Abstract The concept of regulation is believed to suffer from a lack of shared understanding. Yet the maturation of the field raises the question whether this conclusion is still valid. By taking a new methodological approach toward this question of conceptual consolidation, this study assesses how regulation is conceived in the most cited articles in six social science disciplines. Four main conclusions are drawn. First, there is a remarkable absence of explicit definitions. Second, the scope of the concept is vast, which requires us to talk about regulation in rather abstract terms. Third, scholars largely agree that “prototype regulation” is characterized by interventions that are intentional and direct – involving binding standard‐setting, monitoring, and sanctioning – and exercised by public‐sector actors on the economic activities of private‐sector actors. Fourth, while there is considerable variation in research concerns, this variation cannot be attributed to disciplinary differences. Instead, our findings support the portrayal of the field as interdisciplinary, including a shared conception of regulation.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 259 citations exist upstream.