Counting regulatory benefits and costs: Lessons for the US and Europe
Counting regulatory benefits and costs: Lessons for the US and Europe
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/jielaw/jgi030
复制
发表时间：
2005-06-01
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
Litan, RE
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hahn, RW;Litan, RE
本文回顾了美国和欧洲在监管监督和使用正式工具分析监管方面的经验。我们的结论是，美国和欧洲在改善监管分析和监督方面取得了一些进展，但他们可以做得更多。我们为改善监管监督和分析的质量和透明度提出了六项建议：三项建议适用于美国，三项建议适用于欧洲。对于美国，我们建议：1）管理和预算办公室（OMB）运用其内部的专业知识来评估法规的成本和收益; 2）国会通过一项法律，要求所有联邦监管机构向OMB提交主要法规的年度成本和收益评估;管理和预算办公室发布一个记分卡来评估监管的整体质量，并要求各机构为每一项主要监管完成一个记分卡。1）欧盟通过了一项指令，规定监管的主要目标是最大化净利益; 2）欧盟建立了一个强大的中央监管监督单位，以帮助评估监管提案; 3）欧盟以及每个成员国建立了一个平衡的结构，促进有效监管，并阻止低效或无效的监管。
This paper reviews the US and European experiences with regulatory oversight and the use of formal tools to analyze regulation. We conclude that the US and Europe have made some progress in improving regulatory analysis and oversight, but they can do much more.We offer six recommendations for improving the quality and transparency of regulatory oversight and analysis: three recommendations for the United States and three for Europe. For the US, we suggest that: 1) The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) apply its in-house expertise to evaluate the costs and benefits of regulations; 2) Congress pass a law requiring that all federal regulatory agencies submit annual cost and benefit estimates of major regulations to OMB; and 3) OMB issue a scorecard assessing the overall quality of regulation and ask the agencies to complete a scorecard for each major regulation.For Europe, we suggest that: 1) The European Union (EU) pass a directive specifying that the primary objective of regulation is to maximize net benefits; 2) The EU create a strong centralized regulatory oversight unit to help evaluate regulatory proposals; and 3) The EU, as well as each member state, create a structure that is balanced, which promotes efficient regulation and discourages inefficient or ineffective regulation.