Regulating Emerging Technologies: US and EU Export Controls Policy through the Institutional Grammar Framework

The regulatory landscape of dual-use export controls, particularly concerning emerging technologies, reveals notable variations between the United States and the European Union. This study addresses a critical analytical gap in the existing literature on export controls by employing Elinor Ostrom's Institutional Grammar Framework (IGF) to conduct a comparative analysis of these regimes, focusing on the rule typologies. While existing scholarship often discusses broad policy differences, it rarely delves into the specific institutional grammar that governs these regulations. Analyzing these rule typologies is crucial for understanding the precise mechanisms through which regulatory systems operate and diverge. Through systematic coding and analysis of relevant legislative documents, this research aims to identify and delineate the distinct institutional approaches taken by each jurisdiction. Specifically, the analysis focuses on how the US and EU define: position (identification of regulated actors), boundary (limits of regulatory jurisdiction), choice (permissible actions and exemptions), scope (classification and applicability of controlled technologies), information (disclosure and transparency requirements), aggregation (decision-making processes and stakeholder engagement), and payoff (enforcement mechanisms and sanctions). This study pays particular attention to how these rule typologies are applied to emerging technologies, seeking to understand the adaptation of existing regulatory frameworks to address novel technological challenges. By providing a detailed comparison of these institutional elements, this research contributes to a clearer understanding of the regulatory divergences between the US and EU in the domain of dual-use export control and directly fills the identified gap in granular, rule-focused analysis.