This document is the first formal deliverable from JRA4: Regulation, Governance and Standards. It was written by social scientists: an interdisciplinary legal scholar (Marsden), a political scientist (Marzouki), and two communications scholars with broad socio-political expertise (Powell and Pavan). Background material was provided by economists (Cave), computer scientists (Conti and Passarella , Salamatian), lawyers (Bygrave) and communications experts (Brown: Stockholm) . It is a contingent dynamic draft document, expressing an evolving interdisciplinary understanding between the research team members, and growing interaction with the wider regulatory and governance communities. It will evolve and deepen as the JRA progresses. The document has five parts, focussing on an overview of regulatory and governance methodologies drawn from several disciplines and multidisciplinary approaches. Following a short Introduction, the first part is a summary of regulatory literature, including co-regulation, explaining the dynamic nuanced multi - faceted approach , which is becoming more common than a static regulated/self - regulated dichotomy. It also briefly describes the nascent Internet Science contribution to wider regulatory studies, which we may expect to increase as the subject matures. Part 2 then examines Internet governance (IG), with focus on the growing role of multistakeholder processes. There is extended discussion of critical social scientific methodologies in Part 3 : focussing on examining norms, networks, code and regulation, and governance institutions. Critically, it also analyses the normative value of communication and IG, which extends critical examination far beyond the limits of graph theory. Key Frames assessed are: networks as analytic tools for the study o f communication and IG dynamics, critiques of networked governance arrangements and of Internet effects. There is then brief examination in Part 4 of governance institutions and mechanisms, which will lead into the later tasks of drawing lessons from case studies. Finally, Part 5 explains further critical perspectives, notably Foucault and critical concepts of ̳ordering‘. Note that a further detailed political scientist‘s assessment on governance is provided in Appendix 2. Task R4.2 is outlined, which will catalogue governance tools for standards. It provides tools to aid towards case study selection from standards body case studies. Then under description of Task R4.3 w e provide a strawman for a methodology template for case study authorship, and detail the three case studies selected. There follows brief introductory consideration of case study application to our final deliverables D4.4 .1 and D4.4.2 , supported by Appendix 1, which explains the D1 3.1 summary of standard s policy, and the framework put forward in Appendix 2, which explores new form of legitimacy; fragmentation, co-elaboration and re - ordering of norms; and the normative consequences of privatization and proceduralization.