| The social legislation of the '60s and '70s was evidence of the changes in the demands of society on business. The interaction between government and business to meet these demands is often adversarial. The purpose of the research was to identify critical factors associated with cooperative as well as adversarial relations between government and business. The objectives were to examine the perceptions corporations have of their socio-political environment, record the behavior of corporations and their representatives in the rulemaking process, identify differences in responses among corporations and their representatives in rulemaking proceedings and factors associated with the differences, and identify problems that have been encountered in implementing the policies established by Congress as a result of societal concerns.; Conceptual models are presented for the institutional framework of the firm, the adaptive subsystem of the firm, and the corporate response to safety and environmental regulation.; Participants in three rulemaking proceedings were interviewed using interview guides and a specially developed questionnaire. The rulemakings were concerned with reporting of hazardous spills, rail transportation of compressed gases, and lawnmower safety.; Research has shown that corporations will seek to prevent or delay a regulation when it is expected to have an adverse effect on the economic goals or autonomy of the firm. Other barriers to successful collaboration to solve a problem may arise from uncertainty, procedural rules, the number of participants involved, and differences in attitude. Factors that delay resolution of problems include the absence of public or Congressional pressure in favor of the regulation, legislation that is unclear and provides opportunities for challenge, the failure of the agency to follow procedural rules or interpret the legislation to the letter, a champion in Congress to combat legislative or executive action, a lack of communication between industry and the agency, segmentation of the industry, and the absence of adequate factual data to support the rulemaking decision. The more participants share objectives and the greater the knowledge of the process by participants, the more productive are the negotiations that lead to a final ruling. |
