Advertisement

Encouraging Private Sector Transparency: Policies to Support Disclosure of Product Data in North America

  • Holly JarmanEmail author
  • Luis F. Luna-Reyes
  • Theresa A. Pardo
Chapter
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 26)

Abstract

Our concluding chapter draws on the concepts and theories discussed in the book, particularly the concept of governance, collaboration, and the role of trust. The chapter focuses on the practicalities of information disclosure. It asks: how must this process be governed? A definition of governance as the process of steering a society toward a set of predefined goals is introduced. It discusses the benefits and difficulties of creating collaborative governance in the context of our project. The chapter presents our findings regarding governance from the I-Choose project. It evaluates existing experiments in collaborative governance that aim to extract public value from data disclosure, drawing on several examples from multiple countries, including the I-Choose project. We find that information disclosure alone is not enough to enhance the public sphere. It must be supported by innovative governance mechanisms that address classic problems such as establishing independence among producing and regulating organizations and creating procedural transparency.

Keywords

I-Choose Data disclosure Consumer choice Governance 

References

  1. Albersmeier, F., Schulze, H., Jahn, G., & Spiller, A. (2009). The reliability of third-party certification in the food chain: From checklists to risk-oriented auditing. Food Control, 20(10), 927–935. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2009.01.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2007). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Auld, G., Cashore, B., Balboa, C., Bozzi, L., & Renckens, S. (2010). Can technological innovations improve private regulation in the global economy. Business and Politics, 12(3), 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartley, T. (2003). Certifying forests and factories: States, social movements, and the rise of private regulation in the apparel and forest products fields. Politics & Society, 31(3), 433–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance without a state: Can it work?: Governance without a state. Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 113–134. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01076.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Büthe, T. (2010). Private regulation in the global economy: A (p)review. Business and Politics, 12(3). http://doi.org/10.2202/1469-3569.1328.
  7. Cashore, B. W., Auld, G., & Newsom, D. (2004). Governing through markets: Forest certification and the emergence of non-state authority. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Coglianese, C., & Nash, J. (Eds.). (2001). Regulating from the inside: Can environmental management systems achieve policy goals? Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  9. Darnall, N., Potoski, M., & Prakash, A. (2010). Sponsorship matters: Assessing business participation in government- and industry-sponsored voluntary environmental programs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(2), 283–307. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mup014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De la Porte, C. (2010). State of the art. Overview of concepts, indicators and methodologies used for analyzing the social OMC. Overview of concepts, indicators and methodologies used for analyzing the social OMC (November 1, 2010). REC-WP working paper on the reconciliation of work and welfare in Europe, (15/10). Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1711245
  11. Donahue, J. D., & Nye, J. S. (2002). Market-based governance: supply side, demand side, upside, and downside. Cambridge, MA/Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Retrieved from http://www.brookings.edu/research/books/2002/market-based-governance
  12. Fridell, G. (2007). Fair trade coffee: The prospects and pitfalls of market-driven social justice (Repr.). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  13. Goldsmith, S., & Eggers, W. D. (2004). Governing by network: the new shape of the public sector. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hallsworth, M., & Ling, T. (2007). The EU platform on diet, physical activity and health. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR474.html
  15. Hill, C. J., & Lynn, L. E. (2004). Is hierarchical governance in decline? Evidence from empirical research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(2), 173–195. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ICF Consulting Services. (2015). EU plataform on diet, physical activity and health – 2014 Annual report.Google Scholar
  17. Jahn, G., Schramm, M., & Spiller, A. (2005). The reliability of certification: Quality labels as a consumer policy tool. Journal of Consumer Policy, 28(1), 53–73. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-004-7298-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jarman, H. (2009). Imagined commodities: “Trade and” policies in the European Union and United States. London School of Economics and Political Science, UK. Retrieved from http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/2330/
  19. Jarman, H., Luna-Reyes, L. F., Zhang, J., Whitmore, A., Picazo-Vela, S., Andersen, D. L., et al. (2011). I-choose: Consumer choice, digital government, and sustainability in North America. Presented at the APPAM Fall Research Conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  20. Kirton, J. J., & Trebilcock, M. J. (Eds.). (2004). Hard choices and soft law: Voluntary Standards in Global Trade, Environment and Social Governance. Toronto, Canada: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.gowerpub.com/pdf/SamplePages/Hard_Choices_Soft_Law_Intro.pdf
  21. Luna-Reyes, L. F., Andersen, D. F., Andersen, D. L., Derrick, D., & Jarman, H. (2012). Full information product pricing regimes: Policy implications for US-Mexico sustainable commerce. In Puentes Symposium, Houston, TX. Citeseer. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.310.4882&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  22. Luna-Reyes, L. F., Zhang, J., Roy, R., Andersen, D. F., Whitmore, A., & Andersen, D. L. (2013). Information strategies to support full information product pricing: The role of trust. Information Polity, 18(1), 75–91.Google Scholar
  23. Peeler, L. (2008, May 19). Green packaging workshop – Comment, project no. P084200. Retrieved from https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_comments/2008/04/534743-00053.pdf
  24. Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295–336.Google Scholar
  25. Protecting consumers from false and deceptive advertising of weight-loss products, § senate committee on commerce, science and transportation. (2014).Google Scholar
  26. Ran, W., Jarman, H., Luna-Reyes, L. F., Zhang, J., Andersen, D. L., Tayi, G. K., et al. (2016). Supply-chain transparency and governance systems: Market penetration of the I-choose system. In J. Zhang, L. F. Luna-Reyes, T. A. Pardo, & D. S. Sayogo (Eds.), Information, models, and sustainability: Policy informatics in the age of big data and open government. Basel, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Raynolds, L. T., Murray, D., & Heller, A. (2007). Regulating sustainability in the coffee sector: A comparative analysis of third-party environmental and social certification initiatives. Agriculture and Human Values, 24(2), 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rosenau, J. (2000). The governance of fragmegration: Neither a world republic nor a global interstate system. Studia Diplomatica, 53(5), 15–40.Google Scholar
  29. Rosenau, J. N. (1995). Governance in the twenty-first Century. Global Governance, 1(1), 13–43.Google Scholar
  30. Sayogo, D. S., Zhang, J., Liu, H., Picazo-Vela, S., & Luna-Reyes, L. (2014). Examining trust as key drivers in smart disclosure for sustainable consumption: The case of I-choose. In Proceedings of the 15th annual international conference on digital government research (pp. 137–146). New York: ACM. http://doi.org/10.1145/2612733.2612747.Google Scholar
  31. Sayogo, D. S., Zhang, J., Pardo, T. A., Tayi, G. K., Hrdinova, J., Andersen, D. F., et al. (2014). Going beyond open data: Challenges and motivations for smart disclosure in ethical consumption. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 9(2), 1–16. http://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-18762014000200002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thorelli, H. B. (1986). Networks: Between markets and hierarchies. Strategic Management Journal, 7(1), 37–51. http://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250070105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. van der Laan, S. (2009). The role of theory in explaining motivation for corporate social disclosures: Voluntary disclosures vs “solicited” disclosures. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 3(4), 15–29. Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/aabfj/vol3/iss4/2
  34. Weiss, J. A. (2002). Public information. In L. M. Salamon (Ed.), The tools of government: A guide to the new governance (pp. 217–254). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Holly Jarman
    • 1
    Email author
  • Luis F. Luna-Reyes
    • 2
  • Theresa A. Pardo
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Health Management and PolicySchool of Public Health, University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Department of InformaticsUniversity at AlbanyAlbanyUSA
  3. 3.Center for Technology in GovernmentUniversity at AlbanyAlbanyUSA

Personalised recommendations