Soft regulation and responsible nanotechnological development in the European Union: Regulating occupational health and safety in the Netherlands

Worldwide, soft regulation like codes of conduct and benchmarks have been introduced to cope with the uncertain risks and benefits of nanotechnologies. However, it seems that these regulations are facing effectiveness problems. For instance, the European Commission’s 2008 Nano Code of Conduct has not yet been implemented in the member states. Using the analytical framework of responsive regulation this article explores effectiveness problems of soft regulation that has been established to reduce exposure to nanomaterials at the workplace. The article builds on ongoing research on the effects of voluntary regulation that applies to occupational activities with nanomaterials in the Netherlands. The evaluation of this rich governance arrangement offers indications of potential effectiveness problems. A tentative lesson of the research is that soft regulation can contribute to responsible nanotechnological development if it is specific enough to meet the needs of the regulated parties, if rule compliance is supported by financial and professional resources, and if it is embedded in a culture of social responsible partners, knowledgeable vigilance and adaptation.

[1]  Valerie Braithwaite,et al.  Games of Engagement: Postures Within the Regulatory Community* , 1995 .

[2]  Menno D.T. de Jong,et al.  Contested hybridization of regulation: failure of the Dutch regulatory system to protect minors from harmful media. , 2010 .

[3]  D. Curtin,et al.  Public Accountability of Transnational Private Regulation: Chimera or Reality? , 2011 .

[4]  B. Head.  Reconsidering Regulation and Governance Theory: A Learning Approach , 2009 .

[5]  David Vogel,et al.  The Private Regulation of Global Corporate Conduct , 2006 .

[6]  C. Ansell,et al.  Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice , 2007 .

[7]  Sydney A. Halpern.  Hybrid design, systemic rigidity: Institutional dynamics in human research oversight , 2008 .

[8]  Karinne Ludlow.  One size fits all? Australian regulation of nanoparticle exposure in the workplace. , 2007, Journal of law and medicine.

[9]  Health care and new governance: The quest for effective regulation , 2008 .

[10]  Barbel R. Dorbeck-Jung.  What can Prudent Public Regulators Learn from the United Kingdom Government’s Nanotechnological Regulatory Activities? , 2007 .

[11]  J. Pierre.  Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy , 2000 .

[12]  Graeme Hodge,et al.  International Handbook on Regulating Nanotechnologies , 2012 .

[13]  J. Opschoor,et al.  Economic incentives and environmental policies : principles and practice , 1994 .

[14]  C. Parker.  The “Compliance” Trap: The Moral Message in Responsive Regulatory Enforcement , 2006 .

[15]  L. Senden,et al.  The Conceptual and Constitutional Challenge of Transnational Private Regulation , 2011 .

[16]  Robert A. Kagan,et al.  The “Criminology of the Corporation” and Regulatory Enforcement Strategies , 1980 .

[17]  Philip Selznick,et al.  The Moral Commonwealth: Social Theory and the Promise of Community , 1992 .

[18]  J. Braithwaite.  Rewards and Regulation , 2002 .

[19]  John Griffiths.  Legal knowledge and the social working of law : The case of euthanasia , 1999 .

[20]  Morag Goodwin,et al.  Dimensions of technology regulation , 2010 .

[21]  Frans van Waarden,et al.  ‘Governance’ as a bridge between disciplines: Cross-disciplinary inspiration regarding shifts in governance and problems of governability, accountability and legitimacy , 2004 .

[22]  N. Gunningham.  The New Collaborative Environmental Governance: The Localization of Regulation , 2009 .

[23]  Christine Parker,et al.  Reinventing Regulation within the Corporation , 2000 .

[24]  REACHing Down: Nanomaterials and Chemical Safety in the European Union , 2010 .

[25]  FROM THE COMMISSION on the precautionary principle , 2022 .

[26]  R. V. Schomberg.  Prospects for Technology Assessment in a Framework of Responsible Research and Innovation , 2011 .

[27]  K. Wellens,et al.  Soft Law in European Community Law , 1980 .

[28]  T. Wilthagen,et al.  Moving beyond command-and-control: reflexivity in the regulation of occupational safety and health and the environment. , 1997 .

[29]  J. Braithwaite.  Responsive regulation and developing economies , 2006 .

[30]  Graeme Hodge,et al.  Counting on codes: An examination of transnational codes as a regulatory governance mechanism for nanotechnologies , 2009, Emerging Technologies: Ethics, Law and Governance.

[31]  Neil Gunningham,et al.  Social License and Environmental Protection: Why Businesses Go Beyond Compliance , 2002, Law & Social Inquiry.

[32]  J. Black.  Constructing and Contesting Legitimacy and Accountability in Polycentric Regulatory Regimes , 2008 .

[33]  J. Griffiths,et al.  The Social Working of Legal Rules , 2003 .

[34]  C. Scott.  Private Regulation of the Public Sector: A Neglected Facet of Contemporary Governance , 2002 .

[35]  Geert Van Calster,et al.  A good foundation? Regulatory oversight of nanotechnologies using cosmetics as a case study , 2010 .

[36]  P. Klok,et al.  Institutionalism: State Models and Policy Processes , 2000 .

[37]  John Braithwaite,et al.  Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate , 1992 .

[38]  Philippe Nonet.  Law and society in transition , 1978 .

[39]  David Heald,et al.  Varieties of transparency , 2006 .

[40]  Julia Black,et al.  Really Responsive Risk-Based Regulation , 2010 .

[41]  Fiona Haines.  Globalization and Regulatory Character , 2005 .

[42]  R. Rhodes.  Understanding governance : policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability , 1997 .

[43]  Christopher Pollitt,et al.  The Essential Public Manager , 2003 .

[44]  E. Vos.  Institutional frameworks of community health and safety legislation : committees, agencies and private bodies , 1999 .

[45]  Michael Kloepfer.  Technik und Recht im wechselseitigen Werden : Kommunikationsrecht in der Technikgeschichte , 2002 .

[46]  Neil Gunningham,et al.  Environment, Self‐Regulation, and the Chemical Industry: Assessing Responsible Care* , 1995 .

[47]  J. Dupuy,et al.  Some pitfalls in the philosophical foundations of nanoethics. , 2007, The Journal of medicine and philosophy.

[48]  Sten Jönsson.  Institutions and Organizations , 1997 .

[49]  Peer C. Zumbansen.  Neither Public Nor Private, National Nor International: Transnational Corporate Governance from a Legal Pluralist Perspective , 2011 .

[50]  N. Gunningham.  The New Collaborative Environmental Governance , 2011 .

[51]  Sylvia I. Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen,et al.  Comparing the legitimacy and effectiveness of global hard and soft law: An analytical framework , 2009 .

[52]  R. Baggott.  REGULATORY REFORM IN BRITAIN: THE CHANGING FACE OF SELF‐REGULATION , 1989 .

[53]  Julia Black,et al.  Really Responsive Regulation , 2007 .

[54]  G. Teubner.  Global law without a state , 1997 .

[55]  B. Peters,et al.  Governance, Politics and the State , 2000 .

[56]  Regulatory Failures and Regulatory Solutions: A Characteristic Analysis of the Aftermath of Disaster , 2009, Law & Social Inquiry.

[57]  Bridget M. Hutter,et al.  Compliance: Regulation and Environment , 1997 .

[58]  C. Parker.  The Open Corporation: Effective Self-regulation and Democracy , 2002 .

[59]  S. Schwartz.  Social Control Through Law , 1998 .

[60]  Peter Grabosky,et al.  Smart Regulation: Designing Environmental Policy , 1999 .

[61]  Tetty Havinga,et al.  Private Regulation of Food Safety by Supermarkets , 2006 .

[62]  C. Hood,et al.  Transparency: the Key to Better Governance? , 2006 .