Search results

This section regularly examines Regulatory Impact Assessment (IA) at three levels: the EU, the Member States and internationally. Contributions aim to cover aspects such as the interface between IA and risk analysis, looking at methodologies as well as legal and political science-related issues. Contributions are meant to report and critically assess recent developments in the field, develop strategic thinking, and make constructive recommendations for improving performance in IA processes.

The politics and economics of regulatory impact assessment / Claire A. Dunlop and Claudio M. Radaelli -- Regulatory impact assessment in legal studies / Anne C.M. Meuwese and Stijn van Voorst -- Approaches to cost-benefit analysis / Jason A. Schwartz -- Interpretive analysis and regulatory impact assessment / James R. Palmer -- Compliance and delivery analysis / Donald Macrae -- Towards a simpler and practical approach / Scott Jacobs -- Standard cost model / Paola Coletti -- Social impact assessment / Lorna Schrefler -- Courts and regulatory impact assessment / Alberto Alemanno -- Gender and regulatory impact assessment / Francesca Gains -- Consultation / Florentin Blanc and Giuseppa Ottimofiore -- Risk analysis / Elisa Vecchione -- Environment / John Turnpenny, Duncan Russel, Andrew Jordan, Alan Bond and William R. Sheate -- Energy / Jacopo Torriti -- Agriculture / Duncan Russel -- Enterprise and competition / David Parker -- International development / Camilla Adelle -- Diffusion across OECD countries / Fabrizio De Francesco -- Cross-national diffusion in Europe / Ioannis Lianos, Mihály Fazekas and Maksim Karliuk -- European Union / Andrea Renda -- United States of America / William F. West -- Latin America / Alketa Peci -- Australia and New Zealand / Peter G.H. Carroll -- South Korea / Tae-Yun Kim and Song-June Kim -- Developing Countries / Colin Kirkpatrick -- Implementing in the laboratory: scorecards for appraising regulatory impact assessment / Oliver Fritsch and Jonathan C. Kamkhaji -- Designing performance frameworks: the case of the OECD / Christiane Arndt and Gregory Bounds -- Implementing in the classroom: teaching regulatory impact assessment / Lorenzo Allio -- Implementing regulatory impact assessment in the real world: practitioner stories from the field / John Howell

In 2007/2008, the Czech Republic has introduced governmental Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) to the central government level. This procedure has established formal rules binding to all legislative bodies. The process administration of RIA was entrusted to the Panel for a Regulatory Reform and Effective Public Administration and its permanent Committee for Quality Control of the Regulatory Impact Assessment. At the end of 2011, the RIA process has been changed and a new, independent Committee for the control of RIA proposals has been established. Based on minutes from the Committee's discussions, the presented paper analyses fundamental trends in the RIA process in the 2008–2012 period. The general statistical overview indicates that the volume of legislation reviewed under RIA gradually decreases. On the other hand, the number of proposals not recommended by the Committee for an approval decreased from 7.1 % in 2008 to 6.9 % in 2011. After introducing the new RIA rules, the number of proposals not recommended by the new Committee for an approval during the first discussion of a proposal has dramatically increased to 81 %.

Abstract
Regulatory impact assessment (RIA) is an appraisal tool to bring evidence to bear on regulatory decisions. A key property of RIA is that is corrects errors in reasoning by pushing regulators towards deliberative thinking to override intuitive judgments. However, the steps for regulatory analysis suggested by international organisations and governmental handbooks do not handle two sources of bias and barriers that are well documented in the literature on behavioural insights. First, bias enters the process via knowledge production during the analytical process of assessment. Second, bias affects knowledge utilisation when regulators "read" or utilise the results of RIA. We explore these two pathways by focusing on drivers of behaviour rather than lists of biases. The conclusions reflect on the limitations of current practice and its possible improvement, making suggestions for an RIA architecture that is fully informed by behavioural analysis.

Intro -- Title Page -- Dedication -- Copyright Page -- Foreword -- Table of Contents -- List of Figures and Tables -- List of Abbreviations -- Introduction -- A. Purpose -- B. Literature Review -- C. Method -- D. Structure -- Chapter 1. Overview of Regulatory Impact Assessment -- A. Introduction -- B. What is RIA -- I. Concept -- 1. Legislation and Regulation -- 2. Legislative Quality and Regulatory Quality -- 3. The Notion of RIA -- II. Purpose of RIA -- III. Process of RIA -- C. Evaluation criteria -- I. Constitutional Principles -- II. Three 'E's -- 1. Efficacy -- 2. Effectiveness -- 3. Efficiency -- D. Timing of Evaluation -- I. Ex-ante Evaluation -- II. Concurrent Evaluation -- III. Ex-post Evaluation -- E. Tools and Methods -- I. Cost-Benefit Analysis -- II. Standard Cost model -- III. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis -- IV. Multi-Criteria Analysis -- V. Partial Analyses -- F. Conclusion -- Chapter 2. Legislation in Germany and Korea - Organization and Procedure -- A. Introduction -- B. Organizations -- I. Germany -- 1. Overview -- 2. Bundestag -- a) Members -- b) Parliamentary Groups -- c) Committees -- 3. Bundesrat -- 4. Federal Government -- a) Federal Chancellor -- b) Federal Ministers -- II. Korea -- 1. Overview -- 2. National Assembly -- a) Members -- b) Negotiating Parties and Committees -- 3. Government -- a) President -- b) State Council -- C. Legislative Process -- I. Germany -- 1. Preparatory or Pre-Parliamentary Stage -- a) Bills by the Federal Government or the Bundesrat -- b) Bills from the Floor of the Bundestag -- 2. Legislation in the Legislative Bodies -- a) Three Readings in the Plenary -- b) The Passage of Legislation in the Bundesrat -- c) Entry into Force -- 3. Post-parliamentary Stage and Constitutional Review -- II. Korea -- 1. Preparatory or Pre-Parliamentary Stage -- a) Bills from the National Assembly.