IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v46y2017i1p160-170.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Captured by technology? How material agency sustains interaction between regulators and industry actors

Author

Listed:
  • Finch, John
  • Geiger, Susi
  • Reid, Emma

Abstract

This paper examines how environmental regulation is made operational when it legislates for modifications rather than the banning of products or substances. The continued circulation of such products draws attention to the heterogeneous conditions of their use and allows industry actors to accumulate evidence of the products’ polluting effects over time. We find that this agentic quality of materials – including products and sites of application – is a vital and so far largely ignored dimension in the relationship between environmental regulation and innovation. This is captured in a process we term interactive stabilization, which describes how material agency becomes a focus for interactions between regulatory and industry actors. We develop our argument through an in-depth case study of the environmental regulation of production chemistry and identify three interactive processes: formulating regulatory principles; operationalizing these principles through technical documentation and calculation; and incremental innovation as used by chemists to address clients’ varied material problems in production. We trace stabilizing and destabilizing effects across these three processes and draw particular attention to the role of uncertainty in the operationalization of precaution as a regulatory principle. We argue that this uncertainty may lead to a form of regulatory capture that we frame as technological capture. This refers to how industry actors are able to test the limits of regulatory principles and calculations and on occasion contest these through their applied science capabilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Finch, John & Geiger, Susi & Reid, Emma, 2017. "Captured by technology? How material agency sustains interaction between regulators and industry actors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 160-170.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:46:y:2017:i:1:p:160-170
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.08.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733316301275
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2016.08.002?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. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.
    2. Paraskevopoulou, Evita, 2012. "Non-technological regulatory effects: Implications for innovation and innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1058-1071.
    3. van Hoof, L. & van Tatenhove, J., 2009. "EU marine policy on the move: The tension between fisheries and maritime policy," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 726-732, July.
    4. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1991. "The Politics of Government Decision-Making: A Theory of Regulatory Capture," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1089-1127.
    5. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    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. Andreas Klinke & Marion Dreyer & Ortwin Renn & Andrew Stirling & Patrick Van Zwanenberg, 2006. "Precautionary Risk Regulation in European Governance," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 373-392, June.
    8. Blind, Knut, 2012. "The influence of regulations on innovation: A quantitative assessment for OECD countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 391-400.
    9. Jakob Edler & Paul Cunningham & Abdullah Gök & Philip Shapira (ed.), 2016. "Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 16121.
    10. Knol, Maaike, 2011. "The uncertainties of precaution: Zero discharges in the Barents Sea," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 399-404, May.
    11. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    12. Giovan Francesco Lanzara & François-Xavier de Vaujany & Nathalie Mitev & Anouk Mukherjee, 2015. "Materiality, Rules and Regulation. New Trends in Management and Organization Studies," Post-Print hal-01498471, HAL.
    13. Carpenter, Daniel P., 2004. "Protection without Capture: Product Approval by a Politically Responsive, Learning Regulator," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(4), pages 613-631, November.
    14. Lohmann, Larry, 2009. "Toward a different debate in environmental accounting: The cases of carbon and cost-benefit," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 499-534, April.
    15. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 2001. "Competition in Telecommunications," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262621509, April.
    16. François-Xavier de Vaujany & Nathalie Mitev & Giovan Francesco Lanzara & Anouk Mukherjee, 2015. "Materiality, Rules and Regulation. New Trends in Management and Organization Studies," Post-Print hal-01273531, HAL.
    17. Callon, Michel, 2009. "Civilizing markets: Carbon trading between in vitro and in vivo experiments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 535-548, April.
    18. MacKenzie, Donald, 2009. "Making things the same: Gases, emission rights and the politics of carbon markets," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 440-455, April.
    19. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    20. Kesidou, Effie & Demirel, Pelin, 2012. "On the drivers of eco-innovations: Empirical evidence from the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 862-870.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. M. Hassan Awad, 2023. "Place and the Structuring of Cross-Sector Partnerships: The Moral and Material Conflicts Over Healthcare and Homelessness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(4), pages 933-955, May.
    2. Paula Ungureanu, 2023. "Putting Space in Place. Multimodal Translation of the Grand Challenge of Regional Smart Specialization from Policy to Cross-sector Partnerships," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(4), pages 895-915, May.
    3. Geiger, Susi & Kjellberg, Hans, 2021. "Market mash ups: The process of combinatorial market innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 445-457.
    4. Mountford, Nicola, 2019. "Managing by proxy: Organizational networks as institutional levers in evolving public good markets," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 92-104.
    5. Andersen, Kristina Vaarst & Frederiksen, Marianne Harbo & Knudsen, Mette Præst & Krabbe, Anders Dahl, 2020. "The strategic responses of start-ups to regulatory constraints in the nascent drone market," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(10).
    6. Annmarie Ryan & Susi Geiger & Helen Haugh & Oana Branzei & Barbara L. Gray & Thomas B. Lawrence & Tim Cresswell & Alastair Anderson & Sarah Jack & Ed McKeever, 2023. "Emplaced Partnerships and the Ethics of Care, Recognition and Resilience," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(4), pages 757-772, May.
    7. Nicola Mountford & Susi Geiger, 2021. "Markets and institutional fields: foundational concepts and a research agenda," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 11(3), pages 290-303, December.
    8. Cozzolino, Alessio & Geiger, Susi, 2024. "Ecosystem disruption and regulatory positioning: Entry strategies of digital health startup orchestrators and complementors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).

    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. Blind, Knut & Petersen, Sören S. & Riillo, Cesare A.F., 2017. "The impact of standards and regulation on innovation in uncertain markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 249-264.
    2. Kaidonis, Mary & Moerman, Lee & Rudkin, Kathy, 2009. "Paradigm, paradox, paralysis: An epistemic process," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 285-289.
    3. Seokbeom Kwon & Jan Youtie & Alan Porter & Nils Newman, 2024. "How does regulatory uncertainty shape the innovation process? Evidence from the case of nanomedicine," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 262-302, February.
    4. Ren, Shenggang & Hu, Yucai & Zheng, Jingjing & Wang, Yangjie, 2020. "Emissions trading and firm innovation: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    5. Shaozeng Zhang, 2017. "From externality in economics to leakage in carbon markets: An anthropological approach to market making," Economic Anthropology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 132-143, January.
    6. Jakob Edler & Jan Fagerberg, 2017. "Innovation policy: what, why, and how," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 2-23.
    7. Davide Antonioli & Grazia Cecere & Massimiliano Mazzanti, 2018. "Information communication technologies and environmental innovations in firms: joint adoptions and productivity effects," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(11), pages 1905-1933, September.
    8. Caroline Orset, 2014. "Innovation and the precautionary principle," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(8), pages 780-801, November.
    9. Caroline Orset, 2017. "Innovation and The Precautionary Principle," Working Papers hal-01500845, HAL.
    10. Ball, Chris & Burt, George & De Vries, Frans & MacEachern, Erik, 2018. "How environmental protection agencies can promote eco-innovation: The prospect of voluntary reciprocal legitimacy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 242-253.
    11. Dagestani, Abd Alwahed & Shang, Yuping & Schneider, Nicolas & Cifuentes-Faura, Javier & Zhao, Xin, 2023. "Porter in China: A quasi-experimental view of market-based environmental regulation effects on firm performance," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    12. Herman, Kyle S. & Xiang, Jun, 2019. "Induced innovation in clean energy technologies from foreign environmental policy stringency?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 198-207.
    13. Li-Ying, Jason & Mothe, Caroline & Nguyen, Thi Thuc Uyen, 2018. "Linking forms of inbound open innovation to a driver-based typology of environmental innovation: Evidence from French manufacturing firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 51-63.
    14. Chen, Zan & Jin, Jun & Li, Meng, 2022. "Does media coverage influence firm green innovation? The moderating role of regional environment," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    15. Nicholas Martin & Christian Matt & Crispin Niebel & Knut Blind, 2019. "How Data Protection Regulation Affects Startup Innovation," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1307-1324, December.
    16. Asdal, Kristin, 2011. "The office: The weakness of numbers and the production of non-authority," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-9, January.
    17. Doran, Justin & Ryan, Geraldine, 2012. "Regulation and Firm Perception, Eco-Innovation and Firm Performance," MPRA Paper 44578, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Zhou, Kuo & Luo, Haotian & Qu, Zhi, 2023. "What can the environmental rule of law do for environmental innovation? Evidence from environmental tribunals in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    19. Chua, Wai Fong & Fiedler, Tanya & Boedker, Christina, 2024. "Projecting, infrastructuring and calculating: From an In vitro to an In vivo carbon market," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    20. Ghisetti, Claudia & Marzucchi, Alberto & Montresor, Sandro, 2015. "The open eco-innovation mode. An empirical investigation of eleven European countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1080-1093.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Regulatory capture; Technological capture; Precautionary principle; Incremental innovation; Socio-economic interaction; Material agency;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:respol:v:46:y:2017:i:1:p:160-170. 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/locate/respol .

    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.