Log in
This research represents an interdisciplinary collaboration between the School of Life Sciences and the Department of Politics and International Studies at the University of Warwick. The research focused on the commercialisation of biological pesticides or "biopesticides" - pest control agents from natural sources that are considered safer for humans and the environment than most conventional chemical pesticides and could potentially substitute for synthetic chemical pesticides. Biopesticide products can only be sold if they have been authorised by government regulators under UK and EU legislation. Prior to this research, only six biopesticide products had been commercialised in the UK. The research identified shortcomings in the UK biopesticide regulatory process and its associated policy network that acted as unnecessary barriers to the authorisation of biopesticides. A set of recommendations for an improved regulatory system was developed. The UK Pesticides Safety Directorate used the research to help implement a new scheme to facilitate the registration of biopesticides in the UK and therefore get more products to the market. The research was also used in 2008 to provide policy advice to the European Parliament on making greater use of biopesticides and other alternatives to synthetic chemical pesticides and improving the way they are regulated. In a 2007 report by the Science Advisory Council of the UK's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the work was highlighted as helping to facilitate the emergence of a new biopesticides sector in the UK. Since the research was started, there has been a 430% increase in the number of biopesticide products approved in the UK.
Dr Robert Falkner's research into international risk regulation for emerging technologies underpins the work of the Nanotechnology Policy and Regulation programme at LSE. On the basis of this work, Dr Falkner was tasked by the European Commission to lead the first ever comparative study of nanotechnologies regulation in the EU and US. This research has stimulated policy debates in the UK and Europe on how to strengthen regulatory capacity in the field of nanotechnologies. The research has highlighted, in particular, the importance of improved transparency about nanomaterials in consumer goods and supply chains. This research finding has influenced the conclusions of the first UK parliamentary enquiry into nanotechnologies regulation and has informed a recent shift in global policy debates towards comprehensive and mandatory nanomaterials registers.
An AHRC and ESRC-funded Edinburgh research collaboration with the Argentinian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovative Production (MOST), from 2007-2012, served as a key driver in the formation of regulatory structures, norms, knowledge and social understanding, helping to overcome state non-intervention in the regulation of regenerative medicine. As a direct result of engagement with the stakeholders in law/policy, medical and scientific communities, the research exposed a strong appetite for top-down legal intervention. This culminated in the first-ever model law presented by the MOST to the Argentine legislature (Congress) in 2013.
Much contemporary government activity involves regulation of the economy and society. International organisations have increasingly promoted regulatory impact assessment as a tool to appraise the likely costs and benefits of regulations. Ground-breaking research by a team at the Centre for European Governance (CEG) has exposed the limitations of narrow economic approaches to regulatory impact assessment and regulatory reform. The research shows that impact assessment and regulatory measures need to be cast in their political and administrative context to operate effectively and to ensure appropriate cross-national learning about regulation. The main impacts have been: