vol. 11, 281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2004, Renewing our Voice: Code of Good Practice for Responding to HIV/Aids, Geneva, The HIV/AIDS Code of Practice Project, Geneva, available at www.hivcode.org/silo/files/code-of-good-practice.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000, The Rise of the Network Society: Economy, Society and Culture, Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
2000, Normative Development in the International Legal System in (ed.), 21–42.
1998, ‘Incorporationism, Conventionality and the Practical Difference Thesis’, Legal Theory, vol. 4, 381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005, ‘A Structuration Analysis of Accounting Systems and Systems of Accountability in the Privatized Gas Industry’, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, vol. 15, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1991, ‘Accounting and Organizational Reality: A Field Study of the Emergence of a New Organizational Reality’, Accounting Organizations and Society, vol 16, no. 8, 705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1991, ‘Introduction’ in and (eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago University Press, 1–40.Google Scholar
1998, ‘Clarifying Accountability: An Ethical Framework’ in and (eds.), Public Sector Ethics, Leichhardt/Annadale, Routledge, 68–81.Google Scholar
1999, Future Positive: International Co-operation in the 21st Century, London, Earthscan.Google Scholar
2000, NGO Rights and Responsibilities: A New Deal for Global Governance, London, Foreign Policy Centre.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1995, Non-Governmental Organisations: Performance and Accountability, London, Earthscan.
and 2003, ‘The Shadows of the Law: Contemporary Approaches to Regulation and the Problem of Regulatory Conflict’, Law and Policy, vol. 25, no. 4, 353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2001, ‘An Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism’ in and (eds.), Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, Oxford University Press, 1–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2007, ‘Promoting Accountability in Multi-Level Governance: A Network Approach’, European Law Journal, vol. 13, no. 4, 542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2006, ‘Gaming in Targetworld: The Targets Approach to Managing British Public Services’, Public Administration Review, vol. 66, no. 4, 515.Google Scholar
et al. 1999, Regulation Inside Government: Waste-Watchers, Quality Police and Sleaze-Busters, Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1988, ‘Conclusion: An Institutional Approach to Foreign Economic Policy’ in , and (eds.), The State and American Foreign Economic Policy, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 219–43.Google Scholar
1991, ‘Institutions, Institutional Effects and Institutionalism’ in and (eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organisational Analysis, University of Chicago Press, 143–63.Google Scholar
, and 2003, ‘Explaining Corporate Environmental Performance: How Does Regulation Matter?’, Law and Society Review, vol. 37, 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1992, ‘The Balanced Scorecard – Measures that Drive Performance’, Harvard Business Review, January–February, 71–79.Google Scholar
2003, ‘Global Governance and Democratic Accountability’ in and (eds.) Taming Globalization: Frontiers of Governance, London, Polity Press, 130–59.Google Scholar
, and (eds.) 1997, Managing Complex Policy Networks, London, Sage.
and 1995, ‘Public Management and Policy Networks in the Public Sector: A Theoretical Study of Management Strategies in Policy Networks’, Public Administration, vol. 73, no. 3, 437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2000, ‘Public Management and Policy Networks. Foundations of a Network Approach to Governance’, Public Management, vol. 2, no. 2, 135.Google Scholar
2005, ‘Pathologies of Accountability: ICANN and the Challenge of “Multiple Accountability Disorder”’, Public Administration Review, vol. 65, no. 1, 94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2007, ‘The Fate of Public International Law: Between Technique and Politics’, Modern Law Review, vol. 70, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996, ‘Reflections on Performance Measurement in the Public Sector’ in and (eds.), Accounting and Performance Measurement: Issues in the Private and Public Sectors, London, Paul Chapman Publishing, 109–28.Google Scholar
, and 1992, ‘Recent Financial and Accountability Changes in General Practice: An Unhealthy Intrusion into Medical Autonomy?’, Financial Accountability and Management, vol. 8, 129–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996, ‘Performance Based Compensation in Health Care – A Swedish Experience’, Financial Accountability and Management, vol. 12, 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003, ‘NGO Legitimacy: Technical Issue or Social Construct?’, Critique of Anthropology, vol. 23, no. 2, 175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1984, ‘The New Institutionalism: Organisational Factors in Political Life’, American Political Science Review, vol. 78, 734–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1983, Bureaucratic Justice: Managing Social Security Disability, New Haven, Yale University Press.Google Scholar
2007, ‘Accountability and Institutional Design: Some Thoughts on the Grammar of Governance’, Yale Law School Research Paper, no. 116, available at http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=924879.
, . and . (eds.) 2007, The New Corporate Accountability: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Law, Cambridge University Press.
2007, ‘Competitive Supra-Governmental Regulation: How Could it be Democratic?’, Buffalo Legal Studies Research Paper Series, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1001770.
and 1977, ‘Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony’, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 83, 340–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 1994, ‘Ontology and Rationalization in the Western Cultural Account’ in , et al. (eds.), Institutional Environments and Organizations: Structural Complexity and Individualism, Thousand Oaks (CA), Sage, 9–27.Google Scholar
2001, ‘Performance Management and Institutional Processes: A Study of Managerial Responses to Public Sector Reform’, Management Accounting Research, vol. 12, 437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000, ‘Accountability: An Ever Expanding Concept?’Public Administration, vol. 78, no. 3, 555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998, ‘NGOs and Advocacy: How Well Are the Poor Represented?’, Development in Practice, vol. 8, no. 3, 297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1995, ‘Transforming Frameworks of Accountability: The Case of Water Privatization’, Accounting Organizations and Society, vol. 20, no. 2/3, 193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1991, ‘Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 16, no. 1, 145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2006, ‘Redefining Accountability as Relational Responsiveness’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 66, 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2007, ‘Problems of Democratic Accountability in Multilevel Governance Systems’, European Law Journal, vol. 13, no. 4, 469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005, ‘After Government? On Representing Law without the State’, Modern Law Review, vol. 68, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (eds.) 1992, Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics, Oxford University Press.CrossRef
2006, ‘Law's Legitimacy and “Democracy Plus”’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 26, no. 2, 377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1995, ‘The New World Order Incorporated: The Rise of Business and the Decline of the State’, Daedalus, vol. 124, no. 2, 75.Google Scholar
2000, ‘Accountability in the Regulatory State’, Journal of Law and Society, vol. 23, 38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2000, Commitment and Compliance, Oxford University Press.
1995, ‘The Chameleon of Accountability’, Accounting Organizations and Society, vol. 20, 219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005, ‘Jurisdictional Integrity, Polycentrism and the Design of Democratic Governance’, Governance, vol. 18, no. 1, 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002, ‘By What Authority? The Legitimacy and Accountability of Non-Governmental Organisations’, The International Council on Human Rights Policy International Meeting on Global Trends and Human Rights – Before and After 11 September, Geneva, January 2002 (available at www.jha.ac/articles/a082.htm).
1987, ‘Juridification – Concepts, Aspects, Limits, Solutions’ in (ed.), Juridification of the Social Spheres, Berlin, de Gruyter, 3–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997, ‘“Global Bukowina”: Legal Pluralism in the World Society’ in (ed.), Global Law Without a State, Aldershot, Dartmouth, 3–28.Google Scholar
1990, Why People Obey the Law: Procedural Justice, Legitimacy and Compliance, New Haven, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
1997, ‘The Psychology of Legitimacy: A Relational Perspective on Voluntary Deference to Authorities’, Personality & Social Psychology Review, vol. 1, no. 4, 323–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3
- Cited by