Distinguishing Standards and Regulation for Innovation Research: Accommodating Standards in Lessig's Framework of Regulatory Modalities

Distinguishing Standards and Regulation for Innovation Research: Accommodating Standards in Lessig's Framework of Regulatory Modalities

Tineke M. Egyedi, Arjan Widlak, J. Roland Ortt
Copyright: © 2018 |Pages: 21
DOI: 10.4018/IJSR.2018070101
OnDemand:
(Individual Articles)
Available
$37.50
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

Certain influential innovation impact studies do not sharply distinguish standards from regulation. Is differentiation needed? In what way do they differ in how they work and work out? This article applies and extends a framework of regulatory modalities to open up the black box of direct innovation effects. It includes standards as a separate regulatory modality following careful consideration of alternatives, i.e., accommodating them as a special instance or as a hybrid of law, norm, market and architecture. The authors capture the essential differences between standards and law. They reconcile Lessig's emphasis on constraints with findings of enabling and constraining effects in innovation research by differentiating direct inherently constraining effects of regulatory modalities and modality-specific direct generic effects - as opposed to indirect effects. They conclude that standards and law merit separate treatment in innovation research, and recommend complementary frameworks to uncover unaddressed issues.
Article Preview
Top

1. Standards And Regulation: Is Non-Differentiating A Problem?

It is not uncommon for laypersons as well as professionals to talk about rules in an undifferentiated manner, for example, in the context of bureaucracy. Rules, among which customs, norms, regulations and standards guide human behavior (Baer, 2011, p. 277) “[These] terms (…) are often used indiscriminately (or at least interchangeably) and no agreed set of definitions exists.” (Carmona, 2017, p.6) Likewise, studies on effects of standards and regulation on innovation1, the setting of this article, often also do not distinguish the two – neither theoretically nor empirically (Hawkins & Blind, 2017, p. 5; Blind, Petersen & Riillo, 2017, p. 258). Is this a problem? Before continuing, let us illustrate lack of differentiation in this field by taking a closer look at the formal definition of standards (section 1.1) and at the UK version of the Community Innovation Survey, a data gathering tool used in high profile innovation research (section 1.2).

1.1 ISO/IEC Definition of Standard

One might expect formal standards bodies, under whose auspices standards are developed, to define standards in a way that sets them apart from regulation. The official international standardization bodies of ISO and IEC define a standard as:

(…) a document, established by consensus and approved by a recognized body that provides, for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines or characteristics for activities or their results, aimed at the achievement of the optimum degree of order in a given context. (ISO/IEC, 2016)

Table 1.
Key elements of the ISO/IEC definition of standard applied to regulation
ISO/IEC definition of standards
Rules/ Institution
Rules, guidelines, characteristics for activities or their resultsDocumentedConsensus (negotiated agreement)Approved by a recognized bodyFor common & repeated useAim: optimum degree of order in a given context
StandardXXXXXX
RegulationXXXXXX

However, examining the definition element by element standards do not differ significantly from regulation.2 See Table 1. Note that the demarcation problem exists specifically between standards and regulation. The ISO/IEC definition is not so general that it could encompass any rule-type. For example, a ‘de facto standard’ concerns a product or service that emerges from the market; it is not established by consensus and is not a priori meant to achieve an ‘optimum degree of order in a given context’; and a social norm, a cultural phenomenon, is typically not documented or explicitly ‘approved by a recognized body’.

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Volume 21: 1 Issue (2024): Forthcoming, Available for Pre-Order
Volume 20: 1 Issue (2023)
Volume 19: 1 Issue (2021)
Volume 18: 1 Issue (2020)
Volume 17: 2 Issues (2019)
Volume 16: 2 Issues (2018)
Volume 15: 2 Issues (2017)
Volume 14: 2 Issues (2016)
Volume 13: 1 Issue (2015)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing