Governance: An international journal of policy, administration and institutions

Why regulators expands their role

In the current issue of Governance (23.1), Moshe Maor questions the prevailing view that regulatory agencies are “more or less passive actors involving their purview.”  Drawing on a study of the US Food and Drug Administration, Maor suggests that regulators will “claim jurisdiction” when new information becomes available about the potential for serious harm from a new technology, or when rival regulators attempt to extend their own jurisdiction over that technology.  The underlying concern is to protect organizational reputation.  Jurisdictional claiming may not always be rational, Maor argues: “Agency officials do not have all the rational capacity and time to choose the best course of action.”  And regulators can act unilaterally, without assurance that political actors will support their jurisdictional claims.  Read more: Organizational Reputation and Jurisdictional Claims: The Case of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Written by governancejournal

February 24, 2010 at 1:00 am

Posted in Current issue

Tagged with Food and Drug Administration, , United States


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 101 other followers

Powered by
%d bloggers like this: