Mixed-methods study reveals strong firm gains but limited national policy adoption in regulatory sandboxes, highlighting institutional barriers to scaling local deregulation.
As urban regions become testbeds for technological innovation, regulatory sandboxes have emerged as critical place-based policy instruments. This study evaluates Korea’s Regulation-Free Special Zones (RFSZs), introduced under a statute that entered into force in April 2019, with the first zones designated in July 2019, to accelerate innovation in non-metropolitan cities through spatially targeted deregulation. We ask why successful firm-level demonstrations within these zones do not consistently translate into meso-level institutional change, defined here as the conversion of local demonstrations into durable regulatory amendments and nationally usable policy templates. We employ a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design. Phase 1 uses Propensity Score Matching with two-way fixed-effects estimation on a 2017–2023 panel of 220 RFSZ firms and 440 matched controls. Phase 2 applies Actor-Centred Institutionalisation to 23 semi-structured interviews with central regulators, local administrators, and firm representatives. Participation is associated with approximately 24.5% higher sales and 58% more patent applications per year in the zone, though we interpret these patterns cautiously given staggered timing and possible selection on unobservables. Qualitative analysis reveals a meso-level translation gap: administrative records indicate that only about 15% of demonstration projects had resulted in permanent national regulatory changes by 2023, with average institutionalisation lags exceeding two years. Three recurring barriers emerge: scale mismatch between local promoters and risk-averse central ministries; institutional fragmentation across parallel regulatory mechanisms and sandbox frameworks operated by six separate ministries; and absent bridging mechanisms. We frame these findings using an integrative Evidence–Institutionalisation–Diffusion sequence, concluding that in multi-level, multi-ministry sandbox systems, deliberate institutional design – not spatial designation alone – determines whether localised evidence travels beyond the zone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
HaeOk Choi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: