RIA in Practice: The International Narrative Dr.

Systematic, structured, evidence-based, consultative analysis of the prospective impacts of a proposed policy measure against possible alternatives (ex-ante)
“..RIA’s most important contribution to the quality of decisions is not the precision of the calculations used, but the action of analyzing – questioning, understanding real-world impacts and exploring assumptions..” (OECD, 2002)
NOT an end in itself; process matters (demonstration effects)





Insert text
Insert text Insert text
Insert text RIA: “what” and “why”<br>

Sub-set of regulatory policy: effectiveness, transparency/accountability, proportionality, consistency, legitimacy – facilitating better governance structures and processes

Two inter-linked elements: RIA process and RIA document RIA: “what” and “why”<br>

RIA: “what” and “why”<br>

RIA: policy context<br>

RIA: policy context<br>

RIA: incidence OECD (formal)<br>

Africa: e.g. Botswana, Egypt, Ghana, Nigeria, Tanzania (pilot projects to implement RIA); Uganda (RIA training, 2000-2003); Kenya (RIA proposals, 2007); South Africa (approved by Cabinet,2007/RIA Guidelines available from 2012)

Latin America: e.g. Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Costa Rica, Ecuador (trying to introduce a more systematic use of RIA) RIA: emerging/developing economies<br>

Europe & Central Asia: e.g. Bulgaria (think-tank initiative IME (1998-2002); Moldova (2008); Montenegro (RIA manual, 2011); Serbia (2004); Ukraine (2004); Uzbekistan (adoption of government decree on RIA, 2014)
Asia: e.g. Cambodia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Mongolia, Philippines, Vietnam (piloting RIA); Indonesia (via ADB project in Min of Trade,2002 & TAF training for LG)

SOUTH ASIA? RIA: emerging/developing economies<br>

Developing countries: empirical evidence sparse, patchy
Why?
-Other regulatory policy options for regulatory review?
-Done but not documented (or informal)?
-Done but not sustainably embedded (e.g. add-on to satisfy donor conditionality/not in sync with policy cycle, etc. )?

GAP in research RIA: unpacking the international narrative<br>

Knowledge gaps on RIA/alternatives to regulatory review in emerging/developing economies (based on review of existing literature)
Important research questions digging deeper into what has/has not worked and why (political-economy and socio-cultural context); extent/limits of policy transfer/reinventing the wheel; specific stakeholder-level impact of regulatory review; positive & normative usefulness of RIA, etc.
Case for meaningful in-depth research program: recall CUTS 7-Up Project on competition policy and law (empirical research, wide stakeholder consultation process, policy buy-in) RIA: unpacking the international narrative<br>

Expected outcome (assumption): RIA driver of regulatory quality/better regulatory structures & processes for society as a whole
These findings need to be tested/fine-tuned with more empirical research in emerging/developing economies RIA: issues and challenges<br>

RIA: issues and challenges Process
Cohesive, systematic regulatory policy (within which RIA is to be embedded); clear regulatory policy objectives/principles/expected outcomes
Policy buy-in
Political (highest levels of government)
Administrative (bureaucrats) – sync with principal-agent dynamics
Technocrats – often most resistant/ideology-driven interests
Civil society (private sector, consumers, etc.) – regulatory capture, rent-seeking, policy embedding/sustainability<br>

RIA: issues and challenges Process
Institutional arrangements
One apex organization tasked with overseeing the different stages (and sectors) of RIA; coordinating roles/responsibilities of the various technical and administrative actors in the process; quality-control; training; advocacy; and, problem-shooting
Best placed in an entity close to core Executive body of government<br>

RIA: issues and challenges Process
Skills and financial resources
Technical know-how (nuts and bolts of RIA method)
“Knowledge” (political-economic, socio-cultural costs/benefits and outcomes) – country expertise over donor information transfer
Adequate remuneration: “you pay peanuts, you get monkeys”!!

Access to information (e.g. RTI Bill in #LK) – transparency, accountability, credibility, legitimacy – broader stakeholder buy-in<br>

RIA: issues and challenges Methodology
Asking the right questions
Scope: primary or secondary legislation?
Scope: all regulations across the board or major ones (define major?)?
Choice of methodology
Least-cost analysis
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Cost-benefit analysis
Multi-criteria analysis
Some sticky issues
Monetizing non-market impacts (revealed preference? ability to pay versus willingness to pay? bounded rationality?)
Mixing RIA in to long-term policy goals (e.g. quality of life)<br>

RIA: peeling off the layers- #LK story Introspective: looking back at mistakes (2004-2005)

What: “..process used to assess the likely consequences of proposed regulation, and the actual consequences of existing regulation, to assist those engaged in planning, approving and implementing improvements to regulatory systems..”
Why:
Objectives of a social market economy; market failure; effective, workable regulatory policy/institutional structures and processes
Embedded objectives of good governance: transparency, accountability, consistency, participation<br>

RIA: peeling off the layers- #LK story How:

Incremental approach to implementation: short-term (setting up RIA Unit, drawing up RIA Guidelines, RIA pilots, etc.); medium-long term (expand scope to require at least a partial RIA for all new regulation; enshrine RIA in an Act of Parliament)
RIA Unit – focal point for RIA process; located within President’s Office/Cabinet Office/Ministry of Finance; “lean” entity (outsourcing); sunset entity?; facilitate training
Scope: Central, Provincial and Local Government legislation; screen regulations w.r.t impacts (identify key stakeholders affected/numbers, identify positive/negative impacts on each key stakeholder group, score low-medium-high, when one/more impacts rated “high” or two/more impacts rated “medium” do an RIA
Public consultation



Pilot RIAs to be done for demonstration effects/learning: suggested price control on “specified goods” by CAA; CPP-based telco tariffs; price control formula on pharmaceuticals; Private Health Services Bill; Cess on vehicle imports; and, Amendments to VAT<br>

RIA: peeling off the layers- #LK story What we did: Concept paper (rather than a White Paper/Action Plan)
Formed an informal working group (IPS, AG’s Dept, NGO, Private Sector, Media)
Resulted from 2-day RIA “concept/practice” advocacy workshop in #LK (funded by CRC) – attended by policy makers/other key stakeholders (significant press coverage on #LK regulatory challenges)
Set out “good” practices
Developed consultatively (interim version published for comments in media, roundtable discussion on interim version)
Presented to Minister of Finance<br>

RIA: peeling off the layers- #LK story Outcome: not implemented
Why?
No policy buy-in (policy rhetoric vs. policy action)
Conceptual/technical knowhow (local & international) : 
No cohesive regulatory policy to begin with (story of CP)
Not sufficiently linked to formal policy making body from inception (assumed that IPS link to Ministry of Finance necessary/sufficient condition; should have had Ministry reps in Working Group)
Resistance from regulators (should have brought regulator representatives into the Working Group)
Perceived as an “academic” group (despite composition of Working Group)<br>

RIA in practice: key takeaways Is RIA useful? Depends….(caveats, policy context); need for more empirical foundation in developing economies

Developing country narrative: very much work-in-progress (“helicopter” view…)<br>

RIA in practice: key takeaways Solid understanding of policy context (political-economy, socio-cultural) and dynamics of policy cycle: e.g. is there a cohesive regulatory policy structure/processes (regulatory “culture”)?; is there a “political” window of opportunity?; principal-agent dynamics/diverging incentives of politicians and bureaucrats; other regulatory review practices (formal/informal)
Solid understanding of stakeholder interests/vested interests: e.g. sector-specific public policy dynamics; rent-seeking opportunities that will be affected by RIA; civil society “voice” /champions of reform process/culture of right to information/transparency (general governance culture)
Financial and technical resource/capacity constraints (RIA Light – World Bank, 2009) : incremental approach? small/core trained technical group? external funding at the inception? extent/limits of reinventing the wheel?<br>

RIA in practice: some possible discussion questions Ex-post RIA (for existing legislation)? Goes with incremental approach/ data and information relatively easier to access/ demonstration effects from regulation IN EFFECT (versus potential)?

RIA by law or government policy? (possibly frequent challenges in courts versus policy changes with political changes?)

Does RIA have to be a specific/separate document or can RIA language be embedded in existing/forthcoming legislation (#LK PUSCL language that provisions have to be considered in terms of costs/benefits to main stakeholders)?<br>

Thank you<br>