| Abstract
| - Regulatory research has focused on the question of what is the best strategy: to punish or to persuade? This paper argues that a prior question is: what is it that the regulated should be asked to comply with? The answer lo this question will often dictate the strategy to be used. The basic choice to be made is between procedural and substantive outcome regulation. This point is very briefly illustrated in the context of sex discrimination and environmental legislation and then at greater length in relation lo the regulation of occupational health and safely, particularly in the United Kingdom and Australia. It is argued that the OHS legislation in these jurisdictions, which imposes a general duty on employers to safeguard their workers, amounts to substantive outcome regulation. But ironically, in practice employers need to comply with procedural/specification standards in order to avoid the risk of punishment.
|
