Faced with disruptive innovation, regulators believe their only options are reckless action, meaning regulation without sufficient facts, or paralysis, meaning doing nothing; in that bind caution beats risk and the precautionary principle becomes the default.
Source quote, verbatim
Regulators can find themselves in a situation where they believe they must opt for either reckless action (regulation without sufficient facts) or paralysis (doing nothing). Inevitably in such a case, caution tends to trump risk. The precautionary principle becomes the default position.
From
Mark Fenwick, Wulf A. Kaal, Erik P. M. Vermeulen, Regulation Tomorrow What Happens When Technology Is Faster Than the Law (2017), A. Facts Today, p. 22 https://ssrn.com/abstract=2834531 · source PDF
Cite as
Mark Fenwick, Wulf A. Kaal, Erik P. M. Vermeulen, Regulation Tomorrow What Happens When Technology Is Faster Than the Law (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2834531
Holds when
constant, complex and disruptive technological innovation
Classification
mechanismsupport: arguedfailure: recklessness or paralysis dichotomyfamily: regulatory-laginnovation
Verify
The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is 9cd875ebdb0266febbdcdabfca5b9b9f0de1b7ad9e3d5a8a5971bdbe469323b7. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer. Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/01e56426293d955b...json Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2834531-017.md | sha256sum