Suchergebnisse

The Swedish government, despite a possible value conflict with the ambitious Swedish climate mitigation objectives, has stated that tourism development is an important basis for economic growth, not least in rural areas. This paper explores how the Swedish policy making system, and ambitious environmental and traffic safety objectives, influence transport investment planning at the regional level. Our point of reference for evaluating the system is the work with good regulatory policy advocated by the OECD and used by the EU. The main finding is that the Swedish government and parliament lack a strategic "whole-of-government approach" to sustainable transport development. There are many principles and objectives with good intentions established at the national level that are incompatible in practice. The conflicts that follow are handed down to lower government levels to solve with best wishes. The problem with this type of management is the "tragedy of the commons." Without clear guidance, individuals (and administrations) acting independently and rationally based on self-interests are likely to behave contrary to the best interests of the whole group (society). Making choices based on a more holistic assessment of impacts and benefits and costs could help to prevent this kind of outcome. However, from the data collected it appears that many investments are undertaken without being assessed due to the lack of government instructions on regulatory impact assessment. Other investments are undertaken despite having a negative net benefit. One reason for this is specific instructions given by the government that points to certain investments. Another reason seems to be the Vision Zero policy established by the parliament. In recent years this policy has been a strong driver of improvements of the road system. Seen from an environmental perspective, the unwanted consequence of the priorities made is that state roads become faster and safer and thereby a more attractive alternative to other travel modes. Seen from a regional development and tourism perspective, this may have diverted resources away from investments that would have yielded a greater benefit to the tourism industry in "rural" areas. ; TURSAM

The Swedish government, despite a possible value conflict with the ambitious Swedish climate mitigation objectives, has stated that tourism development is an important basis for economic growth, not least in rural areas. This paper explores how the Swedish policy making system, and ambitious environmental and traffic safety objectives, influence transport investment planning at the regional level. Our point of reference for evaluating the system is the work with good regulatory policy advocated by the OECD and used by the EU. The main finding is that the Swedish government and parliament lack a strategic "whole-of-government approach" to sustainable transport development. There are many principles and objectives with good intentions established at the national level that are incompatible in practice. The conflicts that follow are handed down to lower government levels to solve with best wishes. The problem with this type of management is the "tragedy of the commons." Without clear guidance, individuals (and administrations) acting independently and rationally based on self-interests are likely to behave contrary to the best interests of the whole group (society). Making choices based on a more holistic assessment of impacts and benefits and costs could help to prevent this kind of outcome. However, from the data collected it appears that many investments are undertaken without being assessed due to the lack of government instructions on regulatory impact assessment. Other investments are undertaken despite having a negative net benefit. One reason for this is specific instructions given by the government that points to certain investments. Another reason seems to be the Vision Zero policy established by the parliament. In recent years this policy has been a strong driver of improvements of the road system. Seen from an environmental perspective, the unwanted consequence of the priorities made is that state roads become faster and safer and thereby a more attractive alternative to other travel modes. Seen from a regional development and tourism perspective, this may have diverted resources away from investments that would have yielded a greater benefit to the tourism industry in "rural" areas. ; TURSAM

International organisations, such as the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Union (EU), are seeking to implement a cohesive Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) system in order to achieve better regulation and increased unity and transparency. Central to these evaluations is the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and related tools. A comprehensive analysis of the use of impact assessment in the EU shows that many assessments lack important economic components. This paper draws on an extensive document study of the Swedish policy making process related to the EU Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. The aim of the paper is to examine how CBA is presented, negotiated and accounted for by central actors within a policy setting influenced by negotiation and policy coordination. The paper departs from a theoretical perspective on policy coordination and shows how this factor must be considered when explaining the low use of CBA. It concludes that the Swedish policy tradition, wherein the national government relies on consensus-based coordination between agencies, might counteract a more explicit assessment of different policy options. The paper also proposes a model that can be used for further studies on CBA and policy coordination.

