Advertisement

Regulatory Compliance and Over-Compliant Information Sharing – Changes in the B2G Landscape

  • Bram Klievink
  • Marijn Janssen
  • Haiko van der Voort
  • Sélinde van Engelenburg
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11020)

Abstract

Business-to-government information exchange has over the past decades greatly benefited from data exchange standards and inter-organisational systems. The data era enables a new shift in the type of information sharing; from formal reporting to opening up full (and big) data sets. This enables new analytics and insights by government, more effective and efficient compliance assessment, and other uses. The emphasis here shifts from establishing formats to deciding what information can be shared, under what conditions, and how to create added value. There are numerous initiatives that explore how to put data to better use for businesses, for government and for their interactions. However, there is limited attention to exactly how these new forms of extensive data sharing affects the supervision relationships. In this paper, we exploratively look across three research projects to identify the implications of information sharing beyond the regulatory requirements (‘over-compliant’). We find that the lack of attention to those implications lead to solutions that are hard to scale up and present unexpected consequences down the line, which may negatively impact the future willingness to explore new potential added value of data sharing.

Keywords

Business-to-government B2G Regulatory compliance Supervision Information sharing 

References

  1. 1.
    Bharosa, N., et al.: Tapping into existing information flows: the transformation to compliance by design in business-to-government information exchange. Gov. Inf. Q. 30, 9–18 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bharosa, N., van Wijk, R., de Winne, N., Janssen, M.: Challenging the Chain: Governing the Automated Exchange and Processing of Business Information. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    van der Pligt-Benito Ruano, S., Hulstijn, J.: Governance and collaboration in regulatory supervision: a case in the customs domain. Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res. 13, 34–52 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Veenstra, A.W., Hulstijn, J., Christiaanse, R., Tan, Y.-H.: Information exchange in global logistics chains: an application for model-based auditing (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tan, Y.-H., Bjørn-Andersen, N., Klein, S., Rukanova, B.: Accelerating Global Supply Chains with IT-Innovation. ITAIDE Tools and Methods. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15669-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Klievink, B., Bharosa, N., Tan, Y.-H.: The collaborative realization of public values and business goals: governance and infrastructure of public–private information platforms. Gov. Inf. Q. 33, 67–79 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Veenstra, A.F.: IT-Induced Public Sector Transformation (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Urciuoli, L., Hintsa, J., Ahokas, J.: Drivers and barriers affecting usage of e-customs — a global survey with customs administrations using multivariate analysis techniques. Gov. Inf. Q. 30, 473–485 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gil-garcia, J.R., Chengalur-Smith, I., Duchessi, P.: Collaborative e-government: impediments and benefits of information-sharing projects in the public sector. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 16, 121–133 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Robey, D., Im, G., Wareham, J.D.: Theoretical foundations of empirical research on interorganizational systems: assessing past contributions and guiding future directions. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 9, 497–518 (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hart, P., Saunders, C.: Power and trust: critical factors in the adoption and use of electronic data interchange. Organ. Sci. 8, 23–42 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Klievink, B., Lucassen, I.: Facilitating adoption of international information infrastructures: a living labs approach. In: Wimmer, M.A., Janssen, M., Scholl, H.J. (eds.) EGOV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8074, pp. 250–261. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40358-3_21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zuidwijk, R.A., Veenstra, A.W.: The value of information in container transport. Transp. Sci. 49, 675–685 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bharosa, N., Janssen, M., Hulstijn, J., van Wijk, R., de Winne, N., Tan, Y.: Towards a lean-government using new IT-architectures for compliance monitoring. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance - ICEGOV 2011, p. 147 (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kagan, R.A., Scholz, J.: The criminology of the corporation and regulatory enforcement strategies. In: Blankenburg, E., Lenk, K. (eds.) Organisation und Recht. Jahrbuch für Rechtssoziologie und Rechtstheorie, vol. 7, pp. 352–357. Springer, Heidelberg (1980).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-83669-4_21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hawkins, K.: Environment and Enforcement, Regulation and the Social Definition of Pollution. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Braithwaite, J.: To Punish or Persuade: Enforcement of Coal Mine Safety (1985)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sparrow, M.: The Regulatory Craft: Controlling Risks, Solving Problems, and Managing Compliance (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    van Wingerde, K.: The limits of environmental regulation in the global economy. In: van Erp, J., Huisman, W., Vandewalle, G. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of White-Collar and Corporate Crime in Europe, pp. 260–275. Routledge, London (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reiss, A.: Consequences of compliance and deterrence models of law enforcement for the exercise of police discretion. Law Contemp. Probl. 47, 83 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    de Bruijn, H., ten Heuvelhof, E., Koopmans, M.: Law Enforcement: The Game Between Inspectors and Inspectees (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ayres, I., Braithwaite, J.: Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate (1992)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Six, F.E., Verhoest, K.: Trust in regulatory regimes; scoping the field. In: Six, F.E., Verhoest, K. (eds.) Trust in Regulatory Regimes, pp. 1–36. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van Der Voort, H.: Trust and cooperation over the public-private divide. In: Six, F.E., Verhoest, K. (eds.) Trust in Regulatory Regimes, pp. 181–204. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    May, P.: Regulatory regimes and accountability. Regul. Gov. 1, 8 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Coglianese, C.: Management-based regulation: prescribing private management to achieve public goals. Law Soc. Rev. 37, 691 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gunningham, N., Grabosky, P., Sinclair, D.: Smart Regulation: Designing Environmental Policy (1998)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Black, J.: Decentring regulation: understanding the role of regulation and self-regulation in a “post-regulatory” world. Curr. Leg. Probl. 54, 103 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Haines, F.: The Paradox of Regulation: What Regulation Can Achieve and What It Cannot (2011)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Garcia Martinez, M., Verbruggen, P., Fearne, A.: Risk-based approaches to food safety regulation: what role for co-regulation? J. Risk Res. 16, 1101 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Baldwin, R., Black, J.: Really responsive regulation. Mod. Law Rev. 71, 59 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Black, J., Baldwin, R.: Really responsive risk-based regulation. Law Policy 32, 181 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Van der Voort, H., Kerpershoek, E.: Measuring measures: introducing performance measurement in the Dutch health care sector. Pub. Money Manag. 30, 63–68 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Klievink, B., et al.: Enhancing visibility in international supply chains: the data pipeline concept. Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res. 8, 14–33 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Van Engelenburg, S., Janssen, M., Klievink, B.: Design of a software architecture supporting business-to-government information sharing to improve public safety and security: combining business rules, events and blockchain technology. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 1–24 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10844-017-0478-z
  36. 36.
    Hesketh, D.: Weaknesses in the supply chain: who packed the box? World Cust. J. 4, 3–20 (2010)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Baida, Z., Rukanova, B., Liu, J., Tan, Y.: Preserving control in trade procedure redesign – the beer living lab. Electron. Mark. 18, 53–64 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    van Engelenburg, S., Janssen, M., Klievink, B.: What belongs to context? In: Cerone, A., Roveri, M. (eds.) SEFM 2017. LNCS, vol. 10729, pp. 101–116. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74781-1_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bram Klievink
    • 1
  • Marijn Janssen
    • 1
  • Haiko van der Voort
    • 1
  • Sélinde van Engelenburg
    • 1
  1. 1.Delft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations