- 【Updated on May 12, 2025】 Integration of CiNii Dissertations and CiNii Books into CiNii Research
- Trial version of CiNii Research Automatic Translation feature is available on CiNii Labs
- Suspension and deletion of data provided by Nikkei BP
- Regarding the recording of “Research Data” and “Evidence Data”
HOW DOES THE REGULATOR CHOOSE ITS ADMINISTRATIVE TOOLS FOR PUBLIC-PRIVATE COLLABORATION ?
-
- MURAKAMI Yuichi
- The University of Tokyo, Graduate Schools for Law and Politics the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
Bibliographic Information
- Other Title
-
- 官民協働の手段選択の条件等についての分析
- カンミンキョウドウ ノ シュダン センタク ノ ジョウケン トウ ニ ツイテ ノ ブンセキ : デンキ ヨウヒン ノ アンゼン ・ ショウガイ ニ カンスル 2ツ ノ キセイ ノ ヒカク オ トオシテ
- A COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY OF REGULATIONS ON ELECTRIC APPLIANCES
- 電気用品の安全・障害に関する2つの規制の比較を通して
Search this article
Description
Complicated forms of 'public-private division of labour' are frequently observed in regulatory activities. In this paper, I first classify the institutional alternatives of public-private work-sharing, according to the amount of discretion that remains with the government. Then, I expand on my research agenda?how the delegated regulator chooses its administrative tools for public-private collaboration, and the performance of such tools?through a comparative case study on [1] the third-party/self-certification system under the Electrical Appliance and Material Safety Law, and [2] self-regulation against electromagnetic interference (EMI) managed by a private council, the Voluntary Control Council for Interference by Information Technology Equipment (VCCI). The results reveal that their differences in administrative tools are also explained by differences in [1] the resources that the industry possesses for effective regulation, such as administrative or punitive powers for appropriate implementation, and so, [2] suitable discretionary tools in the government for making the regulation productive and responsive in the regulatory space (provided by social factors such as market, consumer, and information), and [3] whether the regulatory system directly suffered from political tides of the regulatory reform in the 1980s, in addition to differences in [4] tools reasonable for the nature of the regulated technology, and [5] the respective path-dependent factor. This paper also mentions some implications for sociotechnology research.
Journal
-
- SOCIOTECHNICA
-
SOCIOTECHNICA 8 124-137, 2011
Sociotechnology Research Network