International organisations, such as the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Union (EU), are seeking to implement a cohesive Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) system in order to achieve better regulation and increased unity and transparency. Central to these evaluations is the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and related tools. A comprehensive analysis of the use of impact assessment in the EU shows that many assessments lack important economic components. This paper draws on an extensive document study of the Swedish policy making process related to the EU Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. The aim of the paper is to examine how CBA is presented, negotiated and accounted for by central actors within a policy setting influenced by negotiation and policy coordination. The paper departs from a theoretical perspective on policy coordination and shows how this factor must be considered when explaining the low use of CBA. It concludes that the Swedish policy tradition, wherein the national government relies on consensus-based coordination between agencies, might counteract a more explicit assessment of different policy options. The paper also proposes a model that can be used for further studies on CBA and policy coordination.

International organisations, such as the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Union (EU), are seeking to implement a cohesive Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) system in order to achieve better regulation and increased unity and transparency. Central to these evaluations is the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and related tools. A comprehensive analysis of the use of impact assessment in the EU shows that many assessments lack important economic components. This paper draws on an extensive document study of the Swedish policy making process related to the EU Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. The aim of the paper is to examine how CBA is presented, negotiated and accounted for by central actors within a policy setting influenced by negotiation and policy coordination. The paper departs from a theoretical perspective on policy coordination and shows how this factor must be considered when explaining the low use of CBA. It concludes that the Swedish policy tradition, wherein the national government relies on consensus-based coordination between agencies, might counteract a more explicit assessment of different policy options. The paper also proposes a model that can be used for further studies on CBA and policy coordination. ; Funding Agencies|Swedish Energy Agency [39945-1]

By performing RIA, the risk of imposing a proposal that is inefficient or leads to sub-optimization is reduced. In the EU this approach to regulatory policy making was introduced in 2002 and it is a crucial component of the Better Regulation Agenda. However the practical implementation of this approach in Member States is varied; Sweden has not implemented the full RIA process. Currently there is a focus on the reduction of administrative burdens for businesses. This paper describes the present use of RIA and CBA in the Swedish planning context and discusses the reasons for and the consequences of current practices. Using the Swedish transport regulator as a case study, the paper considers the following aspects; i) the Swedish planning context and existing requirements regarding the use of RIA, ii) current focus of research regarding CBA for infrastructure investments in the Swedish transport sector and the need for greater focus on issues concerning regulation, iii) the difficulty to quantify and place monetary values on effects, which also increases when unique, complex and uncertain situations are assessed and iv) the need for the alignment of incentives at all levels and across agencies. ; Draft Discussion Paper prepared for the Roundtable on Assessing regulatory changes in the transport sector (6-7 October 2016, Stockholm)

By performing RIA, the risk of imposing a proposal that is inefficient or leads to sub-optimization is reduced. In the EU this approach to regulatory policy making was introduced in 2002 and it is a crucial component of the Better Regulation Agenda. However the practical implementation of this approach in Member States is varied; Sweden has not implemented the full RIA process. Currently there is a focus on the reduction of administrative burdens for businesses. This paper describes the present use of RIA and CBA in the Swedish planning context and discusses the reasons for and the consequences of current practices. Using the Swedish transport regulator as a case study, the paper considers the following aspects; i) the Swedish planning context and existing requirements regarding the use of RIA, ii) current focus of research regarding CBA for infrastructure investments in the Swedish transport sector and the need for greater focus on issues concerning regulation, iii) the difficulty to quantify and place monetary values on effects, which also increases when unique, complex and uncertain situations are assessed and iv) the need for the alignment of incentives at all levels and across agencies. ; Draft Discussion Paper prepared for the Roundtable on Assessing regulatory changes in the transport sector(6-7 October 2016, Stockholm)

