scholarly journals Co-Opting Regulation: Professional Control Through Discretionary Mobilization of Legal Prescriptions and Expert Knowledge

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joelle Evans ◽  
Susan S. Silbey
Keyword(s):  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Regulatory Compliance ◽  
Ethnographic Study ◽  
Professional Expertise ◽  
Environmental Health And Safety ◽  
Expert Control ◽  
Professional Control ◽  
The Law ◽  
Safety Cultures

The governance of front-line professionals is a persistent organizational problem. Regulations designed to make professional work more legible and responsive to both organizational and public expectations depend on these professionals’ willing implementation. This paper examines the important question of how professional control shapes regulatory compliance. Drawing on a seventeen-month ethnographic study of a bioscience laboratory, we show how professionals deploy their discretionary judgment to assemble environmental, health, and safety regulations with their own expert practices, explaining frequently observed differential rates of regulatory compliance. We find that professional scientists selectively implement and blend formal regulations with expert practice to respond to risks the law acknowledges (to workers’ bodies and the environment) and to risks the law does not acknowledge but professionals recognize as critical (to work tasks and collegiality). Some regulations are followed absolutely, others are adapted on a case-by-case basis; in other instances, new practices are produced to control threats not addressed by regulations. Such selective compliance, adaptation and invention enact professional expertise: interpretations of hazard and risk. The discretionary enactment of regulations, at a distance from formal agents, becomes part of the technical, practical, and tacit assemblage of situated practices. Thus, paradoxically, professional expert control is maintained and sometimes enhanced as professionals blend externally imposed regulations with expert practices. In essence, regulation is co-opted in the service of professional control. This research contributes to studies of professional expertise, the legal governance of professionals in organizations, regulatory compliance, and safety cultures.

scholarly journals IACUC and Veterinary Considerations for Review of ABSL3 and ABSL4 Research Protocols

ILAR Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Curtis Klages
Keyword(s):  
Health And Safety ◽  
Disease Outbreaks ◽  
Medical Personnel ◽  
Regulatory Compliance ◽  
Emerging Diseases ◽  
Environmental Health And Safety ◽  
Level 3 ◽  
Animal Use ◽  
Animal Care ◽  
Biosafety Level

Abstract With the recent upswing of infectious disease outbreaks (coronavirus, influenza, Ebola, etc), there is an ever-increasing need for biocontainment animal use protocols to better address the research of emerging diseases and to increase the health of both animals and humans. It is imperative that we as a research community ensure these protocols are conducted with the utmost scrutiny and regulatory compliance for the welfare of the animals as well as the health and safety concerns of the individual conducting these studies. Both the welfare of the animals and the health and safety of the research staff must be balanced with the integrity of the science being studied. Even prior to reviewing biocontainment protocols, the research stakeholders should have professional and collegial interactions across all levels of the proposed project. These stakeholders should include the attending veterinarian, the principal investigator, the sponsor, and any organic institutional health and safety assets (environmental health and safety, occupational health, biosafety personnel, medical personnel, facilities operations and maintenance, etc). At most institutions, these stakeholders are members of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and may not possess the necessary tools to properly assess an Animal Biosafety Level 3 and 4 animal use protocol. It is the goal of this article to review some basic concepts of biocontainment, discuss critical communications and preapprovals, clinical observations, medical interventions and supportive care, scientific and study endpoints, euthanasia criteria, animal manipulations, documentation, training, emergency response and contingency plans, security, and decontamination and provide a scenario-based and informative thought-provoking process Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee members and veterinary staff may consider during Animal Biosafety Level 3 and 4 protocol review. These topics will enhance the ability of all stakeholders to balance the protection of the people with the integrity of the science and ultimately the welfare of the animal.

Education in Virtual Environments

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Saiger
Keyword(s):  
Progressive Era ◽  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Student Rights ◽  
Education Law ◽  
Virtual Schooling ◽  
Virtual Technology ◽  
The Law ◽  
Bureaucratic Institutions ◽  
Fixed Times

The bricks-and-mortar schools contemplated by American education law and regulation are discrete, bureaucratic institutions, where children interact in person with one another, and with adults who supervise them, inside fixed physical borders at fixed times. Their governance is likewise defined geographically. Virtual schooling, by contrast, is untethered from geography, is ubiquitously asynchronous, and involves the interaction of machine representations of people rather than of people themselves. Virtuality privileges the consumer over the bureaucrat, encourages the disaggregation and recombination of educational components on a bespoke basis, and brings different economies of scale and competitive features to the educational marketplace. The education law we have—the law of the traditional, embodied school—fits virtual technology poorly in critical respects. Virtuality demands fundamentally new legal approaches to areas as diverse as curriculum, attendance, student health and safety, privacy, parental responsibility, disability, student rights, discipline, governance, and equity. Responding to these demands provides occasion to see the law afresh, to reassess and redirect, to align principle and practice more closely, and ultimately to transform educational regulation in the service of equity and learning. This is an opportunity of a kind that has not presented itself since the beginning of the Progressive Era.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document