Comparing Regulatory Systems: Institutions, Processes and Legal Forms in Industrialised Countries
The aim of this paper is identify and compare the key features of regulatory systems in industrialised countries. By way of essential background, the first section deals with the constitutional and cultural environment which underpins the systems, but it also includes a discussion of regulatory traditions and styles which, for example as between anglophone and continental European regimes are significantly different. Institutional frameworks are discussed in the second section, covering, inter alia, the relationship between regulatory agencies and government, the breadth of remit of regulatory institutions and the degree of discretion conferred on them by legislation. The latter necessarily gives rise to issues concerning the forms of and institutions of accountability. In the third section, we consider regulatory procedures and management. Noteworthy here are, on the one hand, the systems of consultation and the extent to which public hearings are encouraged and, on the other, cost-benefit or regulatory impact analysis to which, in some jurisdictions, are mandatory for regulatory policy- makers. The final section is concerned with legal instruments and here we concentrate on the growing distance between traditional "command and control" methods and those relying on financial incentives and other economic instruments. Appended to the paper are two case studies which attempt to show how these features are deployed by different jurisdictions in two areas of concrete policy- making: taxicabs and water quality.
|Date of creation:||2002|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Harold Hankins Building, Precinct Centre, Booth Street West, Manchester, M13 9QH|
Web page: http://www.sed.manchester.ac.uk/idpm
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Mashaw, Jerry L, 1985. "Prodelegation: Why Administrators Should Make Political Decisions," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 81-100, Spring.
- P S Morrison, 1997. "Restructuring effects of deregulation: the case of the New Zealand taxi industry," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 29(5), pages 913-928, May.
- Noam, Eli, 1982. "The Choice of Governmental Level in Regulation," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 278-291.
- Shavell, Steven, 1993. "The Optimal Structure of Law Enforcement," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 255-287, April.
- Gallick, Edward C & Sisk, David E, 1987. "A Reconsideration of Taxi Regulation," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 117-128, Spring.
- Esty, Daniel C. & Geradin, Damien (ed.), 2001. "Regulatory Competition and Economic Integration: Comparative Perspectives," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198299059.
- P S Morrison, 1997. "Restructuring Effects of Deregulation: The Case of the New Zealand Taxi Industry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 29(5), pages 913-928, May.
- Macey, Jonathan R, 1992. "Organizational Design and Political Control of Administrative Agencies," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 93-110, March.
- Hai Yang & Yan Lau & Sze Wong & Hong Lo, 2000. "A macroscopic taxi model for passenger demand, taxi utilization and level of services," Transportation, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 317-340, June.