01
Contested Rule Formation and Institutional Mismatch
A framework for early-phase governance of disruptive innovations, focusing on classification, jurisdiction, venue settlement, and procedural rule formation.
Learn more →Research Areas
02
AI and Emerging Technology Governance
Institutional readiness, accountability lag, and procedural governance for AI, autonomous systems, and digital infrastructures.
Learn more →
03
Clean Energy, Rule Location, and Constrained Polycentricity
Where governance actually lands in clean energy transitions under preemption, utility authority, and constrained polycentricity.
Learn more →
04
Civil Society, Nonprofits, and Shadow Rule-Making
How nonprofits and communities make emerging problems governable through intervention, venue activation, and rule-object production.
Learn more →
05
Collaborative Governance and Design Methods
Methods to study institutional change, attention reallocation, and design–implementation gaps in complex governance systems.
Learn more →
Methods and Evidence
I use qualitative case analysis, process tracing, documentary analysis, structured comparison, mixed methods, text-as-data, and systems modeling to make governance empirically observable through rules, venues, routines, and accountability.
01
Contested Rule Formation
CRF explains early-phase governance under institutional mismatch: the upstream period in which actors are still deciding what the policy object is, who has authority, where decisions belong, and what procedural rules can make governance durable.
Core framework
CRF is intentionally bounded. It complements established policy process theories by focusing on the constitutive phase before stable subsystems, settled venues, and durable substantive standards exist (Jangjoo, 2026).
Incipient RecognitionExploratory TacticsRule CrystallizationConsolidation / Backlash
Institutional mismatch dimensions
(Jangjoo, 2026)
RecognitionAuthorityEnforcement CapacityVenue ClarityInterpretive Frames
02
Upstream AI Governance
My AI governance work asks when AI systems, autonomous technologies, and AI infrastructures become institutionally governable—not merely technically deployable. This research focuses on institutional readiness, accountability lag, procedural templates, data-center infrastructure, and public accountability.
AI governance pillars
- Institutional readiness for public-sector AI
- Accountability lag in embodied autonomous systems
- AI infrastructure and data centers as material governance problems
- Procedural governance, documentation, review, and correction
ClassificationVenue ArchitectureProcedural TemplatesAccountabilityDefensibility
03
Clean Energy Governance
Details about Clean energy, rule location, and constrained polycentricity go here.
04
Civil Society and Nonprofits
Details about Civil Society, Nonprofits, and Shadow Rule-Making go here.
05
Collaborative Governance and Design Methods
Details about Collaborative Governance and Design Methods go here.
Methods and Evidence Approach
Expanded details on your research approach go here.