[governance] Study on ICT self- and co-regulation

[Jonathan Cave]

A couple of brief comments, if I may:

The study was intended to help the EU take self- and co-regulation 
into account in ex ante evaluation and impact assessment of policies, 
not to give a comprehensive survey or assessment of selfreg in 
general, any specific institution, etc. To do so, we selected case 
studies to span the issues and features relevant to policy 
assessment. The study was not 'well-meaning' in the sense implied and 
served no political agenda. In addition to the mapping (phase 1) and 
case study (phase 2) parts, the final report includes 
conceptual/theoretical analysis and a framework for setting up impact 
assessments and deciding how (if at all) to incorporate self-reg into 
telecom policy. See also the Ofcom consultation on the subject 
(http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/co-reg/promoting_effective_coregulation/).

We certainly recognised and endorsed the value of wide participation, 
and the potential advantages of selfreg in terms of access to 
accurate information, realistic and recogniseably meaningful 
recommendations, lower enforcement costs and (sometimes) higher 
compliance. But we also recognised potential pitfalls,such as the 
tendency of selfreg bodies, especially those accorded regulatory 
forbearance, to serve their members' interests rather than the public 
interest, and the very real possibility that they might be set up as 
(or might become) 'Potemkin regulators' that serve to deter or 
pre-empt more stringent or effective control measures (by accident, 
evolution or design).

But it's a bit simplistic to say that it 'doesn't work' even if the 
implication that formal command and control regulation 'does work' 
was not intended. agenda creep, regulatory capture, and disconnection 
between ostensible and effective regulatory agendas are pretty 
pervasive. Also, we used the term to refer to regulatory actions 
undertaken (in whole or in part) by non-state actors, not by one or 
another 'side' of an issue or market. The analytic part of the study 
draws attention to multistakeholder 'selfreg' organisations (e/g/ 
consumer counsels and some WSIS bodies), to selfreg bodies whose 
constraints fall at other places in the value chain (e.g. insurance 
self-reg) and to powersharing arrangements between government, 
business and civil society bodies (species of 'co-regulation').

Formal regulators get captured by industry interests just as easily, 
and their formalised mechanisms of accountability and transparency 
have all-too-evident limitations. At least with a selfreg body, 
participation can be voluntary (though there are cases where the 
'insiders' either block the entry of others or compel outsiders' 
comp[liance with the standards, codes, etc. they choose.). With 
government bodies, it's much harder to vote with your feet.

Finally, while end users' input can be valuable, there is a fairly 
obvious tension between openness and efficacy, and end-users, like 
all other players, are vulnerable to manipulation from prophets of 
doom and of redemption alike.

Cheers,

Jonathan


At 22:40 05/09/2008, Jeffrey A. Williams wrote:
>Hakikur and all,
>
>   Institutions are often times out of touch with users.  Self regulation
>or Co-regutlation if in order to be reflective, effective, and useful
>must have at it's base, the approval of individual users.  Therefore
>individual users, must have a direct input and determination of the
>process for developing such regimes or whatever regulation policies
>are to be set, or otherwise imposed.  The will of the governed must
>prevail.
>
>Hakikur Rahman wrote:
>
> > Dear Adam,
> >
> > Thank you for sharing an important document with the list. As a
> > researcher in this field, I find it valuable. However, regarding
> > infrastructure and standards setting I do not see much of ITU's role
> > in the case study. Perhaps, I may have missed it, or the case studies
> > included only the mentioned institutions.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Hakik
> >
> > At 07:47 PM 9/5/2008, Adam Peake wrote:
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >The European Commission recently published a study assessing the
> > >efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of ICT self- and
> > >co-regulation initiatives. The study was led by RAND Europe (Chris
> > >Marsden <http://chrismarsden.blogspot.com/>)
> > >
> > >The study is available from European Commission
> > ><http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/information_society/evaluation/studies/s 
> 2006_05/index_en.htm>
> > >
> > >
> > >The study consists of two main parts: a mapping exercise that
> > >examines existing regulatory and co- and self-regulatory
> > >institutions and identifies "candidate" case studies for closer
> > >analysis. And a second phase report providing the results of 21
> > >short case studies. Case studies were presented in four groupings:
> > >
> > >Internet Infrastructure and Standards (ICANN, Nominet, IETF, W3C, ICRA)
> > >
> > >Internet Self- and Co-Regulation (IWF, INHOPE, EuroISPA, KJM, FSM)
> > >
> > >Content and Filtering/Rating (ICSTIS, IMCB, NICAM, PEGI, ATVOD)
> > >
> > >Emerging Self Regulation Areas (SecondLife, Creative Commons, Social
> > >Network: Bebo, Trustmarks, London Action Plan, IGF)
> > >
> > >Total of all phases about 1300 pages.
> > >
> > >A clear conclusion of the report is that robust self-and
> > >co-regulatory organisations only develop where their design and
> > >dynamics take a multi-stakeholder approach as their basic principle.
> > >
> > >Parts already seem dated and it wasn't written too long ago (3rd 
> qtr 2007).
> > >
> > >Adam
> > >____________________________________________________________
> > >You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > >     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > >To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> > >     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> > >
> > >For all list information and functions, see:
> > >     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >
> > For all list information and functions, see:
> >      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
>Regards,
>
>Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>    Abraham Lincoln
>
>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
>very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>
>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
>liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
>United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
>===============================================================
>Updated 1/26/04
>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
>div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
>ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
>jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
>My Phone: 214-244-4827
>
>____________________________________________________________
>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
>To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
>For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance