Why and how does the regulation of emerging technologies occur? Explaining the adoption of the EU General Data Protection Regulation using the multiple streams framework

Abstract

Why and how the regulation of emerging technologies occurs is not clear in the literature. In this study, we adapt the multiple streams frameworkoften used for explaining agenda-setting and policy adoptionto examine the phenomenon. We hypothesize how technological change affects policy-making and identify conditions under which the streams can be (de-) coupled. We trace the formulation of the General Data Protection Regulation to show that the regulation occupied the legislative agenda when a policy window was exploited through policy entrepreneurship to frame technological change as a problem for data privacy and legislative harmonization within the European Union. Although constituencies interested in promoting internet technologies made every effort to stall the regulation, various actors, activities, and events helped the streams remain coupled, eventually leading to its adoption. We conclude that the alignment of problem, policy, politics, and technologythrough policy entrepreneurshipinfluences the timing and design of technology regulation.

Narrative strategies for emerging disruptive technologies: A case study of Blockchain for Europe

“…This is a period when policy makers swim in unchartered waters and organized interests know that agenda-setting stage may act as a critical juncture, deciding how the policy will be shaped in the later stages of the policy process. Framing benefits and costs associated with disruptive technologies at the agenda-setting stage can be influential in deciding if regulations will be adopted and what the regulations will entail (Goyal et al, 2021).…”

“…Social media has become a vital part of this media strategy in the last decade (Figenschou & Fredheim, 2020; Halpin et al, 2021; Johansson & Scaramuzzino, 2019; Kanol & Nat, 2017, 2021). In the case of emerging disruptive technologies, interest groups can use framing strategies by using the media and social media to shape the regulation process (Goyal et al, 2021). Like framing strategies, creating narratives, and using narrative strategies by interest groups is also quite common.…”

EU Sport Diplomacy: An Idea Whose Time Has Nearly Come

“…Amongst the first to apply the framework was Zahariadis (2008) who argued that EU policy outputs are the result of the interaction of the streams. Since then, the framework has been applied to a number of EU policies including: sugar (Ackrill & Kay, 2011), quality of life indicators (Bache, 2013), cohesion (Becker, 2019; Engl & Evrard, 2020), economic policy (Copeland & James, 2014; Saurugger & Terpen, 2016; Schön‐Quinlivan & Scipioni, 2017), banking (De Rynck, 2016), data protection (Goyal et al ., 2021), natural gas regulation (Herweg, 2016), children's rights policy (Iusmen, 2012), counter‐terrorism (Kaunert & Léonard, 2019), digital tax proposals (Lips, 2020), biofuels policy (Palmer, 2015), and tax avoidance (Roland, 2020).…”

Value Change, Value Conflict, and Policy Innovation: Understanding the Opposition to the Market-Based Economic Dispatch of Electricity Scheme in India Using the Multiple Streams Framework

“…Supported by technology constituencies (Goyal & Howlett, 2018)-comprising technologists, manufacturers, suppliers, service providers, users, and other stakeholders who share an interest in the diffusion of specific technologies-the evolution of this stream might shape not only technological trajectories but also the policy making streams (Goyal & Howlett, 2020b). Illustratively, Goyal et al, (2021) hypothesize the relationship of the technology stream to problem, policy, and politics and apply this four-stream variant of the MSF to explain the emergence of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union (EU).…”