Comparing Assumptions Underlying Regulatory Inspection Strategies: Implications for Oversight Policy
Van Slyke Shanna R, Cullen Francis & Benson Michael (eds.) (2016) The Oxford Handbook of White-Collar Crime. Oxford: Oxford University Press
35 Pages Posted: 19 Sep 2015
Date Written: September 14, 2015
Abstract
This chapter first distinguishes four influential policy ideas about regulatory inspection — criminalizing corporate non-compliance, reintegrative shaming, the enforcement pyramid, and risk-based regulation — in terms of assumed compliance motives. Subsequently, the state-centeredness of these four policy ideas is contrasted with the polycentric point of view underlying responsive regulation and regulatory governance. Finally, it is concluded that general perspectives underlie each of the aforementioned policy ideas on regulatory inspection. Regulation is viewed in terms of conflict or harmony or as a social or scientific process, and regulatory power is conceived of as concentrated or dispersed. All regulatory inspection ideas grapple with implementation problems. This means the comparative edge of the various ideas cannot be easily established empirically. Ultimately, it comes down to determining the context in which these different ideas are most effective.
Keywords: compliance motives, enforcement pyramid, regulatory governance, reintegrative shaming, responsive regulation, risk-based regulation.
JEL Classification: K42, L50, I18, K20, K23
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation