Paul Verbruggen

Understanding complex governance relationships in food safety regulation : The RIT model as a theoretical lens

In this article, we discuss the value of the RIT model for analyzing complex governance relationships in the regulation of food safety. By exploring food safety regimes involving the European Union and the Global Food Safety Initiative, we highlight the diverse and complex relationships between the actors in public, private, and hybrid regimes of food safety regulation. We extend the basic RIT model to better fit the reality of (hybrid) governance relationships in the modern regulation of food safety, arguing that the model enables disaggregation of these regimes into analytical subunits or “regulatory chains,” in which each actor contributes to and affects the regulatory process. Finally, we critically assess what the RIT model adds to alternative theoretical approaches in identifying, mapping, and explaining the different roles that actors play vis-à-vis others in regulatory regimes.

Hybridization of Food Governance

Modern food governance is increasingly hybrid, involving not only government, but also industry and civil society actors. is book analyzes the unfolding interplay between public and private actors in global and local food governance. How are responsibilities and risks allocated in hybrid governance arrangements, how is legitimacy ensured, and what e ects do these arrangements have on industry or government practices? e expert contributors draw on law, economics, political science and sociology to discuss these questions through rich empirical cases.

Food Safety Meta-Controls in the Netherlands

Both public and private actors are involved in the monitoring and enforcement of compliance with public food safety norms. Public authorities in countries such as the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Canada have recently started to develop forms of coordination and collaboration with private food safety control systems. Such policies bring with them the risk of regulatory capture, loss of transparency and fuzzy accountability relationships. Here we analyse how the Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (de Nederlandse Voedsel- en Warenautoriteit – NVWA) assesses and monitors the functioning of private food safety control systems (meta-control) so it can use these private systems in its own enforcement activities. We do so by discussing two national private systems that have been formally accepted by the NVWA: Bureau de Wit and RiskPlaza. The paper examines the safeguards that the public enforcement agency deploys while coordinating its own activities with private food safety controls, the advantages and risks involved in this strategy, and the extent to which this policy can be improved. The study is based on the analysis of policy documents, public and private regulation and open-ended interviews with representatives of the public and private sector in the Netherlands.

The Global Food Safety Initiative and state actors. Paving the way for hybrid food safety governance

Modern food governance is increasingly hybrid, involving not only government, but also industry and civil society actors. This book analyzes the unfolding interplay between public and private actors in global and local food governance. How are responsibilities and risks allocated in hybrid governance arrangements, how is legitimacy ensured, and what effects do these arrangements have on industry or government practices? The expert contributors draw on law, economics, political science and sociology to discuss these questions through rich empirical cases.

Hybridization of food governance: An analytical framework

Modern food governance is increasingly hybrid, involving not only government, but also industry and civil society actors. This book analyzes the unfolding interplay between public and private actors in global and local food governance. How are responsibilities and risks allocated in hybrid governance arrangements, how is legitimacy ensured, and what effects do these arrangements have on industry or government practices? The expert contributors draw on law, economics, political science and sociology to discuss these questions through rich empirical cases.

Private regulation in EU better regulation : Past performance and future promises

The promotion of private regulation is frequently part of better regulation programmes. Also the Better Regulation programme of the European Union (EU) initiated in 2002 advocated forms of private regulation as important means to improve EU law-making activities. However, for various reasons the ambition to encourage private regulation as a genuine governance response to policy issues has remained a paper reality. This contribution asks whether and to what extent the 2015 EU Agenda on Better Regulation provides renewed guidance on how private regulation might be integrated in EU law-making processes. To that end, it builds on previous (empirical) research conducted on European private regulation and reviews the principal policy documents constituting the new EU agenda on better regulation. It is argued that while the new agenda addresses a number of the shortcomings of the old programme concerning the conceptualization and practice of private regulation in the EU, it still falls short of providing principled guidance on how private regulation can be combined and integrated in EU law-making.