Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing Policy II: Governance-Choice Method

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Methods for Media Policy Research

Abstract

The modes and intensity of market interventions are central topics in research and in policy debates on regulation and governance worldwide. Lately, initiatives on good governance, better regulation and evidence-based policy-making have given rise to major questions about the choice between available governance mechanisms. Research and policy typically suggest due consideration of alternative modes of governance like self- and co-regulation, but rarely specify the criteria against which the suitability of different options should be scrutinized and compared. This chapter introduces a governance-choice method that has been developed to support researchers and policy-makers who are confronted with the task of defining the appropriate role of the state in governance arrangements, the right mix of public and private contributions to governance challenges. This institutional approach provides a set of interlinked organizational factors and enabling contextual criteria that make it possible to predict the performance of a planned alternative governance arrangement and to assess the performance of an established one. The chapter presents an outline of the governance-choice method and illustrates its application with two examples: content rating in the audiovisual sector and the prevention of spam on the Internet.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive regulation: Transcending the deregulation debate. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartle, I., & Vass, P. (2007). Self-regulation within the regulatory state. Public Administration, 85(4), 885–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, J., & Baldwin, R. (2010). Really responsive risk-based regulation. Law & Policy, 32(2), 181–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A. J. (1999). Self-regulation and the media. Federal Communications Law Journal, 51(3), 711–771.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freist, R., & Hosbach, W. (2017). Spam-Filter und Tipps gegen unerwünschte E-Mails. PC Magazin. Retrieved August 31, 2017, from http://www.pc-magazin.de/ratgeber/spam-filter-tipps-tools-regeln-3197305.html.

  • Garvin, D. A. (1983). Can industry self regulation work? California Management Review, 25(9), 48–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudkova, D., Vergelis, M., Demidova, N., & Shcherbakova, T. (2017). Spam im Jahr 2016. Kapersky Security Bulletin. Retrieved August 31, 2017, from https://de.securelist.com/kaspersky-security-bulletin-spam-and-phishing-in-2016/72383/.

  • Gunningham, N., & Rees, J. (1997). Industry self-regulation: An institutional perspective. Law & Policy, 19(4), 363–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., & Lad, L. J. (1983). Industry self-regulation: An economic, organizational, and political analysis. Academy of Management Review, 8(3), 416–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Héritier, A., & Lehmkuhl, D. (2008). The shadow of hierarchy and new modes of governance: Sectoral governance and democratic government. Journal of Public Policy, 28(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutter, B. M. (2005). The attractions of risk-based regulation: Accounting for the emergence of risk ideas in regulation (Discussion Paper No. 33). ESRC Centre for Analysis of Risk and Regulation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Just, N., Latzer, M., & Saurwein, F. (2007). Communications governance: Entscheidungshilfe für die Wahl des Regulierungsarrangements am Beispiel Spam. In P. Donges (Ed.), Von der Medienpolitik zur Media Governance? (pp. 103–126). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M. (2007). Regulatory choice in communications governance. Communications, the European Journal of Communication Research, 32(3), 399–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M. (2009). Convergence revisited: Toward a modified pattern of communications governance. Convergence—The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 15(4), 411–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M. (2013). Media convergence. In R. Towse & C. Handke (Eds.), Handbook of the digital creative economy (pp. 123–133). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M., Hollnbuchner, K., Just, N., & Saurwein, F. (2016). The economics of algorithmic selection on the Internet. In J. Bauer & M. Latzer (Eds.), Handbook on the economics of the Internet (pp. 395–425). Cheltenham; Northampton: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M., Just, N., & Saurwein, F. (2013). Self- and co-regulation: Evidence, legitimacy and governance choice. In M. E. Price, S. G. Verhulst, & L. Morgan (Eds.), Routledge handbook of media law (pp. 373–397). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M., Just, N., Saurwein, F., & Slominski, P. (2002). Selbst- und Ko-Regulierung im Mediamatiksektor. Alternative Regulierungsformen zwischen Staat und Markt. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M., Just, N., Saurwein, F., & Slominski, P. (2003). Regulation remixed—Institutional change through self- and co-regulation in the mediamatics sector. Communications and Strategies, 50(2), 127–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M., Just, N., Saurwein, F., & Slominski, P. (2006). Institutional variety in communications regulation: Classification scheme and empirical evidence from Austria. Telecommunications Policy, 30(3–4), 152–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M., Price, M. E., Saurwein, F., & Verhulst, S. G. (2007). Comparative analysis of international co- and self-regulation in communications markets. Research report commissioned by Ofcom. Vienna: ITA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M., & Saurwein F. (2008). Vertrauen in die Industrie – Vertrauen in die Nutzer. In W. Schulz & T. Held (Eds.), Mehr Vertrauen in Inhalte. Das Potenzial von Ko- und Selbstregulierung in digitalen Medien (pp. 93–142). Berlin: Vistas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M., Saurwein, F., Dörr, K., Just, N., & Wallace, J. (2015). Evaluation der Selbstregulierungsmassnahmen zum Jugendmedienschutz der Branchen Film, Computerspiele, Telekommunikation und Internet. Forschungsbericht im Auftrag des Bundesamtes für Sozialversicherungen (BSV). Zürich: IPMZ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levi-Faur, D. (2010). Regulation and regulatory governance (Jerusalem Papers on Regulation & Governance No. 1). Retrieved August 31, 2017, from http://regulation.huji.ac.il/papers/jp1.pdf.

