Regulatory risk control through mandatory occupational safety and health (OSH) certification and testing regimes (CTRs)

Governments make increasing use of private certification and testing infrastructures as an alternative for traditional regulatory arrangements in several areas including occupational safety and health (OSH).This research, commissioned by the Dutch Inspectorate for Work and Income (IWI), concerns an analysis of risk control of four certification and testing regimes (CTRs) in the Netherlands, three mandatory regimes and one non-mandatory regime. The aim was to create a better understanding of problems that may arise in the risk control through such regimes and to identify critical processes and factors that can affect the risk control process.The results of this research are reported in two papers in this special issue (see also Zwetsloot et al., this issue). This one presents an analysis of the risk control at the regulatory level, and its associated critical factors and processes. These critical factors are clustered in four essential processes: the regulatory choice for a CTR, the definition of requirements for the auditing or inspection regime, the certification and testing processes as such, and the processes needed for the self-correcting or learning capability of the CTR. Jointly, these factors and processes form a framework for both the design and the evaluation of such regimes. The case studies clearly demonstrate that these critical factors may undermine the effectiveness of such regulatory practices. We propose that a further development of our framework should be used in the (re)design process for proposed and existing CTRs, and in the process of independent evaluation of such regimes.