IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v304y2022ics0277953620305827.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory niches: Diagnostic reform as a process of fragmented expansion. Evidence from the UK 1990–2018

Author

Listed:
  • Hogarth, Stuart
  • Löblová, Olga

Abstract

This paper analyses the politics of regulatory expansion within the diagnostics sector. Since 1990, an informal, clinician-led process of diagnostic innovation within the UK NHS has been challenged by new mechanisms for the evaluation of diagnostics. We describe these diagnostic reforms as a process of fragmented regulatory expansion. New governance mechanisms function as regulatory niches: discrete spaces within an overarching sociotechnical regime. The boundaries of regulatory niches are organisational and epistemological. Organisational boundaries map onto established communities of practice that constitute the regulatory target; epistemological boundaries are defined by distinctive evaluation frameworks. Niches are also distinguished by their outcomes (rate of positive decisions) and their origins. Niche formation was triggered by five drivers: public scandal; technological change; marketisation; institutional isomorphism; and transnational policy transfer. Each niche was triggered by a unique confluence of these drivers, but common to all were historic shifts in healthcare politics, as the rise of evidence-based medicine intersected with the centralising impulse of the regulatory state, which encroached on clinical autonomy in a contest for power that is increasingly mediated by influential non-governmental organisations.

Suggested Citation

  • Hogarth, Stuart & Löblová, Olga, 2022. "Regulatory niches: Diagnostic reform as a process of fragmented expansion. Evidence from the UK 1990–2018," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:304:y:2022:i:c:s0277953620305827
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113363
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953620305827
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113363?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harcourt, Bernard E., 2011. "The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order," Economics Books, Harvard University Press, number 9780674066168, Spring.
    2. Gardner, John & Webster, Andrew, 2016. "The social management of biomedical novelty: Facilitating translation in regenerative medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 90-97.
    3. Mykhalovskiy, Eric & Weir, Lorna, 2004. "The problem of evidence-based medicine: directions for social science," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(5), pages 1059-1069, September.
    4. Julia Black, 2008. "Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 137-164, June.
    5. Johan Schot & Frank Geels, 2007. "Niches in evolutionary theories of technical change," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 605-622, October.
    6. Cyril Benoit & Philippe Gorry, 2017. "Health Technology Assessment: The Scientific Career of a Policy Concept," Post-Print hal-02880070, HAL.
    7. Faulkner, Alex, 2009. "Regulatory policy as innovation: Constructing rules of engagement for a technological zone of tissue engineering in the European Union," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 637-646, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Petersen, Alexander M. & Rotolo, Daniele & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2016. "A triple helix model of medical innovation: Supply, demand, and technological capabilities in terms of Medical Subject Headings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 666-681.
    2. Timmermans, Stefan & Almeling, Rene, 2009. "Objectification, standardization, and commodification in health care: A conceptual readjustment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 21-27, July.
    3. Daniel Fitzpatrick & Rebecca Monson, 2022. "Property rights and climate migration: Adaptive governance in the South Pacific," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 519-535, April.
    4. Di Liberto, Yuri, 2022. "Hype: The Capitalist Degree of Induced Participation," Review of Capital as Power, Capital As Power - Toward a New Cosmology of Capitalism, vol. 2(2), pages 1-16.
    5. Marletto, Gerardo, 2011. "Structure, agency and change in the car regime. A review of the literature," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 47, pages 71-88.
    6. Justo-Hanani, Ronit & Dayan, Tamar, 2014. "The role of the state in regulatory policy for nanomaterials risk: Analyzing the expansion of state-centric rulemaking in EU and US chemicals policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 169-178.
    7. Kriechbaum, Michael & Posch, Alfred & Hauswiesner, Angelika, 2021. "Hype cycles during socio-technical transitions: The dynamics of collective expectations about renewable energy in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    8. Schrape, Jan-Felix, 2021. "Platformization, pluralization, synthetization: Public communication in the digital age," Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, SOI Discussion Papers 2021-02, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences, Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies.
    9. Cyril Benoît, 2021. "Politicians, regulators, and regulatory governance: The neglected sides of the story," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(S1), pages 8-22, November.
    10. Cavanagh, Alice & Shamsheri, Tahmina & Shen, Katrina & Gaber, Jessica & Liauw, Jessica & Vanstone, Meredith & Kouyoumdjian, Fiona, 2022. "Lived experiences of pregnancy and prison through a reproductive justice lens: A qualitative meta-synthesis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    11. Sara Helen Kaweesa & Hamid El Bilali & Willibald Loiskandl, 2021. "Analysing the socio-technical transition to conservation agriculture in Uganda through the lens of the multi-level perspective," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 7606-7626, May.
    12. Guillaume Ollivier & Daniele Magda & Armelle Mazé & Gaël Plumecocq & Claire Lamine, 2018. "Agroecological transitions: what can sustainability transition frameworks teach us? An ontological and empirical analysis," Post-Print hal-02622145, HAL.
    13. Walrave, Bob & Talmar, Madis & Podoynitsyna, Ksenia S. & Romme, A. Georges L. & Verbong, Geert P.J., 2018. "A multi-level perspective on innovation ecosystems for path-breaking innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 103-113.
    14. Weigelt, Carmen & Lu, Shaohua & Verhaal, J. Cameron, 2021. "Blinded by the sun: The role of prosumers as niche actors in incumbent firms’ adoption of solar power during sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    15. Wesseling, Joeri H. & Bidmon, Christina & Bohnsack, René, 2020. "Business model design spaces in socio-technical transitions: The case of electric driving in the Netherlands," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    16. Muhammad Nouman & Mohammad Sohail Yunis & Muhammad Atiq & Owais Mufti & Abdul Qadus, 2022. "‘The Forgotten Sector’: An Integrative Framework for Future Research on Low- and Medium-Technology Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, March.
    17. Ansell, Christopher K. & Bartenberger, Martin, 2016. "Varieties of experimentalism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 64-73.
    18. Paolo Zeppini & Koen Frenken & Roland Kupers, 2013. "The complexity of transitions," Working Papers 13-04, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies, revised Mar 2013.
    19. Palm, J. & Kojonsaari, A.-R. & Öhrlund, I. & Fowler, N. & Bartusch, C., 2023. "Drivers and barriers to participation in Sweden's local flexibility markets for electricity," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    20. Richard Cowell, 2017. "Decentralising energy governance? Wales, devolution and the politics of energy infrastructure decision-making," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(7), pages 1242-1263, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:304:y:2022:i:c:s0277953620305827. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.