Premium
Precautionary Bans or Sacrificial Lambs? Participative Risk Regulation and the Reform of the UK Food Safety Regime
Author(s) -
Rothstein Henry F.
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
public administration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.313
H-Index - 93
eISSN - 1467-9299
pISSN - 0033-3298
DOI - 10.1111/j.0033-3298.2004.00422.x
Subject(s) - stakeholder , openness to experience , context (archaeology) , food safety , agency (philosophy) , flexibility (engineering) , business , democracy , public economics , regulatory reform , value (mathematics) , process (computing) , economics , public administration , public relations , political science , sociology , politics , market economy , law , medicine , psychology , social psychology , paleontology , management , pathology , biology , machine learning , computer science , operating system , social science
This paper considers the impact of contemporary trends towards participative risk regulation on policy processes and outcomes. Using the example of reform of the UK food safety regime, the paper examines whether participative reforms are able to deliver their promised benefits and if not, why not. Empirically, the paper examines how in 2002 the UK's Food Standards Agency used a stakeholder decision‐making process to manage the potential risks from BSE in sheep. The paper finds that the potential benefits of the stakeholder process were mitigated by a number of institutional factors, including: interpretative flexibility in representing consumer interests and the concept of precaution; restricted openness and exclusion of key stakeholders; and the supra‐national regulatory context. The paper concludes that broadening participation per se does not necessarily produce more democratic or robust policy outcomes than closed processes, although it may have some limited value in improving public confidence in the regulatory regime.