Reform Where It Is Least Needed: Diffusion of Post Crisis Risk Governance Regulation

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shane Magee ◽  
Elizabeth A. Sheedy ◽  
Sue Wright
Keyword(s):  
Risk Governance

scholarly journals Ugandan stakeholder hopes and concerns about gene drive mosquitoes for malaria control: new directions for gene drive risk governance

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Hartley ◽  
Robert D. J. Smith ◽  
Adam Kokotovich ◽  
Chris Opesen ◽  
Tibebu Habtewold ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Malaria Control ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Control Programme ◽  
Local Context ◽  
Risk Governance ◽  
Malaria Control Programme ◽  
Gene Drive ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
New Directions ◽  
High Level

Abstract Background The African Union’s High-Level Panel on Emerging Technologies identified gene drive mosquitoes as a priority technology for malaria elimination. The first field trials are expected in 5–10 years in Uganda, Mali or Burkina Faso. In preparation, regional and international actors are developing risk governance guidelines which will delineate the framework for identifying and evaluating risks. Scientists and bioethicists have called for African stakeholder involvement in these developments, arguing the knowledge and perspectives of those people living in malaria-afflicted countries is currently missing. However, few African stakeholders have been involved to date, leaving a knowledge gap about the local social-cultural as well as ecological context in which gene drive mosquitoes will be tested and deployed. This study investigates and analyses Ugandan stakeholders’ hopes and concerns about gene drive mosquitoes for malaria control and explores the new directions needed for risk governance. Methods This qualitative study draws on 19 in-depth semi-structured interviews with Ugandan stakeholders in 2019. It explores their hopes for the technology and the risks they believed pertinent. Coding began at a workshop and continued through thematic analysis. Results Participants’ hopes and concerns for gene drive mosquitoes to address malaria fell into three themes: (1) ability of gene drive mosquitoes to prevent malaria infection; (2) impacts of gene drive testing and deployment; and, (3) governance. Stakeholder hopes fell almost exclusively into the first theme while concerns were spread across all three. The study demonstrates that local stakeholders are able and willing to contribute relevant and important knowledge to the development of risk frameworks. Conclusions International processes can provide high-level guidelines, but risk decision-making must be grounded in the local context if it is to be robust, meaningful and legitimate. Decisions about whether or not to release gene drive mosquitoes as part of a malaria control programme will need to consider the assessment of both the risks and the benefits of gene drive mosquitoes within a particular social, political, ecological, and technological context. Just as with risks, benefits—and importantly, the conditions that are necessary to realize them—must be identified and debated in Uganda and its neighbouring countries.

Principles and Structures of European Risk Governance, or: How (not) to Play a Trust Game

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-174
Author(s):  
Anne van Aaken
Keyword(s):  
International Organizations ◽  
Service Provision ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Trust Game ◽  
Risk Governance ◽  
Private Institutions ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Potential Risks ◽  
Regulatory Functions ◽  
The Eu

Ever more risky service activities are carried out across borders, creating spillovers and externalities. At the same time, if freedom to provide services is legally enabled, states can cooperate in multiple ways to mitigate the potential risks accruing from crossborder activities. Global Administrative Law Scholarship distinguishes five types of administrative regulation: “administration by formal international organizations; administrations based on collective action by transnational networks of governmental officials; distributed administration conducted by national regulators under treaty regimes, mutual recognition arrangements or cooperative standards; administration by hybrid intergovernmental–private arrangements; and administration by private institutions with regulatory functions. In practice many of these layers overlap or combine […]”. In the area of risky cross–border service provision, the EU has moved from a more decentralised version of networks and mutual recognition characterised by coordination and minimum harmonization of rules and standards to a more centralized commandand–control system with European authorities and supervision.

Accountability and risk governance: a scenario-informed reflection on European regulation of GMOs

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. 1123-1140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Drott ◽  
Lukas Jochum ◽  
Frederik Lange ◽  
Isabel Skierka ◽  
Jonas Vach ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Governance ◽  
European Regulation

A TWO-PHASED FUZZY MULTICRITERIA SELECTION AMONG PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS FOR POLICY-MAKING AND RISK GOVERNANCE

2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (supp01) ◽  
pp. 31-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
İHSAN KAYA ◽  
BAŞAR ÖZTAYŞI ◽  
CENGIZ KAHRAMAN
Keyword(s):  
Public Transportation ◽  
Capital Investment ◽  
Transportation Policy ◽  
Rolling Stock ◽  
Risk Governance ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Transportation Modes ◽  
The Social ◽  
Transportation Type

Public transportation can be viewed as a key determinant and consequence of the social and spatial formation and development of contemporary cities and regions. Transportation policy generally combines four categories of instruments, i.e., investment, pricing, regulation and subsidy, to generate viable alternatives. Capital investment in public transportation supports the purchase of equipment and facilities including rolling stock, tracks, control equipment, and the construction of terminals, stations, parking lots, maintenance facilities and power generating facilities. Risk governance for public transportation investments looks at how risk-related decision-making unfolds when a range of actors is involved, requiring co-ordination and possibly reconciliation between a profusion of roles, perspectives, goals and activities. In this paper, a two-phased multicriteria methodology is proposed to select the best investment alternative for public transportation with respect to the predetermined criteria. In the first phase, a selection among transportation types is made, and in the second phase, a selection among transportation modes of the selected transportation type is made. A case study for Istanbul is given in the application section.

scholarly journals Policy Entrepreneurship and Policy Transfer: Flood Risk Governance in Northern Sweden

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evangelia Petridou ◽  
Pär M. Olausson
Keyword(s):  
Policy Change ◽  
Flood Risk ◽  
National Level ◽  
Policy Transfer ◽  
Risk Governance ◽  
Policy Entrepreneur ◽  
Policy Entrepreneurship ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Political Actors

AbstractCentral to policies relating to risk governance at the regional and local levels is the interaction between the public and private sectors also referred to as networked governance. At the same time, the role of political actors in general and policy entrepreneurs in particular, in terms of policy change, has gained considerable traction in recent policy scholarship. The purpose of this study was to investigate the change in governance arrangements resulting in the formation of a coordination network in regional flood risk management-the first of its kind in Sweden. Our research is guided by the following questions: first, would the policy change (the establishment of the networks)have taken place if a policy entrepreneur were not part of the policy transfer process? Second, what is the role of policy entrepreneurship in the implementation of the policy after its nationwide adoption? Third, what other factors played a role in the variation of the results in the implemented policy that is, the enforced networks? We find the role of a policy entrepreneur key in the policy transfer from the regional to the national level. In order to investigate the resultant networks, we draw from B. Guy Peters (1998) and his conceptualization of factors which affect the politics of coordination. In addition to the presence of a policy entrepreneur, we compare: (i) pluriformity of network members;(ii) member interdependence; (iii) redundancy of structures, and (iv) degree of formality (in terms of meetings). Our findings suggest that entrepreneurs contribute to the variation in the functionality of the enforced river groups, though other factors play a significant role as well.Most importantly, perhaps, we did not identify entrepreneurs in any of the river groups which were not functional.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document