IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prg/jnlefa/v2012y2012i3id5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory Impact Assessment in the Czech Republic

Author

Listed:
  • Leoš Vítek

Abstract

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 %.

Suggested Citation

  • Leoš Vítek, 2012. "Regulatory Impact Assessment in the Czech Republic," European Financial and Accounting Journal, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2012(3), pages 63-78.
    • Handle: RePEc:prg:jnlefa:v:2012:y:2012:i:3:id:5
    DOI: 10.18267/j.efaj.5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://efaj.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.efaj.5.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://efaj.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.efaj.5.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18267/j.efaj.5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wim Marneffe & Lode Vereeck, 2011. "The meaning of regulatory costs," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 341-356, December.
    2. Yin-Fang Zhang, 2010. "Towards Better Regulatory Governance?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(6), pages 873-891, November.
    3. Cesar Cordova-Novion & Stephane Jacobzone, 2011. "Strengthening the Institutional Setting for Regulatory Reform: The Experience from OECD Countries," OECD Working Papers on Public Governance 19, OECD Publishing.
    4. Michael Gibbons & David Parker, 2012. "Impact assessments and better regulation: the role of the UK's Regulatory Policy Committee," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 257-264, July.
    5. Stephane Jacobzone & Faye Steiner & Erika Lopez Ponton & Emmanuel Job, 2010. "Assessing the Impact of Regulatory Management Systems: Preliminary Statistical and Econometric Estimates," OECD Working Papers on Public Governance 17, OECD Publishing.
    6. Blind, Knut, 2012. "The influence of regulations on innovation: A quantitative assessment for OECD countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 391-400.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Seokbeom Kwon & Jan Youtie & Alan Porter & Nils Newman, 2024. "How does regulatory uncertainty shape the innovation process? Evidence from the case of nanomedicine," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 262-302, February.
    2. Polemis, Michael & Tselekounis, Markos, 2019. "Does deregulation drive innovation intensity? Lessons learned from the OECD telecommunications sector," MPRA Paper 92770, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Alaassar, Ahmad & Mention, Anne-Laure & Aas, Tor Helge, 2021. "Exploring a new incubation model for FinTechs: Regulatory sandboxes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    4. Elvira Uyarra & Jens Sörvik & Inger Midtkandal, 2014. "Inter-regional Collaboration in Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3). S3 Working Paper Series no 6/2014," JRC Research Reports JRC91963, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Tigor Sitorus, 2019. "Extortion Operation and Police Members Performance and Its Impact towards Public Trust," Academic Journal of Economic Studies, Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy Bucharest,"Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University Bucharest, vol. 5(4), pages 52-61, December.
    6. Focacci, Chiara Natalie & Kovac, Mitja & Spruk, Rok, 2023. "Ethnolinguistic diversity, quality of local public institutions, and firm-level innovation," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    7. Dewick, Paul & Maytorena-Sanchez, Eunice & Winch, Graham, 2019. "Regulation and regenerative eco-innovation: the case of extracted materials in the UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 38-51.
    8. Rosella Levaggi & Paolo Pertile, 2020. "Which valued‐based price when patients are heterogeneous?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(8), pages 923-935, August.
    9. d'Agostino, Giorgio & Scarlato, Margherita, 2016. "Institutions, Innovation and Economic Growth in European Countries," MPRA Paper 72427, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Michaël Distelmans & Ilse Scheerlinck, 2021. "Institutional Strategies in the Ridesharing Economy: A Content Analysis Based on Uber’s Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-25, July.
    11. Martin Lodge & Kai Wegrich, 2015. "Crowdsourcing and regulatory reviews: A new way of challenging red tape in British government?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 30-46, March.
    12. Amable, Bruno & Ledezma, Ivan & Robin, Stéphane, 2016. "Product market regulation, innovation, and productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2087-2104.
    13. Mitja Kovac & Salvini Datta & Rok Spruk, 2021. "Pharmaceutical Product Liability, Litigation Regimes, and the Propensity to Patent: An Empirical Firm-Level Investigation," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, April.
    14. Eunice Omolola Olaniyi & Marti Viirmäe, 2016. "The Economic Impact of Environmental Regulations on a Maritime Fuel Production Company," Research in Economics and Business: Central and Eastern Europe, Tallinn School of Economics and Business Administration, Tallinn University of Technology, vol. 8(2).
    15. MARSCHINSKI Robert & DE AMORES HERNANDEZ Antonio & AMOROSO Sara & BAUER Peter & CARDANI Roberta & CSEFALVAY Zoltan & GENTY Aurelien & GKOTSIS Petros & GREGORI Wildmer & GRASSANO Nicola & HERNANDEZ GUE, 2021. "EU competitiveness: recent trends, drivers, and links to economic policy: A Synthesis Report," JRC Research Reports JRC123232, Joint Research Centre.
    16. Alam, Ashraful & Uddin, Moshfique & Yazdifar, Hassan, 2019. "Institutional determinants of R&D investment: Evidence from emerging markets," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 34-44.
    17. Benjamin Bürbaumer, 2021. "The Limits of Traditional Bargaining under Deep Integration: TTIP Stumbling over Technical Barriers to Trade," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 1069-1085, September.
    18. Chunling Yu & Toru Morotomi & Qunwei Wang, 2023. "Heterogeneous Effects of Public Procurement on Environmental Innovation, Evidence from European Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-23, September.
    19. Agnes Wanjiku Wangai & Daniel Rohacs & Anita Boros, 2020. "Supporting the Sustainable Development of Railway Transport in Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-21, April.
    20. Koh, Yumi & Lee, Gea M., 2023. "R&D subsidies in permissive and restrictive environment: Evidence from Korea," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Czech Republic; Government policy; Regulation; Regulatory impact assessment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H83 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - Public Administration
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:prg:jnlefa:v:2012:y:2012:i:3:id:5. 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: Stanislav Vojir (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/uevsecz.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.