The diffusion of regulatory impact analysis - Best practice or lesson-drawing?

被引:74
作者
Radaelli, CM
机构
[1] Univ Exeter, Dept Polit, Exeter EX4 4RJ, Devon, England
[2] European Univ Inst, Robert Schuman Ctr, Plouzane, France
关键词
D O I
10.1111/j.0304-4130.2004.00172.x
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
This article presents the main results of a research project on regulatory impact analysis (RIA) in comparative perspective. Its main theoretical thrust is to explore the limitations of the conventional analysis of RIA in terms of de-contextualised best practice and provide an alternative framework based on the lesson-drawing literature. After having discussed how demand and supply of best practice emerge in the OECD and the European Union, some analytic (as opposed to normative) lessons are presented. The main lessons revolve around the politics of problem definition, the nesting of RIA into wider reform programmes, the political malleability of RIA, the trade-off between precision and administrative assimilation, the roles of networks and watchdogs, and institutional learning. The conclusions discuss the implications of the findings for future research.
引用
收藏
页码:723 / 747
页数:25
相关论文
共 43 条
[21]  
LUTTER R, 2001, EC ANAL REGULATION U
[22]  
Mandelkern Group on Better Regulation, 2001, FIN REP
[23]  
*NAO, 2001, BETT REG MAK GOOD US
[24]  
*OECD, 1999, REG REF NETH
[25]  
*OECD, 2000, REG REF DENM
[26]  
*OECD, 1997, OECD REP REG REF THE
[27]  
*OECD, 1999, NETH PROJ STRAT REV
[28]  
Page E., 2000, ESRC FUT GOV PROGR W
[29]   Convergence: The useful myth? [J].
Pollitt, C .
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, 2001, 79 (04) :933-947
[30]  
POLLITT C., 2000, PUBLIC MANAGEMENT RE