Learning to shield Regulatory learning in sociotechnical transitions
description
Transcript of Learning to shield Regulatory learning in sociotechnical transitions
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