IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cdh/commen/507.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory Reform in Ontario: Machine Learning and Regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Anthony Niblett

    (University of Toronto)

Abstract

Government regulation of individual and business activity is part and parcel of modern society. But many businesses face difficulties in understanding and navigating the legal hurdles, rules, and uncertainty that come with modern regulation. Many governments in Canada have taken steps to reduce this burden by streamlining regulation and cutting unnecessary red tape. In this Commentary, I explore how regulators can continue this trend toward more efficient and effective regulation: by embracing data analytics and machine-learning tools. Big data, analytics and machine learning offer new and difficult challenges for regulators who oversee how many businesses make decisions. But regulators can also benefit from effective use of data science. Some of these benefits can be realized almost immediately by using data that the regulators already have. First, regulators can better predict who should and should not be investigated. A regulator needs to make choices about how to allocate and prioritize scarce resources. With the right data and appropriate data analytics, predictions can be made about where to best place investigation resources. Second, regulators must make choices over which cases to prosecute. Regulators should not waste resources litigating cases they are likely to lose. Instead, regulators should put resources only toward cases that they are likely to win. Regulators can turn to the data and use machine learning to predict how a court would resolve a particular problem. Moving further into the future, big data and machine learning will change the way that laws and regulations will be consumed and produced. Lawmakers will have greater ability to provide relevant information before the individual or business acts, rather than waiting to adjudicate after they have acted. Businesses will seek prior authorization for many more regulated actions. Furthermore, the time and cost for regulators to respond to the queries will fall drastically. Instead of relying primarily on vague guidelines, regulators will be able to offer more expedient and personalized responses. There are enormous benefits to regulators making decisions before individuals and business act. Advance rulings, given before investments are made, provide certain outcomes and reduce the likelihood of wasted investments. There are, of course, a number of potential barriers and issues that may arise. These include: the quality of the data, accountability and due process, the need for transparency, privacy and the reluctance to share data, the benefits of uncertainty, and the stability of social views and goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Anthony Niblett, 2018. "Regulatory Reform in Ontario: Machine Learning and Regulation," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 507, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:507
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/attachments/research_papers/mixed/March%2027%20Commentary_507.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aaron Chalfin & Oren Danieli & Andrew Hillis & Zubin Jelveh & Michael Luca & Jens Ludwig & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2016. "Productivity and Selection of Human Capital with Machine Learning," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 124-127, May.
    2. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2017. "The State of Applied Econometrics: Causality and Policy Evaluation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 3-32, Spring.
    3. Sendhil Mullainathan & Jann Spiess, 2017. "Machine Learning: An Applied Econometric Approach," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 87-106, Spring.
    4. Daniel Martin Katz & Michael J Bommarito II & Josh Blackman, 2017. "A general approach for predicting the behavior of the Supreme Court of the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-18, April.
    5. Jon Kleinberg & Himabindu Lakkaraju & Jure Leskovec & Jens Ludwig & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2018. "Human Decisions and Machine Predictions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(1), pages 237-293.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pedro Henrique Melo Albuquerque & Yaohao Peng & João Pedro Fontoura da Silva, 2022. "Making the whole greater than the sum of its parts: A literature review of ensemble methods for financial time series forecasting," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(8), pages 1701-1724, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. de Blasio, Guido & D'Ignazio, Alessio & Letta, Marco, 2022. "Gotham city. Predicting ‘corrupted’ municipalities with machine learning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    2. Monica Andini & Emanuele Ciani & Guido de Blasio & Alessio D'Ignazio & Viola Salvestrini, 2017. "Targeting policy-compliers with machine learning: an application to a tax rebate programme in Italy," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1158, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    3. Andini, Monica & Ciani, Emanuele & de Blasio, Guido & D'Ignazio, Alessio & Salvestrini, Viola, 2018. "Targeting with machine learning: An application to a tax rebate program in Italy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 86-102.
    4. Guido de Blasio & Alessio D'Ignazio & Marco Letta, 2020. "Predicting Corruption Crimes with Machine Learning. A Study for the Italian Municipalities," Working Papers 16/20, Sapienza University of Rome, DISS.
    5. Isil Erel & Léa H Stern & Chenhao Tan & Michael S Weisbach, 2021. "Selecting Directors Using Machine Learning," NBER Chapters, in: Big Data: Long-Term Implications for Financial Markets and Firms, pages 3226-3264, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Anja Garbely & Elias Steiner, 2023. "Understanding compliance with voluntary sustainability standards: a machine learning approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(10), pages 11209-11239, October.
    7. McKenzie, David & Sansone, Dario, 2017. "Man vs. Machine in Predicting Successful Entrepreneurs: Evidence from a Business Plan Competition in Nigeria," CEPR Discussion Papers 12523, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Yusuke Narita & Kohei Yata, 2021. "Algorithm is Experiment: Machine Learning, Market Design, and Policy Eligibility Rules," Working Papers 2021-022, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    9. Ballestar, María Teresa & Doncel, Luis Miguel & Sainz, Jorge & Ortigosa-Blanch, Arturo, 2019. "A novel machine learning approach for evaluation of public policies: An application in relation to the performance of university researchers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    10. Andini, Monica & Boldrini, Michela & Ciani, Emanuele & de Blasio, Guido & D'Ignazio, Alessio & Paladini, Andrea, 2022. "Machine learning in the service of policy targeting: The case of public credit guarantees," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 434-475.
    11. Ajay Agrawal & Joshua S. Gans & Avi Goldfarb, 2019. "Artificial Intelligence: The Ambiguous Labor Market Impact of Automating Prediction," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(2), pages 31-50, Spring.
    12. McKenzie, David & Sansone, Dario, 2019. "Predicting entrepreneurial success is hard: Evidence from a business plan competition in Nigeria," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    13. Liyang Tang, 2020. "Application of Nonlinear Autoregressive with Exogenous Input (NARX) neural network in macroeconomic forecasting, national goal setting and global competitiveness assessment," Papers 2005.08735, arXiv.org.
    14. Andreas Fuster & Paul Goldsmith‐Pinkham & Tarun Ramadorai & Ansgar Walther, 2022. "Predictably Unequal? The Effects of Machine Learning on Credit Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(1), pages 5-47, February.
    15. Andres, Antonio Rodriguez & Otero, Abraham & Amavilah, Voxi Heinrich, 2021. "Using Deep Learning Neural Networks to Predict the Knowledge Economy Index for Developing and Emerging Economies," MPRA Paper 109137, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Bauer, Kevin & Pfeuffer, Nicolas & Abdel-Karim, Benjamin M. & Hinz, Oliver & Kosfeld, Michael, 2020. "The terminator of social welfare? The economic consequences of algorithmic discrimination," SAFE Working Paper Series 287, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    17. Khudri, Md Mohsan & Hussey, Andrew, 2024. "Breastfeeding and Child Development Outcomes across Early Childhood and Adolescence: Doubly Robust Estimation with Machine Learning," IZA Discussion Papers 17080, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Jermain C. Kaminski & Christian Hopp, 2020. "Predicting outcomes in crowdfunding campaigns with textual, visual, and linguistic signals," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 627-649, October.
    19. Sophie-Charlotte Klose & Johannes Lederer, 2020. "A Pipeline for Variable Selection and False Discovery Rate Control With an Application in Labor Economics," Papers 2006.12296, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2020.
    20. Yucheng Yang & Zhong Zheng & Weinan E, 2020. "Interpretable Neural Networks for Panel Data Analysis in Economics," Papers 2010.05311, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2020.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:507. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kristine Gray (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdhowca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.