Better by design: Business preferences for environmental regulatory reform
| dc.contributor.author | Taylor, Christopher Michael | |
| dc.contributor.author | Pollard, Simon J. T. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Rocks, Sophie A. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Angus, Andrew | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2016-06-07T08:38:42Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2016-06-07T08:38:42Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2015-01-26 | |
| dc.description.abstract | We present the preferences for environmental regulatory reform expressed by 30 UK businesses and industry bodies from 5 sectors. While five strongly preferred voluntary regulation, seven expressed doubts about its effectiveness, and 18 expressed no general preference between instrument types. Voluntary approaches were valued for flexibility and lower burdens, but direct regulation offered stability and a level playing field. Respondents sought regulatory frameworks that: are coherent; balance clarity, prescription and flexibility; are enabled by positive regulatory relationships; administratively efficient; targeted according to risk magnitude and character; evidence-based and that deliver long-term market stability for regulatees. Anticipated differences in performance between types of instrument can be undermined by poor implementation. Results underline the need for policy makers and regulators to tailor an effective mix of instruments for a given sector, and to overcome analytical, institutional and political barriers to greater coherence, to better coordinate existing instruments and tackle new environmental challenges as they emerge. | en_UK |
| dc.identifier.citation | Taylor CM, Pollard SJT, Rocks SA, Angus AJ. (2015) Better by design: business preferences for environmental regulatory reform. Science of The Total Environment, Volumes 512–513, April 2015, pp. 287-295 | en_UK |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0048-9697 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.01.062 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/handle/1826/9938 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_UK |
| dc.publisher | Elsevier | en_UK |
| dc.rights | Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivatives 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. Information: Non-Commercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. No Derivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material. No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. | en_UK |
| dc.subject | Environmental policy | en_UK |
| dc.subject | Regulation | en_UK |
| dc.subject | Regulatory reform | en_UK |
| dc.subject | Instrument selection | en_UK |
| dc.title | Better by design: Business preferences for environmental regulatory reform | en_UK |
| dc.type | Article | en_UK |