Learning to shield Regulatory learning in sociotechnical transitions

Wouter Boon & Sjoerd Bakker

Workshop “Constructing and contesting spaces for low-carbon energy innovation”26-28 November 2013, Eindhoven

Starting point

Niches and “underconceptualisation” of protection

Embrace emphasis on protection

Learning of actors about protection

Focus on regulation as protection measure

Regulatory learning

Design of regulation and negotiation

How to deal with new regulation? Question for involved and uninitiated

parties Mastering protective regulations

Regulatory learning as hotspot on relation innovation – regulation

Theoretical basis

Protection processes (Smith & Raven) Shielding, nurturing, empowerment

activities

Negotiations about shielding regulation involves insiders and outsiders (Garud & Ahlstrom)

Legitimacy plays key role (Scott, etc)

Characterisation of cases

Characterisation of protection: width: what is protected and what is

not? depth: to what extent is something

protected? tools: how is protection provided? legitimisation: why is protection

warranted?

Two cases of shielding

Highly-needed medicines

Electric vehicles

Case 1: high-need drugs (1)

HIV epidemic, orphan drugs

Balancing act ‘unmet medical need versus safety risks’

Accelerated approval (US), exceptional circumstances (EU) schemes

Role of “institutional activists”

Case 1: high-need drugs (2)

Conditional approvals (EU, 2006) Fast access, strict post-market testing

Width of shield: serious, emergency, rare diseases

Early experimentation… perceived differently

Case 1: high-need drugs (3)

Ongoing discussion about depth of scheme

“confusion” about benefit/risk ratio and breakthrough character

regulatory agency and regulator differed

solution was less deviant from normal procedure; benefits less clear

Case 1: high-need drugs (4)

Operationalisation (tools) and legitimisation were problematic:

Risks and uncertainty Medical need not always clear Regulators: ‘escape route’; completion of

datasets and policy termination Pressure and capture; empowerment

and legitimisation of niche protection Firms: difficult to understand rules (what

is expected?); re-evaluate costs and benefits of taking route

Case 2: clean cars (1)

Societal desire for low- and zero-emission vehicles

Climate, energy, local air quality Broad portfolio of options: biofuels,

natural gas, hydrogen, (hybrid-) electric

Some incremental, some radical Our case: electric in the NL

Case 2: clean cars (2)

Protective measures “Technology neutral” sticks

Emission norms Technology specific carrots

R&D & demo-project funds Consumer/business incentives Recharging/fueling infrastructure

Protection also from industry, NGOs Each with their own interests and

expectations

Case 2: clean cars (3)

Protection in NL Width: Low-emission vehicles

(<50 gr CO2/km): EV & PHEV Outcome of negotiations!

Tax exemptions (registration, road-use, company cars for private use), free parking

Living labs (pilot projects) Recharging infrastructure:

Local/regional govs Grid operators

Case 2: clean cars (4)

Learning about protection

Protection too wide and too deep? Opportunistic adoption? No chargers and no need to charge -

> normal emissions

High societal costs, little benefits Challenge: reduce incentives, but

maintain momentum Diff. between EV and PHEV

Conclusions

Actors need to learn about new protection measures

Learning applies to a wide range of (insider and outsider) actors

These actors interact and negotiate Regulation is shared product Regulation is delegated (leads to

resource-intensive learning exercise)

Conclusions

Protection measures on different levels of aggregation

Lower levels are further removed from ‘level playing field’

Regulatory learning // implementation and diffusion of technologies

‘Drifting’ of protection might be shared responsibility

And thank you!

w.p.c.boon@uu.nls.bakker-1@tudelft.nl

Discussion