What happens when two leading research institutes (UCL CLES and ENA CERA, respectively in London and Paris), join forces to research good policy making? Excellent and very useful work, judging by the quality of the output of the Gutenberg project, headed by Drs I. Lianos and F. Larat. As announced on this blog, some 50 academics and practitioners from Europe and America gathered in Paris for "Theory and practice of RIA in Europe" on 10 June. The first session was largely devoted to a detailed presentation and discussion of the findings of the Gutenberg project, which aims to portray and analyse the development of the use of impact assessments (RIAs) throughout the European Union as a standard of good governance and, in some cases, as a legal obligation on regulators. Their research involved a large scale scrutiny of published RIAs in 18 countries (+ the EU) since 2005, supported by sound conceptual planning: the "evidence/politics nexus",six hypothetical models of RIAs, eight key features for rating RIAs, 125 indicators clustered in 5 lead indicators, etc. It has delivered a number of comparison tables which may rank with the Doing Business index for scientific backing and clear methodological basis. Their work will become a must-read for RIA practitioners.
Of the marathon of about 30 presentations which followed, highlights included, in order of appearance (with apologies to all those not mentioned):
- Andrea Renda (CEPS) examined, on the basis of a painstaking scrutiny of all EC RIAs, whether impact assessment has improved EU policymaking (answer: "mixed evidence, but tendency is promising") and gave an expert view on where smart regulation was heading;
- Jonathan Wiener (Duke) was riveting with a history of RIA forerunners since the XVIIIth century, then focused on recent challenges to making RIA a tool to improve policy making: the multiple, interconnected risks that the regulator faces requires broadening the scope of RIAs and CBA. The variety of risks also make it difficult to draw international comparisons (see his books Risk vs Risk, 1995, and The Reality of Precaution, 2011.)
- James Broughel (George Mason U.) presented the Regulatory Report Card, which actually rates "economically significally US RIAs since 2008 by reference to 12 criteria drawn from EO 12866. Results will interest Americans, while the methodology (especially the criteria) should be helpful to all European experts in search of quality RIAs;
- Michael Livermore (NYU) fascinated the audience with his account of how CBA developped in the US, with the shifting appeal to political sides, according to the use lobbies and interest groups could expect to make of the figures, and other political considerations (see also comment on Mike's work on "a new perspective on CBA" in policymaking;
- Alberto Alemanno (HEC Paris) presented some original research, new for most of the audience, into "courts as actors of RIA", with deep insights into the impact of RIAs on policymakers concern for quality and accuracy, in view of possible later repeal of legislation for insufficient evidence base, or ineffective consultation. For more on the topic, see Alberto's blog;
- Liza Bellulo, from the French Competition Authority, presented a useful guide for competition impact assessment of new legislation; English version available from the Authority;
- Elke Ballon, head of the new RIA unit of the European Parliament was sure to interest the audience with her report on the first year of the EP's RIA activities, in connection with EC work, which include screening of EC RIAs, drafting an "initial appraisal" of the Commission report - see April 2013 example - or a detailed assessment on request from an EP committee, producing an IA on substantive amendments to EC proposals. The unit's website will soon be online;
Of the marathon of about 30 presentations which followed, highlights included, in order of appearance (with apologies to all those not mentioned):
- Andrea Renda (CEPS) examined, on the basis of a painstaking scrutiny of all EC RIAs, whether impact assessment has improved EU policymaking (answer: "mixed evidence, but tendency is promising") and gave an expert view on where smart regulation was heading;
- Jonathan Wiener (Duke) was riveting with a history of RIA forerunners since the XVIIIth century, then focused on recent challenges to making RIA a tool to improve policy making: the multiple, interconnected risks that the regulator faces requires broadening the scope of RIAs and CBA. The variety of risks also make it difficult to draw international comparisons (see his books Risk vs Risk, 1995, and The Reality of Precaution, 2011.)
- James Broughel (George Mason U.) presented the Regulatory Report Card, which actually rates "economically significally US RIAs since 2008 by reference to 12 criteria drawn from EO 12866. Results will interest Americans, while the methodology (especially the criteria) should be helpful to all European experts in search of quality RIAs;
- Michael Livermore (NYU) fascinated the audience with his account of how CBA developped in the US, with the shifting appeal to political sides, according to the use lobbies and interest groups could expect to make of the figures, and other political considerations (see also comment on Mike's work on "a new perspective on CBA" in policymaking;
- Alberto Alemanno (HEC Paris) presented some original research, new for most of the audience, into "courts as actors of RIA", with deep insights into the impact of RIAs on policymakers concern for quality and accuracy, in view of possible later repeal of legislation for insufficient evidence base, or ineffective consultation. For more on the topic, see Alberto's blog;
- Liza Bellulo, from the French Competition Authority, presented a useful guide for competition impact assessment of new legislation; English version available from the Authority;
- Elke Ballon, head of the new RIA unit of the European Parliament was sure to interest the audience with her report on the first year of the EP's RIA activities, in connection with EC work, which include screening of EC RIAs, drafting an "initial appraisal" of the Commission report - see April 2013 example - or a detailed assessment on request from an EP committee, producing an IA on substantive amendments to EC proposals. The unit's website will soon be online;
- Joachim Beck (Euro-Institute) introduced a topic which was new to most attendees: "cross-border RIA cooperation" in which he showed that EU lawmakers pursuing economic integration had not sufficiently addressed the issues of cross border regions which represent 40% of the EU territory and 30% of its population;
- Finally, more classicly, the conference was given updates on current RIA and smart regulation developments in the European Commission, the UK and France (with a notable presentation, on a personal basis by an administrator of the French national assembly.)
- Finally, more classicly, the conference was given updates on current RIA and smart regulation developments in the European Commission, the UK and France (with a notable presentation, on a personal basis by an administrator of the French national assembly.)
No comments:
Post a Comment