首页> 外文OA文献 >Innovation types and regulation: the regulatory framing of nanotechnology as 'incremental' or 'radical' innovation
【2h】

Innovation types and regulation: the regulatory framing of nanotechnology as 'incremental' or 'radical' innovation

机译:创新类型和监管:纳米技术作为“增量”或“激进”创新的监管框架

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The regulatory literature has long been concerned with the challenges of technological innovation, yet it says relatively little about what we understand as “innovative” and how innovation “types” impact on regulation. This article unpacks the concept of “innovation” and analyses its significance for the development of regulatory strategy. It shows that innovation types – such as “incremental” and “radical” innovation – are not clear-cut, but involve differences of interpretation. This interpretive flexibility makes them powerful discursive resources in regulatory decision-making. Through a study of the EU’s regulation of nanotechnology, the article shows how arguments of “incremental” and “radical” innovation can be mobilised to very different effect. These different ways of conceptualising new technology affect decisions on: (i) the desirability of legislative reform; (ii) the evidence-base for regulation; and (iii) the use of the precautionary principle. The study also shows how the framing of technology as “incrementally” innovative can contribute to a strategy of “deliberate regulatory ignorance”. The article concludes by arguing that the incremental/radical distinction can be put to more positive use, so that regulatory choices take account of the different techno-scientific and socio-economic dimensions of innovation.
机译:监管文献长期以来一直关注技术创新的挑战,但对于我们所理解的“创新”以及创新“类型”如何对监管产生的影响却很少提及。本文介绍了“创新”的概念,并分析了其对制定监管策略的重要性。它表明,创新类型(例如“增量”创新和“激进”创新)不是明确的,而是涉及不同的解释。这种解释上的灵活性使它们成为监管决策中强大的话语资源。通过对欧盟纳米技术法规的研究,该文章显示了如何动员“增量式”和“激进式”创新的论点以产生截然不同的效果。新技术概念化的这些不同方式会影响以下方面的决策:(i)进行立法改革的必要性; (ii)监管的依据; (iii)使用预防原则。该研究还表明,将技术框架“逐步”创新化如何有助于“故意监管无知”战略。本文的结论是,可以更积极地利用增量/根本区别,以便监管选择考虑创新的不同技术科学和社会经济方面。

著录项

  • 作者

    Smismans Stijn; Stokes Elen;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2017
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号