Abstract:
A brief history of studies of standard setting and constituency lobbying is
summarised, and a description of standard setting in New Zealand is provided.
Historically, levels of responses to exposure drafts in New Zealand indicate there is
no clear existing body of theory to clarify the factors contributing to the pattern in
responses to exposure drafts in the last twenty years. The historic longitudinal data
from New Zealand exposure drafts exhibited a pattern which could be described as
consistently low with two major fluctuations. An alternative approach (expectancy
theory) is explored. It is proposed that the response level in New Zealand was
generally low over time because there is not a sufficient belief by stakeholders that the
Board will change the resulting standard sufficiently to ensure making a submission is
cost-benefit
efficient. It is suggested that the fluctuations represent periods when there
were changes in expectancy by participants of their potential influence on due
process.
