Indicators and good practice database, Christiane Arndt and Antonia Custance Baker

Download Indicators and good practice database, Christiane Arndt and Antonia Custance Baker

Post on 22-Aug-2014

155 views

Category:

Government & Nonprofit

1 download

DESCRIPTION

Presentation by Christiane Arndt, Programme Co-ordinator Measuring Regulatory Performance, and Antonia Custance Baker, Policy Analyst, OECD, at the 6th Expert Meeting on Measuring Regulatory Performance: Evaluating Stakeholder Engagement in Regulatory Policy, Breakout Session 2, The Hague, 16-18 June 2014. Further information is available at http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/

TRANSCRIPT

  • Indicators and good practice database Christiane Arndt, Programme Co-ordinator Measuring Regulatory Performance, OECD Antonia Custance Baker Breakout session 2 6th Expert Meeting on Measuring Regulatory Performance 17 June 2014
  • Are all questions on stakeholder engagement clear? Do any questions leave room for interpretation? Questions for discussion
  • Why do we need indicators on consultation? How can the REG indicators be complemented with data/indicators from other sources? How would you use a good practice database to complement the indicators? How could it look like? Questions for discussion
  • What are the pros and cons of different aggregation methods? Questions for discussion
  • Tables with all answers of each country Indicators of Regulatory Management Systems Worldwide Governance Indicator (WGI) on Regulatory Quality Product Market Regulation Indicator Degree of aggregation
  • Simple weights (e.g. OECD Product Market Regulation Indicators) Expert weights (e.g. Indicators of Regulatory Management Systems 2008) Statistical weighting methods based on variation and correlation of data such as PCA, unobserved component model (e.g. Worldwide Governance Indicators) Users can set weights themselves online (e.g. Better Life Index) Method of aggregation See also: OECD, European Commission (2008), Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators
  • OECD Product Market Regulation Indicators
  • Worldwide Governance Indicators
  • Note: This graph summarises information about the existence of key elements of formal consultation processes for primary laws in OECD member countries. It does not gauge whether these processes have been effective. Questions: Weights: a) Is public consultation with parties affected by regulations a routine part of developing draft new primary laws? No=0, In some cases=0.5, Always=1 When is it conducted? a(i) at the inception of the legal proposal? No=0, Yes=0.75 a(ii) during the drafting of a law? No=0, Yes=0.5 If the answer is always or in some cases to a) Is consultation mandatory? No=0, Yes=0.5 b(v) Are there consultation guidelines? No=0, Yes=0.5 If so, are they mandatory? No=0, Yes=0.5 b(vii) What forms of public consultation are routinely used: - Broad circulation of proposals for comment? - Public notice and calling for comment? - Public meeting? - Simply posting proposals on the Internet? - Advisory group? - Preparatory public commission/committee? If ticked, weight= 0.25, 0.5, 0.25, 0.25, 0.25, 0.25 b(viii) Can any member of the public choose to participate in the consultation? No=0, Yes=0.5 c(i) What is the minimum period for allowing consultation comments inside government? 1 week=0.125, 2 weeks=0.25, 4 weeks or more=0.5 c(ii) What is the minimum period for allowing consultation comments by the public, including citizens and business and civil society organisations? 2 weeks=0.125, 3 weeks=0.2, 4 weeks=0.25, 6 weeks=0.4, 8 weeks= 0.5, 12 weeks or more= 0.75 d(i) Are the views of participants in the consultation process made public? No=0, Yes=0.5 d(ii) Are regulators required to respond in writing to the authors of consultation comments? No=0, Yes= 0.25 d(iii) Are the views expressed in the consultation process included in the regulatory impact analysis? No=0, Yes=0.5 d(iv) Is there a process to monitor the quality of the consultation process? (e.g. surveys or other methods, please specify in comments) No=0, Yes=0.5 d(v) Is guidance available on how to conduct effective consultation? No=0, Yes=0.5 Source: Question 9 / OECD Regulatory Management Systems Indicators Survey 2008. www.oecd.org/regreform/indicators Formal consultation processes: Primary laws (2008) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ITA FRA JPN PRT LUX USA BEL CZE ESP AUT SVK GRE NLD TUR ICE DEU HUN DNK MEX NOR IRL POL FIN AUS CAN NZL KOR CHE SWE EU UK 5th percentile 95th percentile Index 9.5
  • Formal consultation processes: Subordinate legislation (2008) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 TUR BEL GRE ITA ICE LUX PRT AUT SVK NLD FRA DEU DNK HUN CZE ESP CHE IRL POL NOR USA FIN JPN AUS MEX NZL CAN KOR SWE EU UK 5th percentile 95th percentile Index 9.5 Note: This graph summarises information about the existence of key elements of formal consultation processes for subordinate regulations in OECD member countries. It does not gauge whether these processes have been effective. Questions: Weights: a) Is public consultation with parties affected by regulations a routine part of developing new draft subordinate regulations? No=0, In some cases=0.5, Always=1 When is it conducted? a(i) at the inception of the legal proposal? No=0, Yes=0.75 a(ii) during the drafting of a regulatory impact statement (RIS)? No=0, Yes=0.5 If the answer is always or in some cases to a) Is consultation mandatory? No=0, Yes=0.5 b(v) Are there consultation guidelines? No=0, Yes=0.5 If so, are they mandatory? No=0, Yes=0.5 b(vii) What forms of public consultation are routinely used: - Broad circulation of proposals for comment? - Public notice and calling for comment? - Public meeting? - Simply posting proposals on the Internet? - Advisory group? - Preparatory public commission/committee? If ticked, weight= 0.25, 0.5, 0.25, 0.25, 0.25, 0.25 b(viii) Can any member of the public choose to participate in the consultation? No=0, Yes=0.5 c(i) What is the minimum period for allowing consultation comments inside government? 1 week=0.125, 2 weeks=0.25, 4 weeks or more=0.5 c(ii) What is the minimum period for allowing consultation comments by the public, including citizens, business and civil society organisations? 2 weeks=0.125, 3 weeks=0.2, 4 weeks=0.25, 6 weeks=0.4, 8 weeks= 0.5, 12 weeks or more= 0.75 d(i) Are the views of participants in the consultation process made public? No=0, Yes=0.5 d(ii) Are regulators required to respond in writing to the authors of consultation comments? No=0, Yes= 0.25 d(iii) Are the views expressed in the consultation process included in the regulatory impact analysis? No=0, Yes=0.5 d(iv) Is there a process to monitor the quality of the consultation process? (e.g. surveys or other methods, please specify in comments) No=0, Yes=0.5 d(v) Is guidance available on how to conduct effective consultation? No=0, Yes=0.5 Source: Question 9 / OECD Regulatory Management Systems Indicators Survey 2008. www.oecd.org/regreform/indicators
  • OECD, Better Life Index OECD, Product Market Regulation Indicators Worldbank, Worldwide Governance Indicators OECD, Services Trade Restrictiveness Index Regulatory Database OECD, Services Trade Restrictiveness Index Policy Simulator OECD, Observatory of Public Sector Innovation Links to indicators and databases
  • What are the pros and cons of different aggregation methods? How would you use a good practice database to complement the indicators? How could it look like? Questions for discussion
  • Stockholm workshop Drafting a list of practices based on findings from Stockholm workshop Invitation to all RPC delegates and delegates from TUAC and BIAC to join the Steering Group to be actively involved in the project Consultation on list of practices with RPC delegates Final list of practices Phase 1 Discussions about assessing the implementation of the Recommendation June 2013 March 2014 Drafting of questionnaire based on list of practices Discussion of draft questionnaire with Steering Group at one-day meeting Revision of questionnaire based on comments from Steering Group members and comments from experts across the OECD Revised questionnaire circulated for piloting Final clarification of questions, answer options and definitions based on pilots and meetings in The Hague Final questionnaire Phase 2 Development of questionnaire February 2014 June 2014 Questionnaire sent to countries Preliminary analysis and identification of data issues Discussion of survey results at RPC meeting in November with delegates, TUAC and BIAC Steering group meeting on construction of indicators Adjustment and analysis of data Phase 3 Data collection, cleaning and analysis July 2014 March 2015 Draft Regulatory Policy Outlook and final data and indicators presented at RPC Publication of Regulatory Policy Outlook and final database Development of best practice database in selected areas Phase 4 Publication and communication of results April 2015 end 2015 Timeline

Recommended

View more >