The Expanding Role of the State in Professional Regulation

该项目对1990年代末和2000年代初试图改革美国职业法规的尝试进行了个案研究，最终在2002年颁布了改革。专业人士可能会使用他们的专业知识，对客户、第三方和整个社会造成伤害。有多种监管方法可以限制或防止这种伤害，包括自我监管、国家监管或由私人市场机制进行“监管”。传统上，职业是自我监管的，但近年来，许多国家逐渐摆脱了这种模式，转向让国家发挥越来越大的监管作用。我们对为什么这一特定方向会发生变化知之甚少。这项研究是朝着增加我们的理解迈出的一步，它还允许发展理论，解释如何以及为什么类似的转向加强国家对职业的监管已经在许多环境中发生，并可能在未来发生。更广泛地说，这项研究揭示了促进或阻碍专业服务监管改革的情况，并开始确定社会为遏制滥用专家知识而开放的可能性的限制。研究设计是一个案例研究，追踪了20世纪90年代末和21世纪初参与寻求、抵制和塑造基于国家的监管的关键行动者和利益相关者群体之间的互动。此案呈现了一种自然的实验：2001年至2002年该行业严重不当行为的曝光，使我们能够比较这一关键事件前后相同的参与者、决策选项和论点。这些数据主要是纪实的：演讲、听证会的文字记录、政府报告，以及专业行业媒体和一般新闻媒体的文章。除了开发新的理论和为未来的监管改革努力提供信息外，该项目还将在专业研究和其他子领域和学科之间建立智力桥梁。这一奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力优势和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

This project conducts a case study of attempts to reform regulation of a United States profession in the late 1990s and early 2000s, culminating in reforms enacted in 2002. Professionals can use their expert knowledge in ways that cause harm to clients, third parties, and society in general. A variety of regulatory approaches are possible for limiting or preventing such harm, including self-regulation, state regulation, or “regulation” by private market mechanisms. Professions have traditionally regulated themselves, but in recent years many countries have seen a gradual shift away from this model toward an increasing regulatory role for states. We know relatively little about why change is occurring in this particular direction. This study is a step toward increasing our understanding that additionally permits the development of theory explaining how and why similar shifts toward increased state regulation of professions have occurred in a number of settings and might occur in the future. More generally, the study sheds light on the circumstances that facilitate or impede change in the regulation of professional services, and begins to identify the limits on the possibilities open to societies to curb the misuse of expert knowledge.The research design is a case study in which the interactions among key actors and stakeholder groups involved in seeking, resisting, and shaping state-based regulation during the late 1990s and the early 2000s are traced. The case presents a kind of natural experiment: revelation of serious misconduct in the profession in 2001-2002 allows comparison of the same actors, decision options, and arguments before and after this key event. The data are primarily documentary: speeches, transcripts of hearings, government reports, and articles from both the professional trade press and the general news media. In addition to developing new theory and informing future efforts at regulatory change, the project will build intellectual bridges between the study of professions and other subfields and disciplines. It will also contribute to revitalizing research on professional and expert work.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.