  • Majone, G. (Ed.). (1996). Regulating Europe. New York; London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, A. L., & Bach, D. (2004). Self-regulatory trajectories in the shadow of public power: Resolving digital dilemmas in Europe and the United States. Governance, 17(3), 387–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2010). Risk and regulatory policy: Improving the governance of risk. Paris: OECD.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pattberg, P. (2005). The institutionalization of private governance: How business and nonprofit organizations agree on transnational rules. Governance, 18(4), 589–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies, 44(4), 652–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saurwein, F. (2011). Regulatory choice for alternative modes of regulation: How context matters. Law & Policy, 33(3), 334–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saurwein, F., Just, N., & Latzer, M. (2015). Governance of algorithms: Options and limitations. Info, 17(6), 35–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saurwein, F., & Latzer, M. (2010). Regulatory choice in communications: The case of content-rating schemes in the audiovisual industry. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 54(3), 463–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, W., & Held, T. (2002). Regulierte Selbstregulierung als Form modernen Regierens (Arbeitspapiere des Hans-Bredow-Instituts, Nr. 10). Hamburg: Hans-Bredow-Institut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, D. (1997). Self-regulation versus command and control? Beyond false dichotomies. Law & Policy, 19(4), 529–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Further Reading

  • Latzer, M. (2007). Regulatory choice in communications governance. Communications, the European Journal of Communication Research, 32(3), 399–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M., Just, N., & Saurwein, F. (2013). Self- and co-regulation: Evidence, legitimacy and governance choice. In M. E. Price, S. G. Verhulst, & L. Morgan (Eds.), Routledge handbook of media law (pp. 373–397). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M., Just, N., Saurwein, F., & Slominski, P. (2006). Institutional variety in communications regulation: Classification scheme and empirical evidence from Austria. Telecommunications Policy, 30(3–4), 152–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saurwein, F., Just, N., & Latzer, M. (2015). Governance of algorithms: Options and limitations. Info, 17(6), 35–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saurwein, F., & Latzer, M. (2010). Regulatory choice in communications: The case of content-rating schemes in the audiovisual industry. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 54(3), 463–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication and Media Research (IKMZ), University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

    Michael Latzer & Natascha Just

  2. Institute for Comparative Media and Communication Studies (CMC), Austrian Academy of Sciences and University of Klagenfurt, Vienna, Austria

    Florian Saurwein

Authors
  1. Michael Latzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Florian Saurwein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Natascha Just
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication, Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA

    Hilde Van den Bulck

  2. Department of Communication and Media Research, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland

    Manuel Puppis

  3. Department of Communication Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

    Karen Donders

  4. Department of Communication Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

    Leo Van Audenhove

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Latzer, M., Saurwein, F., Just, N. (2019). Assessing Policy II: Governance-Choice Method. In: Van den Bulck, H., Puppis, M., Donders, K., Van Audenhove, L. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Methods for Media Policy Research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16065-4_32

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation