Increasing interest from stakeholders has brought new focus on risk governance and risk regulation, such as the regulator’s execution of duty and tangible results on safety and environmental protection in oil and gas industry. One recent example, from 2019, is the Office of the Auditor General Norway’s (OAG) investigation of the Petroleum Safety Authority’s (PSA) follow-up on health, safety and the environment in the petroleum industry, where the regulatory regime in Norway resting on functional requirements was questioned. Simplistically speaking, there are two current traditions or main schools in regulatory regimes: use of functional requirements associated with co-regulation and use of normative requirements associated with prescriptive regulation. In this paper, we introduce a generic model from an attribute perspective on contrasting, gauging or evaluating the two different regulatory regimes. Furthermore, this approach may explain the controversy regarding the favouring of functional or prescriptive regulatory regimes by the different players in the industry. Our case is based on regulations relating to offshore oil and gas operations, in particular focusing on the Norwegian sector. We use the OAG’s investigation of the PSA and the public reaction as our material because this material is proposed to provide a thorough and valid description of how the effects of the Norwegian regulatory regime are perceived from the outside. We believe that the generic concept presented here is applicable when performing investigations in other industries involved in hazardous activities.

中文翻译：

---

风险治理监管制度的属性视角

利益相关方关注度的提高，使风险治理和风险监管成为新的焦点，例如监管机构在油气行业安全环保方面的履职情况和实际成效。最近的一个例子是 2019 年挪威审计长办公室 (OAG) 对石油安全局 (PSA) 对石油行业健康、安全和环境的后续行动进行的调查，挪威的监管制度依赖于功能需求受到质疑。简单地说，当前监管制度有两种传统或主要流派：使用与共同监管相关的功能性要求和使用与规范性监管相关的规范性要求。在本文中，我们从属性角度引入了一个通用模型，用于对比、衡量或评估两种不同的监管制度。此外，这种方法可以解释有关行业不同参与者支持功能性或规范性监管制度的争议。我们的案例基于与海上石油和天然气运营相关的法规，特别是挪威行业。我们使用 OAG 对 PSA 的调查和公众反应作为我们的材料，因为该材料旨在提供关于外部如何看待挪威监管制度影响的全面而有效的描述。我们认为，此处提出的通用概念适用于对涉及危险活动的其他行业进行调查。