Advertisement

Journal of Consumer Policy

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 99–113 | Cite as

Self-regulation, Co-regulation and the Audio-Visual Media Services Directive

  • Tony Prosser
Original Paper

Abstract

This paper criticises the use of the concepts of self-regulation and command and control regulation as simplistic and often having a political function. They neglect the fact that there is a continuum of different types of regulation; they represent extremes rarely found in the real world. Moreover, regulatory regimes will be comprised of a cocktail of different regulatory approaches. The developing concept of co-regulation is likely to be more productive. It is unhelpful to attempt to draw up restrictive definitions of different types of regulation; it is much more important to assess them through the application of normative principles, including those relating to procedures, accountability, and enforcement of rights. The drafting of the Audio-Visual Media Services Directive initially made the mistake of using the narrow definitions of co- and self-regulation contained in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making, but amendments during the Parliamentary process have resulted in a more flexible approach better adopted to the recognition of existing co-regulatory regimes.

Keywords

Regulation Self-regulation Co-regulation Broadcasting European Union 

References

  1. Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Black, J. (1996). Constitutionalising self-regulation. Modern Law Review, 59, 24–55.Google Scholar
  3. Black, J. (2001). Decentring self-regulation: Understanding the role of regulation and self-regulation in a “post-regulatory” world. Current Legal Problems, 54, 103–46.Google Scholar
  4. Cafaggi, F., & Muir Watt, H. (2007). The Making of European Private Law: Regulation and Governance Design. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.(forthcoming).Google Scholar
  5. Department for Trade and Industry and Department for Culture, Media and Sport (2000). A New future for telecommunications. London: The Stationery Office Cm 5010.Google Scholar
  6. European Audiovisual Observatory (2003). Co-regulation of the media in Europe. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory.Google Scholar
  7. European Commission (2001). European governance – A white paper COM(2001) 428 final.Google Scholar
  8. European Commission (2005). Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council Amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities. COM(2005) 646 final.Google Scholar
  9. European Commission (2007). Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities.Google Scholar
  10. European Parliament (2006). Committee on Culture and Education, Rapporteur Ruth Hieronymi: Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities. Brussels: European Parliament.Google Scholar
  11. European Parliament, Council and Commission (2003). Interinstitutional agreement on better law-making. (2003/C 321/01).Google Scholar
  12. Gunningham, N., & Grabosky, P. (Eds.) (1998). Smart regulation: Designing environmental policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hans-Bredow Institute/EMR (2006). Final report: Study on co-regulation measures in the media sector. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/docs/library/studies/coregul/coregul-final-report_en.pdf (consulted 15 August 2007).
  14. Hawkins, K. (2002). Law as last resort: Prosecution decision-making in a regulatory agency. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. House of Lords European Union Committee (2007). Television without frontiers? Report with Evidence. London: The Stationery Office HC 27, 2006–7.Google Scholar
  16. Moran, M. (1989). Investor protection and the culture of capitalism. In M. Moran, & L. Hancher (Eds.), Capitalism, culture and economic regulation (pp. 49–75). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Moran, M. (2003). The British regulatory state: High modernism and hyper-innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Ofcom (Office of Communications) (2004a). Ofcom’s decision on the future regulation of broadcast advertising. Available at: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/reg_broad_ad/future_reg_broad/regofbroadadv.pdf (consulted 15 August 2007).
  19. Ofcom (Office of Communications) (2004b). Criteria for promoting effective co and self-regulation: Statement. Available at: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/co-reg/promoting_effective_coregulation/co_self_reg.pdf (consulted 15 August 2007).
  20. Prosser, T. (2006). Self-regulation, politics and law: The example of the media. In F. Cafaggi (Ed.), Reframing self-regulation in European Private Law (pp. 249–270). Leiden: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  21. Teubner, G. (1987). Juridification: Concepts, aspects, limits, solutions. In G. Teubner (Ed.), Juridification of the social spheres (pp. 3–48). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wills Memorial BuildingUniversity of BristolBristolUK

Personalised recommendations