Fast changing communication technologies in combination with market liberalization and globalization are challenging traditional regulatory systems. Regulatory agencies are increasingly required to assess the potential and limits of alternative modes of regulation (self- and co-regulation) to inform or improve regulatory systems. In particular, a knowledge of the key institutional factors affecting the performance of alternative regulatory institutions may enable regulators to determine whether alternative modes are relevant in addressing new regulatory challenges (ex-ante evaluation), and/or to improve already established, but unsuccessful schemes (ex-post evaluation).
This study was intended to contribute to the regulator’s assessment- and regulatory choice-efforts. The study’s primary goal was to examine whether and how success and failure of selected self- and co-regulatory schemes can be explained by their respective institutional design, by characteristics of the industries involved, and by the established regulatory environment. To this end, the study investigated objectives, institutional settings and the success of selected self- and co-regulation schemes in North America, Australia, Asia and the European Union.