Intermediation and Trust in the Regulatory State: More Regulation, Less Trust?

Regulation is sometimes a manifestation of distrust, but on other times it is a manifestation of trust. When do trust and regulation compete, substitute for and mutually-support each other? How can we maximize the benefits of both? Is the proliferation of rules around us a manifestation of growing distrust or trust? Is the regulatory state necessarily a low-trust state? To answer these questions, RegTrust introduces intermediation as a governance mechanism and intermediaries as third parties in trust and regulatory interactions. Intermediaries certify products, report compliance, rank organizations, label products, monitor performance, screen behavior, whistle-blow misbehavior, and audit organizations. The regulation literature treats them as regulatory actors; the trust literature, as trustees. Yet intermediaries are both trustees and regulatees, both subjects and objects of trust and regulation. Most importantly, they may determine successes and failures, winners and losers, of trust and regulation. At their best, intermediaries reinforce regulation and trust, and promote polycentric (pluralist) structures of governance. At their worst, they undermine trust in regulation, leading to vicious cycles of failure and re/centralization (monocentric governance). RegTrust examines under which conditions, why, how, and to what effects trust and regulation compete, substitute for, or mutually-support each other. We problematize the role of intermediaries, develop a three-actor (triadic) model of governance, and assess its institutional macro-political consequences. Going beyond the state of the art, this project sheds light on the multiple interactions of trust and regulation in policy and politics. It advances the theory of intermediation; advances the interaction of trust and regulation as a central element of the governance literature; And explores the conditions that may make a regulatory state into a high-trust state.

RegTrust advances an intermediation-centred analysis in governance and the the social sciences. The aim of the research groups is to shed light on the dark corner where rule-makers (regulators) and rule-takers (regulatees) interact with the intermediaries. The trust literature on the interaction between trustor and trustees. But when intermediaries are” brought in” interactions changes. Trust is rearranged and redirected; responsibilities are changing. Our group develops a three-party (triadic) model to overcome the constraints of the two-actor (dyadic) models. At the same time, it explores how intermediation, trust and regulatory performances have effects at the meso level (policy regime), the macro level (countries) as well as the micro level (stakeholders and citizens). In the first two years of the project we have advanced the first aim of the project, mainly to explore under which conditions, why, how, and to what effects trust and regulation compete, substitute, or mutually support each other. In particular we were able to innovate theoretically and show interesting empirical results on the decline/rise of trust and how it is associated with the growth of regulation. Together with my partners Koen Verhoest and Bernardo Rangoni we advanced a typology that does it. It offers a multi-layered framework and a basic typology that categorizes trust-regulation relationships into five core modes—decoupled, substitutive, undermining, complementary, and reinforcing—based on valence (conflictual/cooperative) and interaction (low/high). We then expand it by disaggregating trust and regulation into key dimensions (level, design, and action) for richer, finer-grained analysis. Our framework promises to advance theoretical precision, guide empirical inquiry, and inform policy design in the field of regulatory governance. This typology is currently under review in the journal of Regulation and Governance. The said paper is part of a special issue on the topic and it is forthcoming in the coming months. We believe that the typology and the insights it offers on the conditions that determine the relations between trust and regulation will have high impact on the progress of research in the field. The major tasks of WP1 task 1.1. to task 1.4) on Trust & Regulation are now close to completion with many of them each coming out at least with one paper each. We also made a significant progress on the second aim, namely to explore whether, why, and how intermediation changes the ways in which trust and regulation compete, substitute, and mutually support each other. In particular, we expect to identify and systematically compare how different intermediaries and intermediation mechanisms help promote trust in the trustworthy and distrust in the untrustworthy. Here as well we prepared a special issue with the journal Policy & Society. This special issue was co-edited with Avri Eitan and Jale Tosun. The special issue major advance was to extend the framework of governance by intermediation to the world of politics and governance at large, well beyond the field of regulation. All papers of this special issue are now available online. Three taks of the five tasks of WP2 are now underway and are midway towards completion.

There are two major ways to bring literatures and fields together. The first and the most intuitive is to use data, concepts, and variables from one field to explore effects on the other. In this first way, trust and regulation are two different things. They do not interact in concrete architectures of choices and actors are either regulatory or trust actors. Hence, regulation and trust can be studied as cause and effect. The second and more promising way is to redefine the main problem in both fields. This is what RegTrust is doing. It moves beyond the current agenda by studying trust and regulation in a way that offers new perspectives, and with the hope to points to rethink governance failures and of course new solution. The challenge is even more urgent in liberal societies, where trust and regulation seem to collide, and distrust challenges support for democracy and the rule of law. I believe that the publications so far offer a refreshing in-depth, theory-driven account of the tradeoffs and trade-ins of the politics of trust and regulation in governance. (Aim #1). The project also promotes triadic models and a better understanding of how and why governance via intermediation works or fails. RegTrust conceptualizes intermediaries as actors of trust, and introduces regulatory intermediaries to the theory of trust. All of this broadens a previous understanding of governance that has omitted intermediation and belittled trust issues. The triadic model of governance and the choice between de/re/regulation and dis/trust represents a breakthrough in the two fields, as well as in our understanding of governance more generally (Aim #2(. The overall impact is expected to change the way we study regulatory governance. This is now part of a new paper using analytical narratives around three imaginaries countries, Trustland, Regland and Concordia.

Periodic Reporting for period 1 - RegTrust (Intermediation and Trust in the Regulatory State: More Regulation, Less Trust?)

Descargar Descargar el contenido de la página