IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v12y2018i1p46-63.html

Regulatory inspection and the changing legitimacy of health and safety

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Almond
  • Mike Esbester

Abstract

The regulation of conduct via law is a key mechanism through which broader social meanings are negotiated and expressed. The use of regulatory tools to bring about desired outcomes reflects existing social and political understandings of institutional legitimacy, the meanings attached to regulation, and the values it seeks to advance. But these contextual understandings are not static, and their evolution poses challenges for regulators, particularly when they reflect political framing processes. This paper shows how inspection has been reshaped as a tool within the United Kingdom's health and safety system by changes in the meanings attached to the concept of “risk‐based regulation.” While rates of inspection have fallen dramatically in recent years, the nature and quality of inspection have also been fundamentally reshaped via an increasingly procedural and economically rational “risk‐based” policy context. This has had consequences for the transformative and symbolic value of inspection as a tool of regulatory practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Almond & Mike Esbester, 2018. "Regulatory inspection and the changing legitimacy of health and safety," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 46-63, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:46-63
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12155
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12155
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12155?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hood, Christopher & Rothstein, Henry & Baldwin, Robert, 2004. "The Government of Risk: Understanding Risk Regulation Regimes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199270019.
    2. Julia Black & Robert Baldwin, 2012. "When risk‐based regulation aims low: Approaches and challenges," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 2-22, March.
    3. Julia Black & Robert Baldwin, 2012. "When risk‐based regulation aims low: A strategic framework," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(2), pages 131-148, June.
    4. H. Felix Kloman, 1990. "Risk Management Agonistes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(2), pages 201-205, June.
    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. Oscar Rikhotso & Thabiso John Morodi & Daniel Masilu Masekameni, 2021. "Occupational Health Hazards: Employer, Employee, and Labour Union Concerns," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-61, May.
    2. Jeroen van der Heijden, 2021. "Why meta‐research matters to regulation and governance scholarship: An illustrative evidence synthesis of responsive regulation research," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(S1), pages 123-142, November.
    3. Elena I. Dobrolyubova, 2021. "Improving regulatory enforcement and inspection activities based on evaluation of business motives behind regulatory compliance," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 63-73, April.
    4. Jodi L. Short, 2021. "The politics of regulatory enforcement and compliance: Theorizing and operationalizing political influences," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 653-685, July.
    5. Marie Nilsen & Trond Kongsvik & Stian Antonsen, 2022. "Taming Proteus: Challenges for Risk Regulation of Powerful Digital Labor Platforms," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-23, May.
    6. Dahlvik Julia & Pohn-Weidinger Axel & Kollegger Martina, 2020. "Independence despite Political Appointment ? The Curious Case of the Austrian Ombudsman Board," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 13(2), pages 181-210, December.
    7. Ben A. Rissing, 2022. "Trust but sometimes verify: Regulatory enforcement in attestation‐based immigration programs," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 327-354, January.

    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. Paul Sanderson & David Seidl & John Roberts, 2013. "The Limits of Flexible Regulation: Managers' Perceptions of Corporate Governance Codes and 'Comply-or-Explain'," Working Papers wp439, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    2. Max Boholm, 2019. "Risk and Quantification: A Linguistic Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(6), pages 1243-1261, June.
    3. Juan Carlos Henao & Carmen Eloísa Ruiz López, 2018. "Corrupción en Colombia Tomo 3 Corrupción privada," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1026.
    4. Przemysław Brzuszczak, 2020. "Regulacja oparta na ryzyku jako refleksyjna strategia regulacyjna," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 139-151.
    5. Kristian Krieger, 2013. "The limits and variety of risk‐based governance: The case of flood management in Germany and England," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 236-257, June.
    6. Andreas Klinke & Ortwin Renn, 2021. "The Coming of Age of Risk Governance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 544-557, March.
    7. Henry Rothstein & Olivier Borraz & Michael Huber, 2013. "Risk and the limits of governance: Exploring varied patterns of risk‐based governance across Europe," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 215-235, June.
    8. Jeroen van der Heijden, 2021. "Risk as an Approach to Regulatory Governance: An Evidence Synthesis and Research Agenda," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, July.
    9. Alexandra Revez & Jose A Cortes-Vazquez & Stephen Flood, 2017. "Risky policies: Local contestation of mainstream flood risk management approaches in Ireland," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(11), pages 2497-2516, November.
    10. Benjamin van Rooij & Rachel E. Stern & Kathinka Fürst, 2016. "The authoritarian logic of regulatory pluralism: Understanding China's new environmental actors," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 3-13, March.
    11. Mirko Noordegraaf & Janet Newman, 2011. "Managing in Disorderly Times," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 513-538, May.
    12. Julien Etienne, 2015. "Different ways of blowing the whistle: Explaining variations in decentralized enforcement in the UK and France," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 309-324, December.
    13. Aven, Terje & Renn, Ortwin, 2018. "Improving government policy on risk: Eight key principles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 230-241.
    14. Johanna Karolina Louise Koehler, 2023. "Not all risks are equal: a risk governance framework for assessing the water SDG," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 179-189, June.
    15. Simon Dietz & Alec Morton, 2011. "Strategic Appraisal of Environmental Risks: A Contrast Between the United Kingdom's Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change and its Committee on Radioactive Waste Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 129-142, January.
    16. Olga Minchenko, 2014. "Comparative analysis of the mechanisms of the involvement of experts and expert organizations in Russian and foreign practice (The example of some supervisory functions of the state)," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 4, pages 136-152.
    17. Eyert, Florian & Irgmaier, Florian & Ulbricht, Lena, 2018. "Algorithmic social ordering: Towards a conceptual framework," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 48-57.
    18. Åsa Boholm & Hervé Corvellec & Marianne Karlsson, 2012. "The practice of risk governance: lessons from the field," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, January.
    19. Charles Sabel & Gary Herrigel & Peer Hull Kristensen, 2018. "Regulation under uncertainty: The coevolution of industry and regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(3), pages 371-394, September.
    20. Chiara Verbano & Karen Venturini, 2011. "Development paths of risk management: approaches, methods and fields of application," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 519-550, May.

    More about this item

    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:wly:reggov:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:46-63. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    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.