Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPeetz, David
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-17T01:30:46Z
dc.date.available2021-06-17T01:30:46Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.issn0034-379X
dc.identifier.doi10.7202/1075574ar
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/405187
dc.description.abstractOne response to the employer's search for “flexibility” (most evident in the “platform economy”) may be “institutional experimentation,” ie, changes to institutions and how they relate to organizations and labor standards. Our question: “What form of institutional arrangement can best enable the lessons of policy experimentation to be learned and disseminated?” Under directed devolution, as proposed here, legal entitlements or obligations would be set at a higher level (say, a national jurisdiction). A lower level (“subsidiary bodies”) would be required to work out detailed implementation of those standards, with a view to protecting the affected workers' interests. The subsidiary bodies might cover specific industries or groups of industries. They may need to be quite innovative. Results would be evaluated and ideas generated. By emphasizing flexibility and learning, directed devolution enables actors to learn from the experiments of other actors. One such example is the regulation of New York's road passenger transport industry in 2019, a highly innovative attempt to convert a high-level time-based minimum standard into a practical, local solution. Directed devolution is a form of multi-level policy-making, with some similarities to the concept of subsidiarity, but more tightly integrated. Other relevant but distinct forms of multi-level bargaining include the ILO Conventions , the Bangladesh Accord and several forms of regulation adopted in Australia. Actors and policy-makers should have long-term strategies, be careful in their processes of selecting institutional members, and be prepared to deal with powerful opposition. Directed devolution can be useful wherever establishing enforceable general principles is important and can make a real difference, but there are complications with implementation if circumstances vary considerably among organizations or industries. Devolution can be achieved without losing enforceability, and this can be done without shifting power away from those with less power. Directed devolution is a complement to, not a substitute for, specific regulatory interventions.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.languagefr
dc.publisherLaval University
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom69
dc.relation.ispartofpageto89
dc.relation.ispartofissue1
dc.relation.ispartofjournalRelations industrielles
dc.relation.ispartofvolume76
dc.subject.fieldofresearchBusiness and Management
dc.subject.fieldofresearchSociology
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1503
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1608
dc.titleInstitutional Experimentation, Directed Devolution and the Search for Policy Innovation
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dcterms.bibliographicCitationPeetz, D, Institutional Experimentation, Directed Devolution and the Search for Policy Innovation, Relations industrielles, 2021, 76 (1), pp. 69-89
dc.date.updated2021-06-17T01:27:05Z
dc.description.versionAccepted Manuscript (AM)
gro.rights.copyright© 2021 Laval University. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal website for access to the definitive, published version.
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorPeetz, David R.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record