Adam Thierer: Over-Regulation Stifles Environmental Progress and Innovation

Adam Thierer, a prominent innovation and technology policy analyst at the R Street Institute, recently articulated a sharp critique of current regulatory practices, arguing that their sheer volume and ambiguity are actively hindering societal and environmental goals. In a recent social media post, Thierer stated, "> Regulation obviously has a critical role in protecting people and the environment, but the sheer volume, over-specificity and sometimes ambiguity of those same regulations is now actively working against those goals! We’re unintentionally blocking the very things that would improve our environment. We’ve become a society that blocks all things, and we need to be a society that builds great things every day." This statement underscores his long-standing advocacy for "permissionless innovation."

Thierer, formerly a Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, champions the concept of "permissionless innovation," which posits that experimentation with new technologies and business models should generally be permitted by default. He contrasts this with the "precautionary principle," a regulatory approach that demands proof of no theoretical harm before an innovation is allowed to proceed. According to Thierer, this "mother, may I" approach, often seen in European-style regulation, stifles progress by creating excessive bureaucratic hurdles and compliance costs.

His argument extends to the environmental sector, where he suggests that well-intentioned regulations, when overly prescriptive or vague, can inadvertently impede the very innovations needed to address environmental challenges. This perspective highlights a growing concern among some policy experts that regulatory burdens can deter investment and development in new solutions, leading to stagnation rather than progress. Thierer's work frequently examines how "evasive entrepreneurs"—innovators who challenge existing norms—are crucial for driving advancement.

The analyst's views align with broader discussions on the economic impact of regulatory frameworks. Critics of extensive regulation often point to increased compliance costs, particularly for smaller entities, and a chilling effect on research and development as significant drawbacks. Thierer advocates for a shift towards a "proactionary principle," which emphasizes protecting the freedom to innovate while intelligently planning for potential collateral effects, rather than preemptively blocking advancements based on hypothetical risks. He argues that learning from trial-and-error is essential for progress, and excessive regulation prevents this vital process.