Abstract
Self-regulation exists at the firm-level, the industry-level, and the business-level of economic organization. Industry self-regulation has faced economic (“free rider”) and legal (antitrust) impediments to widespread implementation, although there exist examples of effective industry self-regulation, e.g., securities industry and the SEC, advertising and the FTC. By instituting industry codes of conduct, national trade associations have shown to be natural vehicles for self-regulation. While there has been long-standing general encouragement for establishing industry codes, adopting and enforcing conduct codes has been seriously circumscribed by restrictive Supreme Court decisions and FTC advisory opinions. One approach to clearing legal confusion is to petition the FTC to issue an industry guide on promulgating and enforcing trade association codes of conduct. Another strategy is to utilize a stakeholder approach to association ethics committee appointments that subsequently influence code creation and enforcement. Finally, a new concept of an industry code of conduct will consist of three subcodes: an economic code; an environmental code; and a socio-political code. Combined, these strategic approaches will offer new opportunities for effective nonmarket regulation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Petroleum Institute: 1990,Environmental Excellence, Brochure (Washington, D.C.).
American Society of Association Executives: 1987,1987 Policies and Procedures in Association Management (Washington, D.C.), Tables 40 & 41, p. 25.
Azcuenaga, M. L., Commissioner, FTC: 1990, ‘Deceptive Environmental Claims: How Should the Federal Trade Commission Clean Up Advertising Pollution’, speech before the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association, The Grand Hotel, Washington, D.C. (November 15), pp. 1–21.
Chemical Manufacturers Association: 1991,Responsible Care: A Public Commitment, Brochure, Summary Description — Responsible Care Program Elements, Leaflet Insert, Questions and Answers About Responsible Care, Leaflet Insert (Washington, D.C.).
FTC Advisory Opinions: 1968, July 17, Nos. 249 and 268, 1967 March 8, No. 115, 1967 May 23, No. 128, April 6, No. 119, and 1966 October 26, No. 97.
FTC v. Cement Institute: 1948, 333 U.S. 683,reh'g denied, 334 U.S. 839.
FTC Organization, Procedures and Rules of Practice: 1989, June 16, Part I-General Procedures, Subpart A-Industry Guidance, Advisory Opinions, p. I–1 (Washington, D.C.).
Garvin, D. A.: 1983, ‘Can Industry Self-Regulation Work?’,California Management Review 25(4), 37–52.
Gupta, A. K. and L. J. Lad: 1983, ‘Industry Self-Regulation: An Economic, Organizational, and Political Analysis’,Academy of Management Review 8(3), 416–425.
Maitland, I.: 1985, ‘The Limits of Business Self-Regulation’,California Management Review 27(3), 132–146.
National Directory of Trade and Professional Associations: 1991 (Columbia Books, Washington, D.C.).
National Food Processors Association: 1991, February ‘What is an FTC Guide?’, Issue Paper (Washington, D.C.).
Nigh, D. and L. Cochran: 1987, ‘Issues Management and the Multinational Enterprise’,Management International Review 27(1), 4–12.
Sugar Institute, Inc. v. United States: 1936, 297 U.S. 553, 578–579.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Thomas A. Hemphill is affiliated with the Institute of Scrap Recycling Institute, Inc., Washington, D.C. His most recent publications are found inBusiness and Society Review (Fall 1990), ‘A Solid Program for Solid Waste’ and (Summer 1991), ‘Marketer's New Motto: It's Keen to be Green.’
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hemphill, T.A. Self-regulating industry behavior: Antitrust limitations and trade association codes of conduct. J Bus Ethics 11, 915–920 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00871957
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00871957