Abstract
We explore the changes in central government administration due to European Union (EU) membership and its consequences for policy outcomes and economic efficiency in Finland and Sweden. Both countries became members of the EU in 1995. Upon joining the union, member states are expected to adopt common legislation and are encouraged to develop similar rule-making procedures. The actual implementation of EU directives varies considerably between member states, however. This is also the case for Finland and Sweden. Despite the two Nordic countries for historical reasons having had similar government systems, upon becoming members of the EU, they started to diverge. Using a model of delegation and comparing the more centralized Finnish system with the decentralized institutional setup in Sweden, we show that the Swedish approach leads to a stricter than optimal environmental policy, which in turn makes EU policy non-optimal from a global point of view, ceteris paribus. We also provide empirical support for our findings in the form of some example cases. We focus on environmental policy since this is an area that has been high on the EU agenda.

lean air is one of 16 Environmental Objectives adopted by the Swedish parliament to guide action towards a sustainable environment. This project is part of the work undertaken by the Swedish Environment Protection Agency (Swedish EPA) to bring about the fulfilment of this goal. Much research has been undertaken regarding air pollution and health impacts in the adult population but much less is known about how pollutants influence children's health. The overriding purpose of this study has therefore been to see how and to what extent the economic benefit from reducing these impacts can be calculated. To answer this question we provide a brief introduction on the method commonly used to do these kinds of benefit calculations. Two crucial inputs into these calculations are estimates of the health impacts and estimates of the economic values for the health impacts. We therefore start by providing a summary of the current stateof-art regarding these inputs which is based on a survey of the literature in each area. We then perform two case studies that describe how these economic benefits can be calculated and what influences the results. The calculation is based on the findings in the literature reviews and we also describe the exposure assessment that is another crucial input into these calculations. The report ends with suggestions for future research. Regarding air pollution and health impacts, the finding is that air pollution exposure has been associated with a number of health outcomes in children, many of these partly overlapping and related to respiratory effects. Both long-term exposure and short-term fluctuations have been correlated with adverse effects. However, the involved exposure variables are often not source specific, but may in some cases act as acceptable indicators of traffic related air pollution. Only for a limited number of health effects we have found exposure-response functions that may be used to quantify health effects in children. Most of these have been described also in a previous report (Naturvårdsverket, 2010). New for this report is an estimated exposure-response function for the development of air-way disease in the 5-18 age group. For the short-term effects such as hospital admissions, it is possible to calculate baseline frequencies needed for the impact assessments from register data. It is more complicated to estimate the baseline in terms of prevalence (occurrence of disease) or onset of disease, but some types of impacts can be estimated using combinations of data and assumptions. On the relationship between traffic pollution and restricted activity days (for example school absences), effects on pregnancy outcome and in infancy as well as effects of early exposure later in life there is limited information. As for the economic valuation of health impacts, the conclusion in the literature is that the valuation of children's health risks is more challenging than that of adults. There are several reasons for this where children not being able to assess and value risk reductions by themselves is the most important one. There is however also the difference in age between children and adults which is likely to make a difference for the values. As in the case of the quantification of health impacts, little research has been done on the valuation of children's health risks. Therefore, so far mainly proxies have been used such as willingness to pay estimates derived from parents' choices and behaviour. The general conclusion is that economic values used for adults in general underestimate the benefits to children and that as high as two times these estimates can be relevant. Since almost no economic valuation studies of this kind have been undertaken in Sweden the estimates we propose are those used in other, mainly European, studies. Based on the findings in the literature surveys we have, as an example, calculated the benefit of a reduction in children's exposure of 1 µg/m³ of NO2 in Stockholm and Umeå. The difference between the cities that we could account for was the number of children that are exposed. The calculation was done for two endpoints; that children having wheeze develop asthma and that asthmatic children are admitted to hospital due to respiratory symptoms. According to our calculations this reduction in exposure in Greater Stockholm would generate a benefit to society of 168 million SEK per year because of fewer cases of asthma, and 47 000 SEK due to fewer hospital admissions (for the price levels in 2000). For Umeå the benefits are smaller, 8 million SEK and 2000 SEK per year. These benefit estimates however are based on a quite large reduction in air pollution. 1 µg/m³ NO2 is approximately the reduction in population exposure that resulted in the inner city of Stockholm from the trial with congestion charges where traffic in this area decreased by 15%. To achieve the same reduction in Greater Stockholm or Umeå would require measures that result in quite important emission reductions from transport. To determine if such measures are beneficial from a socioeconomic point of view would require a comparison of benefits and costs on the local scale of the chosen measures. In general it is found in the literature that the benefits are larger when emissions are reduced in densely populated areas. We also discuss how different assumptions influence the results and the uncertainties related to these types of calculations. There are uncertainties in every part of the calculation chain; exposure, impact assessment and economic valuation. One way to account for these uncertainties is by doing a sensitivity analysis where alternative assumptions are used for important inputs. In our calculations an influential assumption is for example the probability that children with wheeze develop asthma later in life. The largest uncertainty however is probably the cause and effect of single pollutants. In this study NO2 is used since it is a good indicator of emissions from traffic but if this is the true cause of the effects is still a matter of research and discussion. This is the first attempt to calculate the benefits for children in Sweden of reducing air pollution. Due to lack of data we have only been able to give an indication of the size of the benefits and only for endpoints related to respiratory diseases. Therefore, further research is needed in order to determine the accuracy of these estimates, the size of the benefit for other endpoints and all children in Sweden and how the benefits vary between different geographical areas. However we consider such research to be warranted since our estimates suggests that reducing children's exposure to air pollution result in important economic benefits and there is a need for policy makers to know if and when this is the case.

Many countries have begun to require benefit-cost analysis as a way of informing key regulatory decisions. However, its actual use seem to be limited, especially in the area of environmental, health, and safety regulation. Reasons for this seem to be lack of knowledge and experience among decision makers and that established quality objectives prevent the use of this type of analysis and deliberation. We present the results from an experiment designed to investigate choice behavior in a public sector context. Students with different academic majors were asked to act as decision makers. There were two choice situations: one in a municipality deciding on an action plan and one in a government agency having to propose a national limit value. In both settings, the outcome that would pass a benefit-cost test would not achieve a natural state of the environment, hence a social dilemma choice situation. We find that a majority of the respondents prefer outcomes that can be considered environmental "optimum" but that there is a difference depending on academic major. The choice context also influences the response behavior and so does the information about an international standard. The latter increases the likelihood to accept alternatives that imply higher costs.

Many countries have begun to require benefit-cost analysis as a way of informing key regulatory decisions. However, its actual use seem to be limited, especially in the area of environmental, health, and safety regulation. Reasons for this seem to be lack of knowledge and experience among decision makers and that established quality objectives prevent the use of this type of analysis and deliberation. We present the results from an experiment designed to investigate choice behavior in a public sector context. Students with different academic majors were asked to act as decision makers. There were two choice situations: one in a municipality deciding on an action plan and one in a government agency having to propose a national limit value. In both settings, the outcome that would pass a benefit-cost test would not achieve a natural state of the environment, hence a social dilemma choice situation. We find that a majority of the respondents prefer outcomes that can be considered environmental "optimum" but that there is a difference depending on academic major. The choice context also influences the response behavior and so does the information about an international standard. The latter increases the likelihood to accept alternatives that imply higher costs.

Civil servants in governmental agencies regularly both propose environmental policies for the elected politicians and make own decisions. In making these decisions they may be influenced by legal norms, agency policy and culture, professional norms acquired through education as well as personal political preferences. This study tests how students in late stages of professional training in economics, biology and social sciences handle information in order to make a stylized choice of a national nutrient limit for lake water, or choose a program at a municipal level to lower the nutrient level in a local lake. The purpose is to test whether professional norms acquired during academic education and/or the presence of an international standard influences decision-making. We examine three hypotheses. Firstly, students' political attitudes affect their choice of major, i.e. biology, economics or social sciences, and thereby indirectly their decisions. We find that the distribution of the political values among disciplines is compatible with the hypothesis, which therefore is not rejected. Secondly, a student's major influences the kind of information they use and consequently the policy choice they will recommend. In plain words we expected biology students to go for environmentally more ambitious (lower) nutrient limits and economics students to prefer economically efficient (higher) levels. The central result is that while economics majors are more likely than biology or social science majors to choose a cost-efficient nutrient limit, the mean and median values of the nutrient levels chosen by the three groups do not differ from one another in a statistically significant way. Economists thus have a higher standard deviation in their answers than the other majors. The third hypothesis is that the presence of an internationally approved standard level for the nutrient content will significantly influence the choice of national nutrient limit. We find that biology students are influenced to set a lower nutrient limit when presented with the standard than otherwise, thereby rejecting the null hypothesis for this group. For students in economics and social sciences, no significant effect is found. Our results have implications for the feasibility of micromanagement in government agencies as recruiting economists to environmental agencies may not be sufficient to ensure economically efficient decisions. The findings also should sound a warning about the skills learned by economics majors at the two largest universities in Sweden: while some students seem familiar with the concepts of optimality and cost efficiency and able to use them, this applies to far from all of them.

Civil servants in governmental agencies regularly both propose environmental policies for the elected politicians and make own decisions. In making these decisions they may be influenced by legal norms, agency policy and culture, professional norms acquired through education as well as personal political preferences. This study tests how students in late stages of professional training in economics, biology and social sciences handle information in order to make a stylized choice of a national nutrient limit for lake water, or choose a program at a municipal level to lower the nutrient level in a local lake. The purpose is to test whether professional norms acquired during academic education and/or the presence of an international standard influences decision-making. We examine three hypotheses. Firstly, students' political attitudes affect their choice of major, i.e. biology, economics or social sciences, and thereby indirectly their decisions. We find that the distribution of the political values among disciplines is compatible with the hypothesis, which therefore is not rejected. Secondly, a student's major influences the kind of information they use and consequently the policy choice they will recommend. In plain words we expected biology students to go for environmentally more ambitious (lower) nutrient limits and economics students to prefer economically efficient (higher) levels. The central result is that while economics majors are more likely than biology or social science majors to choose a cost-efficient nutrient limit, the mean and median values of the nutrient levels chosen by the three groups do not differ from one another in a statistically significant way. Economists thus have a higher standard deviation in their answers than the other majors. The third hypothesis is that the presence of an internationally approved standard level for the nutrient content will significantly influence the choice of national nutrient limit. We find that biology students are influenced to set a lower nutrient limit when presented with the standard than otherwise, thereby rejecting the null hypothesis for this group. For students in economics and social sciences, no significant effect is found. Our results have implications for the feasibility of micromanagement in government agencies as recruiting economists to environmental agencies may not be sufficient to ensure economically efficient decisions. The findings also should sound a warning about the skills learned by economics majors at the two largest universities in Sweden: while some students seem familiar with the concepts of optimality and cost efficiency and able to use them, this applies to far from all of them.

A commonly assumed reason for the delegation of authority from a legislature (politicians) to bureaucracies is that the bureaucrats have an information advantage over the politicians, including knowledge of cost–benefit analysis (CBA). But it is reasonable to assume that the bureaucrats use their information advantage by taking all relevant aspects of policy into account? We model the use of CBA using a delegation model and then test the theoretical predictions with empirical data collected from five Swedish government agencies. The empirical results lend support both for the hypothesis that risk aversion concerning the environmental outcome, the bureaucrats' environmental attitudes, and the cost of taking CBA information into account have a considerable impact on the probability of using information from a CBA. Hence risk averse and bureaucrats with strong environmental preferences are less likely and bureaucrats with low cost of doing a CBA more likely than other bureaucrats to use CBA information. Finally, a binding governmental budget constraint may positively influence a bureaucrat's choice of using CBA information. A tentative conclusion is therefore that it may be possible to increase the use of CBA by making the budgetary consequences of policies much clearer and demanding due consideration of costs.