Regulatory Stewardship and Intermediation: Comparative Lessons from Human Rights Governance
Tom Pegram, ‘Stewardship and Intermediation: Comparative Lessons from Human Rights Governance’, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 670, March 2017, Forthcoming
32 Pages Posted: 4 Nov 2016 Last revised: 19 Mar 2017
Date Written: November 4, 2016
This article employs the Regulator-Intermediary-Target (RIT) framework to explore one of the risks identified therein: the potential for intermediation to provide alternative channels for capture. To mitigate this problem, I advance a novel form of regulatory management: regulatory stewardship. Regulatory stewardship involves intermediaries themselves monitoring the performance of one another. I explore the implications of stewardship by examining a new generation of human rights treaty innovation: the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture (OPCAT) and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). These instruments differentially formalize relations among intermediaries. I use their contrasting experience to identify three factors central to effective regulatory stewardship: (1) the task environment; (2) the enabling quality of rule frameworks; and (3) the approaches adopted by potential stewards in practice. The study substantiates the importance of regulatory stewardship within RIT arrangements, particularly where targets are strongly motivated to resist implementation.
Keywords: Human rights, regulation, international organization, torture prevention, compliance
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation