The Dutch Healthcare Inspectorate has recently tried out a new form of inspection: System-Based Regulation (SBR). This article explores how SBR was situated in the healthcare context through a process of ‘experimentalist governance’. A qualitative formative evaluation was undertaken involving two years of participative observation, numerous iterations between data gathering and feedback in order to orient the next steps of the process. The evaluation found that SBR could fit into the existing supervisory regime, but notwithstanding positive outcomes SBR was controversial and further implementation was delayed. The process of ‘experimentalist governance’ was strengthened by qualitative formative evaluation that documented and reflected on the process as it progressed. The evaluation also helped to translate and communicate learning so as to better understand regulation and to reform and reconceptualize SBR in today’s healthcare context.
AvenT (2011) Quantitative Risk Assessment: The Scientific Platform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
AyresIBraithwaiteJ (1994) Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4.
BalRMastboomF (2007) Engaging with technologies in practice: Travelling the Northwest passage. Science as Culture16(3): 253–66.
5.
BowkerGStarSL (1996) How things (actor-net) work: Classification magic and the ubiquity of standards. Philosophia25(3 – 4): 195–220.
6.
BraithwaiteJ (1982) Enforced self-regulation: A new strategy for corporate crime control. Michigan Law Review80(7): 1466–507.
7.
CoglianeseCLazerD (2003) Management-based regulation: Prescribing private management to achieve public goals. Law and Society Review37(4): 691–730.
8.
De BreeMA (2005) Waste and Innovation: How Waste Companies and Government Can Interact to Stimulate Innovation in Dutch Waste Industry. Amsterdam: Berghauser Pont Publishing.
9.
DorfMCSabelCF (1998) A constitution of democratic experimentalism. Cornell Law Faculty Publications, Paper120.
10.
GiladS (2011) Process-oriented regulation: Conceptualization and assessment. In: Levi-FaurD (ed.) Handbook on the Politics of Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 423–38.
11.
GeertzC (1994) Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In: MartinMMcIntyreLC (eds) A Bradford Book. Cambridge: MIT Press, 213–31.
12.
GunninghamN (2012) Regulatory reform and reflexive regulation: Beyond command and control. In: BrousseauEDedeurwaerdereTSiebenhunerB (eds) Reflexive Governance for Global Public Goods. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 85–104.
13.
GunninghamNJohnstoneR (1999) Regulating Workplace Safety: Systems and Sanctions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14.
GunninghamNSinclairD (2009) Organizational trust and the limits of management-based regulation. Law and Society Review43(4): 865–90.
15.
HanssonFNornMTVadTB (2014) Modernize the public sector through innovation? A challenge for the role of applied social science and evaluation. Evaluation20(2): 244–60.
16.
HeimerCA (2011) Disarticulated responsiveness: The theory and practice of responsive regulation in multi-layered systems. University of British Columbia Law Review44(3): 663–93.
17.
HollnagelEBraithwaiteJWearsR (eds) (2013) Resilient Health Care. London: Ashgate.
18.
Jerak-ZuiderentS (2013) Generative accountability: Comparing with care. Dissertation. Rotterdam: EUR.
19.
KaplanSGarrickBJ (1981) On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Analysis1(I): 11–27.
20.
Levi-FaurD (ed.) (2011) Handbook on the Politics of Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
21.
NichterMQuinteroGMockJ. (2004) Qualitative research: Contributions to the study of drug use, drug abuse, and drug use(r)-related interventions. Substance Use and Misuse39(10–12): 1907–69.
22.
ParkerC (2002) The Open Corporation: Effective Self-regulation and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23.
ParkerC (2013) Twenty years of responsive regulation: An appreciation and appraisal. Regulation and Governance7(1): 2–13.
24.
ParkerCGiladS (2011) Internal corporate compliance management systems: Structure, culture and agency. In: ParkerCNielsenV (eds) Explaining Compliance: Business Responses to Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1–46.
25.
PichaultF (2013) Change Management: Towards Polyphony. Brussels: De Boeck.
26.
SabelCF (2004) Beyond principal-agent governance: Experimentalist organisations, learning and accountability. In: EngelenERSie Dhian HoM (eds) De staat van de democratie Democratie voorbij de staat. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 173–93.
27.
SabelCFZeitlinJ (2008) Learning from difference: The new architecture of experimentalist governance in the EU. European Law Journal14(3): 271–327.
28.
SalemPShieldsP (2011) Out of the woods: Facilitating pragmatic inquiry and dialogue. Administration and Society43(1): 124–32.
29.
ScottC (2004) Regulation in the age of governance: The rise of the post regulatory state. In: JordanaYLevi-FaurD (eds) The Politics of Regulation: Institutions and Regulatory Reforms for the Age of Governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 145–74.
30.
ScottWR (ed.) (2000) Institutional Change and Healthcare Organizations: From Professional Dominance to Managed Care. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
31.
SelznickP (1985) Focusing organizational research on regulation. In: NollR (ed.) Regulatory Policy and the Social Sciences. Berkeley: University of California Press, 363–67.
32.
ShieldsPM (1998) Pragmatism as a philosophy of science: A tool for public administration. In: WhiteJ (ed.) Research in Public Administration. Stamford, CT: JAI Press, 195–226.
33.
StarSLGriesemerJR (1989) Institutional ecology ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. Social Studies of Science19(3): 387–420.
34.
SzyszczakE (2006) Experimental governance: The open method of coordination. European Law Journal12(4): 486–502.
35.
VROM Inspectie (2008) Eindrapport Pilot Compliance Management, Report of the inspectorate of housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment.
36.
VROM Inspectie (2009) Inleiding systeemgericht toezicht milieu en veiligheid voor grote bedrijven, Report of the inspectorate of housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment.
37.
WienerCL (2000) The Elusive Quest: Accountability in Hospitals. New York: Walter de Gruyter Inc.
38.
Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid (WRR) (2013) Toezien op publieke belangen. Naar een verruimd perspectief op rijkstoezicht. The report ‘Supervising public interests’, The Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR).
39.
ZeitlinJ (2013) Towards governance-based regulation?Tijdschrift voor Toezicht4: 10–15.
