政策执行中的监管中介与价值冲突:比利时的宗教组织与生死政策

IF 3.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Irina Ciornei, Eva-Maria Euchner, Michalina Preisner, Ilay Yesil
{"title":"政策执行中的监管中介与价值冲突:比利时的宗教组织与生死政策","authors":"Irina Ciornei, Eva-Maria Euchner, Michalina Preisner, Ilay Yesil","doi":"10.1111/rego.12500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article makes important contributions to governance research by studying the implementation of policies with high potential for goal incongruence between intermediaries and regulators. Building on a regulatory intermediation framework and prevailing theories from organizational institutionalism, we propose an original typology that classifies intermediaries' strategies for coping with challenging regulations. Furthermore, we explain the choice of these strategies based on intermediaries' value systems, the degree of interdependency with the regulator, and policy ambiguity. The empirical strategy is based on the case of Catholic, Protestant, and Muslim religious organizations engaged in the implementation of abortion and euthanasia policies in Belgium. These latter constitute a typical case of policy implementation that prompts value conflicts between permissive official regulations and intermediaries' conservative values on life-and-death issues.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulatory intermediaries and value conflicts in policy implementation: Religious organizations and life-and-death policies in Belgium\",\"authors\":\"Irina Ciornei, Eva-Maria Euchner, Michalina Preisner, Ilay Yesil\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/rego.12500\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article makes important contributions to governance research by studying the implementation of policies with high potential for goal incongruence between intermediaries and regulators. Building on a regulatory intermediation framework and prevailing theories from organizational institutionalism, we propose an original typology that classifies intermediaries' strategies for coping with challenging regulations. Furthermore, we explain the choice of these strategies based on intermediaries' value systems, the degree of interdependency with the regulator, and policy ambiguity. The empirical strategy is based on the case of Catholic, Protestant, and Muslim religious organizations engaged in the implementation of abortion and euthanasia policies in Belgium. These latter constitute a typical case of policy implementation that prompts value conflicts between permissive official regulations and intermediaries' conservative values on life-and-death issues.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulation & Governance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regulation & Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12500\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation & Governance","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12500","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文通过对中介机构与监管机构之间目标不一致可能性较大的政策实施情况的研究,为治理研究做出了重要贡献。在监管中介框架和组织制度主义流行理论的基础上,我们提出了一个原始的类型学,对中介机构应对具有挑战性的监管策略进行分类。此外,我们根据中介机构的价值体系、与监管机构的相互依赖程度和政策模糊性来解释这些策略的选择。实证策略基于天主教、新教和穆斯林宗教组织在比利时实施堕胎和安乐死政策的案例。后者构成了一个典型的政策执行案例,在生死问题上,宽松的官方规定与中介机构的保守价值观之间引发了价值冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regulatory intermediaries and value conflicts in policy implementation: Religious organizations and life-and-death policies in Belgium
This article makes important contributions to governance research by studying the implementation of policies with high potential for goal incongruence between intermediaries and regulators. Building on a regulatory intermediation framework and prevailing theories from organizational institutionalism, we propose an original typology that classifies intermediaries' strategies for coping with challenging regulations. Furthermore, we explain the choice of these strategies based on intermediaries' value systems, the degree of interdependency with the regulator, and policy ambiguity. The empirical strategy is based on the case of Catholic, Protestant, and Muslim religious organizations engaged in the implementation of abortion and euthanasia policies in Belgium. These latter constitute a typical case of policy implementation that prompts value conflicts between permissive official regulations and intermediaries' conservative values on life-and-death issues.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Regulation & Governance serves as the leading platform for the study of regulation and governance by political scientists, lawyers, sociologists, historians, criminologists, psychologists, anthropologists, economists and others. Research on regulation and governance, once fragmented across various disciplines and subject areas, has emerged at the cutting edge of paradigmatic change in the social sciences. Through the peer-reviewed journal Regulation & Governance, we seek to advance discussions between various disciplines about regulation and governance, promote the development of new theoretical and empirical understanding, and serve the growing needs of practitioners for a useful academic reference.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信