|
|
| REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS |
|
One of the most important capacities of a market regulator is the ability to assess the market impacts of a regulation before it is adopted. Regulatory impact analysis (RIA) is a tool now used in most developed countries to improve understanding of the impacts of a law and other forms of regulation on business costs and opportunities. RIA also improves the transparency of decisions, and enhances consultation and participation of affected groups.
Jacobs and Associates offers unique experience with assisting governments in setting up regulatory impact analysis programs. We have assisted governments in the methods, processes, theory and practice of regulatory impact analysis, public consultation, and building skills among government officials implementing RIA. Scott Jacobs, Managing Director, and Rex Deighton-Smith, Associate, are the same team that developed the best practices for regulatory impact analysis at the OECD that continue to be used as international benchmarks in this area. Randall Lutter, Associate, was a Senior Economist for the environment and regulation in the US President's Council of Economic Advisers, where he chaired an interagency group on methods of analyzing costs and benefits of federal regulations. He has helped write the guidance to U.S. Federal agencies on how to conduct benefit-cost analysis.
We have advised most of the OECD countries in setting up their RIA programs in the past several years. Our staff has published extensively on regulatory impact analysis from comparative and national perspectives.
As Jacobs and Deighton-Smith wrote in the 1997 book, Regulatory Impact Analysis: Best Practices in OECD Countries, “RIA attempts to widen and clarify the relevant factors for decision making. It implicitly broadens the mission of regulators from highly focussed problem solving to balanced decisions that trade off problems against wider economic and distributional goals. Far from being a technocratic tool that can be simply "added on" to the decision making system by policy directive, it is a method for transforming the view of what is appropriate action, indeed, what is the proper role of the state.” (This book can be purchased from the OECD’s online bookshop at www.oecd.org).
Implementation of regulatory impact analysis is not only a technical issue of the right methodologies. Design of an appropriate RIA process that integrates regulatory and sustainable impact analyses also requires broad knowledge of government procedures and values, of policy priorities, of transparency tools, and of the consequences of regulatory choices in dynamic and global economies. Moreover, adaptation of impact analysis to the unique institutions in any country and the formidable challenges faced by domestic regulators requires familiarity with the richness of practices in various institutional settings.
Our recent RIA work includes:
|
|
- At the European Union level, Scott Jacobs served as a member of the Steering Group established by the Risk Forum of the European Policy Centre to prepare the influential report, "Regulatory Impact Analysis: Improving the Quality of EU Regulatory Activity" (EPS, Brussels, September 2001). Jacobs spoke at the EPS conference on 31 January 2002, in the European Parliament, "Better Regulation in the E uropean Union: The Role of Impact Analysis". At the conference, Jacobs said, "Europe needs RIA as part of a renewed commitment to growth through properly regulated markets that deliver prosperity and growth." His comments can be read at:
http://www.theepc.be/documents/confdetail.asp?SEC=documents&SUBSEC=
conference&SUBSUBSEC=&SUBSUBSUBSEC=&REFID=756
- Jacobs also spoke at a seminar on "Methodologies for Sustainability Impact Appraisal" in April 2002, sponsored by the Institute for European Environmental Policy, Brussels.
- Scott Jacobs presented a Private Sector Advisory Services Clinic for World Bank staff in March 2002 on "The role of regulatory impact analysis in regulatory reform: How can it be applied to developing and transition economies?" He identified five steps toward RIA in developing countries:
|
|
- A government should require a justification statement for all laws and other regulations that explains the expected benefits and costs of the actions, and the results of public consultations.
- A government should create an independent body that can review the statements for accuracy and quality.
- A government should adopt a universal benefit-cost principle, with a step by step strategy to gradually improve the quantification of regulatory impacts for the most important regulations, while making qualitative assessments more consistent and reliable.
- Application of RIA should be extended to a progressively wider range of laws and lower level rules such as ministerial decrees.
- RIA should be integrated with public consultation processes to reduce its costs and increase its quality. RIA should be made available as key inputs to participants in consultation and the results of consultation should be used as inputs for refining and developing RIA.
|
|
- In its work on regulatory reform in Senegal and Mauritania in 2002, Jacobs and Associates assessed the potential benefits of adopting a system of regulatory impact analysis and recommended that the governments "improve the market orientation of new regulations by implementing, step by step, a program of regulatory impact analysis within the ministries. The first step should be an agreement by ministers to require an expanded justification statement for all new projets de lois, decrêts, and arrêtés."
- An article by Scott Jacobs, "The role of regulatory impact analysis in improving the legal framework for private business in Serbia," appeared in the first edition of the Serbian Journal of Public Administration (Belgrade, 2002). The article explained how RIA can help Serbia improve the quality of government decisions, promote private sector development, and converge with European market standards.
- In our work on regulatory reform in China (see above), we found that "The capacity to assess market impacts is particularly important in China. In the current transition phase, when market needs are changing quickly, the risk of making bad regulatory decisions is high. In its WTO negotiations, too, China has agreed that its sanitary and phytosanitary laws will be based on science, which requires a concrete assessment of need based on empirical analysis." We recommended that the Chinese government investigate implementing a more systematic approach to regulatory impact analysis using existing scientific institutions such as the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|