IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v4y2010i2p154-174.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contested hybridization of regulation: Failure of the Dutch regulatory system to protect minors from harmful media

Author

Listed:
  • Bärbel R. Dorbeck‐Jung
  • Mirjan J. Oude Vrielink
  • Jordy F. Gosselt
  • Joris J. Van Hoof
  • Menno D. T. De Jong

Abstract

The hybridization of regulatory modes and instruments is currently a popular way to improve public regulation. However, it is still unclear whether combinations of hard law and soft law, co‐regulation, and legally enforced self‐regulation really make regulation more effective. Using the analytical framework of the “really responsive regulation” approach, in this article we explore effectiveness problems in a hybrid regulatory system that tries to protect minors from harmful media. In our analysis of low compliance rates in the context of system failures, we argue that effectiveness problems seem to arise from poorly informed staff members, lack of internal and external controls, low rule enforcement, insufficient overlap between public and private interests, poor social responsibility in the Dutch media sector, deficiencies in the institutional framework, an inconsistent regulatory strategy, and inadequate responses from responsible regulators. Furthermore, based on our case study we argue that institutional dynamics of standard‐setting activities can be detrimental to regulatory goal achievement if there is no compensation at the systemic level. Ongoing “regulatory care” through control, corrective responses, and rule enforcement seems to be crucial for a hybrid regulatory system to perform well.

Suggested Citation

  • Bärbel R. Dorbeck‐Jung & Mirjan J. Oude Vrielink & Jordy F. Gosselt & Joris J. Van Hoof & Menno D. T. De Jong, 2010. "Contested hybridization of regulation: Failure of the Dutch regulatory system to protect minors from harmful media," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(2), pages 154-174, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:4:y:2010:i:2:p:154-174
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01079.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01079.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01079.x?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. Cutler,A. Claire, 2003. "Private Power and Global Authority," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521533973, October.
    2. Héritier, Adrienne & Lehmkuhl, Dirk, 2008. "The Shadow of Hierarchy and New Modes of Governance," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Black, Julia, 2002. "Critical reflections on regulation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 35985, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Braithwaite, John, 2006. "Responsive regulation and developing economies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 884-898, May.
    5. Baldwin, Robert & Cave, Martin & Lodge, Martin, 2011. "Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy, and Practice," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199576098.
    6. Cutler,A. Claire, 2003. "Private Power and Global Authority," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521826600, October.
    7. Parker,Christine, 2002. "The Open Corporation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521818902, October.
    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. Reinhard Steurer, 2013. "Disentangling governance: a synoptic view of regulation by government, business and civil society," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 46(4), pages 387-410, December.
    2. Mia Mahmudur Rahim, 2017. "Improving Social Responsibility in RMG Industries Through a New Governance Approach in Laws," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(4), pages 807-826, July.
    3. Tanja Börzel, 2010. "European Governance: Negotiation and Competition in the Shadow of Hierarchy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(2), pages 191-219, March.
    4. Gowthorp, Lisa & Greenhow, Annette & O’Brien, Danny, 2016. "An interdisciplinary approach in identifying the legitimate regulator of anti-doping in sport: The case of the Australian Football League," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 48-60.
    5. Grahame Thompson, 2007. "Tracking Global Corporate Citizenship: Some Reflections on ‘Lovesick' Companies," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp192, IIIS.
    6. Peter T. Leeson, 2008. "How Important is State Enforcement for Trade?," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 10(1), pages 61-89.
    7. Sandrine Brachotte, 2021. "The Limits of Arbitration Law in Addressing Cultural Diversity: The Example of Ismaili Arbitration in the United Kingdom," Laws, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, June.
    8. Terry Macdonald, 2008. "What's So Special about States? Liberal Legitimacy in a Globalising World," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(3), pages 544-565, October.
    9. João Paulo Cândia Veiga & Fausto Makishi & Murilo Alves Zacareli & Thiago Augusto Hiromitsu Terada, 2016. "Corporate Leadership, Multilevel Enforcement and Biodiversity Regulation," Journal of Business, LAR Center Press, vol. 1(3), pages 43-53, July.
    10. Roberto R. C. Pires, 2011. "Beyond the fear of discretion: Flexibility, performance, and accountability in the management of regulatory bureaucracies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), pages 43-69, March.
    11. Mia Rahim & Shawkat Alam, 2014. "Convergence of Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance in Weak Economies: The case of Bangladesh," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(4), pages 607-620, June.
    12. Kenneth Patrick Vincent O'Sullivan & Stephen Kinsella, 2013. "Financial and regulatory failure: The case of Ireland," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, January.
    13. Ojo, Marianne, 2009. "Responsive regulation:achieving the right balance between persuasion and penalisation," MPRA Paper 15543, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2009.
    14. Fabrizio Cafaggi & Katharina Pistor, 2015. "Regulatory capabilities: A normative framework for assessing the distributional effects of regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(2), pages 95-107, June.
    15. Mende, Janne, 2020. "Business authority in global governance: Beyond public and private," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2020-103, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    16. David Levi-Faur, 2005. "The Global Diffusion of Regulatory Capitalism," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 598(1), pages 12-32, March.
    17. Fenwick, Colin F. & Howe, John & Marshall, Shelley. & Landau, Ingrid, 2007. "Labour and labour-related laws in micro and small enterprises : innovative regulatory approaches," ILO Working Papers 994038143402676, International Labour Organization.
    18. Parent, Milena M. & Rouillard, Christian & Naraine, Michael L., 2017. "Network governance of a multi-level, multi-sectoral sport event: Differences in coordinating ties and actors," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 497-509.
    19. Whytock Christopher A., 2010. "Private-Public Interaction in Global Governance: The Case of Transnational Commercial Arbitration," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-29, October.
    20. 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.

    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:4:y:2010:i:2:p:154-174. 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.