IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00570501.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing Regulatory Oversight Bodies across the Atlantic: The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the US and the Impact Assessment Board in the EU

Author

Listed:
  • Alberto Alemanno

    (GREGH - Groupement de Recherche et d'Etudes en Gestion à HEC - HEC Paris - Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • J.B Wiener

Abstract

'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?' asked the Roman poet Juvenal - 'who will watch the watchers, who will guard the guardians?' As legislative and regulatory processes around the globe progressively put greater emphasis on impact assessment and accountability, we ask: who oversees the regulators? Although regulation can often be necessary and beneficial, it can also impose its own costs. As a result, many governments have embraced, or are considering embracing, regulatory oversight - frequently relying on economic analysis as a tool of evaluation. We are especially interested in the emergence over the last four decades of a new set of institutional actors, the Regulatory Oversight Bodies (ROBs). These bodies tend to be located in the executive (or sometimes the legislative) branch of government. They review the flow of new regulations using impact assessment and benefit-cost analysis, and they sometimes also appraise existing regulations to measure and reduce regulatory burdens. Through these procedures of regulatory review, ROBs have become an integral aspect not only of regulatory reform programs in many countries, but also of their respective administrative systems. Although most academic attention focuses on the analytical tools used to improve the quality of legislation, such as regulatory impact assessment (RIA) or benefit-cost analysis, this chapter instead identifies the key concepts and issues surrounding the establishment and operation of ROBs across governance systems. It does so by examining and comparing the oversight mechanisms that have been established in the United States and in the EU and by critically looking into their origins, rationales, mandates, institutional designs and scope of oversight.

Suggested Citation

  • Alberto Alemanno & J.B Wiener, 2010. "Comparing Regulatory Oversight Bodies across the Atlantic: The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the US and the Impact Assessment Board in the EU," Post-Print hal-00570501, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00570501
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) & Philippine APEC Study Center Network (PASCN), 2015. "Building Inclusive Economies, Building a Better World: A Look at the APEC 2015 Priority Areas (Volume 1)," Discussion Papers PIDS Book 2015-01, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    2. Oliver Fritsch & Claudio M. Radaelli & Lorna Schrefler & Andrea Renda, 2013. "Comparing the content of regulatory impact assessments in the UK and the EU," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(6), pages 445-452, November.
    3. Stuart Shapiro & John F. Morrall III, 2012. "The triumph of regulatory politics: Benefit–cost analysis and political salience," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(2), pages 189-206, June.
    4. Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS), 2015. "Economic Policy Monitor 2014: Effective Regulations for Sustainable Growth," Discussion Papers PIDS EPM 2014, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    5. Roman Senninger & Jens Blom‐Hansen, 2021. "Meet the critics: Analyzing the EU Commission's Regulatory Scrutiny Board through quantitative text analysis," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1436-1453, October.

    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:hal:journl:hal-00570501. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.