9  Regulation

The regulation indicator is defined as: the extent and quality of regulatory impact assessments and the degree of stakeholder engagement involved in them. The appropriate appraisal and evaluation of regulatory changes accompanied by sufficient stakeholder engagement is crucial to ensuring that any introductions are fully considered and fair, involving various stakeholders. This scrutiny is endorsed by many; the OECD (2012) for instance, “recognis[es] that regulations are one of the key levers by which governments act to promote economic prosperity, enhance welfare and pursue the public interest”, and that “well designed regulations can generate significant social and economic benefits which out weigh the costs of regulation, and contribute to social well-being”. The International Monetary Fund (2016) acknowledges the importance of regulatory frameworks to successful governance: “From the perspective of the IMF, countries with good governance have strong legal and regulatory frameworks in place”. Additionally, in promoting best practice, “[the] Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) is a multiple stakeholder assessment of the economic, environmental and social impact of regulations. The OECD and European Union have strongly promoted this evidence-based approach towards legislation” (Boviard & Löffler, 2003).

The regulation indicator is comprised of nine metrics, an increase of three from the 2017 Pilot. It uses the following sources:

Table 9.1: Composition of the regulation indicator
Metric Source Type Public sector proxy Data transformation Weighting within indicator Definition of the source metric (e.g. question wording)
In theme (A) Theme (B) Total (C=A*B)
Use of appraisal and evaluation
Use of impact assessments [new] SGI Expert assessment No None 20.0% 50.0% 10.0% To what extent does the government assess the potential impacts of existing and prepared legal acts (regulatory impact assessments, RIA)? [rated 1-10; mean score]
Impact assessment for primary law OECD Government assessment No None 20.0% 50.0% 10.0% OECD composite of government regulatory governance practices
Impact assessment for secondary law OECD Government assessment No None 20.0% 50.0% 10.0% OECD composite of government assessments of the use of impact assessment
Evaluation for primary law OECD Government assessment No None 20.0% 50.0% 10.0% OECD composite of government assessments of the use of impact assessment
Evaluation for secondary law OECD Government assessment No None 20.0% 50.0% 10.0% OECD composite of government assessments of the use of impact assessment
Stakeholder engagement
Stakeholder engagement for primary law OECD Government assessment No None 50.0% 25.0% 12.5% OECD composite of government assessments of the use of impact assessment
Stakeholder engagement for secondary law OECD Government assessment No None 50.0% 25.0% 12.5% OECD composite of government assessments of the use of impact assessment
Nature of impact assessment
Quality of impact assessment [new] SGI Expert assessment No None 50.0% 25.0% 12.5% Does the RIA process ensure participation, transparency and quality evaluation? [rated 1-10; mean score]
Sustainability checks [new] SGI Expert assessment No None 50.0% 25.0% 12.5% Does the government conduct effective sustainability checks within the framework of RIA? [rated 1-10; mean score]
Tables 3.7.A & 3.7.B in the original 2019 publication

9.1 Imputation of missing data

None of the 38 countries selected for the 2019 edition of InCiSE have completely missing data for the regulation metrics. As a result the imputation of missing data for the regulation metrics is based solely on the data within the indicator.

9.2 Changes from the 2017 Pilot

The regulation indicator has had three additional metrics added from the Bertelsmann Foundation’s Sustainable Governance Indicators on the use and quality of regulatory impact assessments (RIA), and whether RIAs include sustainability checks.

Cross-referencing note

This chapter was presented as section 3.7 in the original 2019 publication.