Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T03:45:51.513Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Role of Regulatory Impact Assessment in Fighting Climate Change and the Economic Downturn: A EU-US Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2017

Jacopo Torriti  and
Ragnar Lofstedt
Jacopo Torriti
Affiliation:
Centre for Environmental Strategy, University of Surrey, UK
Ragnar Lofstedt
Affiliation:
King’s Centre of Risk Management, King’s College London, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In times of low economic growth and post-Copenhagen climate talks, a number of reasons for regulatory competition and cooperation between the United States and the European Union coexist. This paper discusses the role of Impact Assessment between the US and the EU on responses to the economic downturn and climate change. It is argued that, in the future, IAs will be an instrument through which it will be possible to read the level of cooperation and competition between the US and the EU, particularly on economic trade and environmental regulation.

Type
Articles
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , September 2010 , pp. 251 - 257
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 R. Lofstedt and D. Vogel, “The changing character of regulation: a Comparison of Europe and the United States”, 23(2) Risk Analysis (2003), pp. 411–421.

2 European Commission, Impact Assessment Guidelines (Brussels: EC 2005), SEC(2005) 791.

3 Office of Management and Budget, Report to Congress on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations (Washington: OIRA 2007).

4 For an overview see D. Vogel, Ships Passing in the Night: The Changing Politics of Risk Regulation in Europe and the United States, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute, Working Paper 2001/16, p. 1.

5 C. Cecot, R. Hahn, A. Renda and L. Schrefler, An Evaluation of the Quality of Impact Assessment in the European Union with Lessons for the U.S. and the EU, Working Paper (Washington, D.C.: AEI-Brookings Joint Center For Regulatory Studies 2007); R. Hahn and R. Litan, “Counting Regulatory Benefits and Costs: Lessons for the US and Europe”, 8(2) Journal of International Economic Law (2005), pp. 473–508.

6 L. Allio, “Better Regulation in the European Commission?”, in C. Kirkpatrick and D. Parker (eds), Regulatory Impact Assessment: Towards Better Regulation? (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar 2007).

7 R. Lofstedt, “The ‘Plateau-ing’ of the European Better Regulation Agenda: An Analysis of Activities Carried out by the Barroso Commission”, 10(4) Journal of Risk Research (2007), pp. 423–447.

8 J. Torriti, “(Regulatory) Impact Assessments in the European Union: A Tool for better Regulation, less Regulation or less bad Regulation?”, 10(2) Journal of Risk Research (2007), pp. 239–276.

9 C. Kirkpatrick and J. Franz (2007), “Integrating Sustainable Development into European Policymaking: The Role of Impact Assessments”, 9(2) Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy Management (2007), pp. 1–20; C. Adelle, J. Hertin and A. Jordan (2006), “Sustainable Development ‘Outside’ the European Union: What Role for Impact Assessment?”, 16 European Environment (2006), pp. 57–62; Institute for European Environmental Policy, Sustainable Development in the European Commission's Integrated Impact Assessments for 2003 (London: IEEP 2004).

10 A. Renda, Impact Assessment in the EU. The State of the Art and the Art of the State (Brussels: CEPS 2006).

11 Evaluation Partnership, Evaluation of the Commission's Impact Assessment System (2007), available on the Internet at <ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/docs/key_docs/tep_eias_final_report_executive_summary_en.pdf> (last accessed on 1 April 2010).

12 A. Alemanno, “Quis custodet custodes dans le cadre de l’initiative mieux légiférer?”, 1 Revue du Droit de l’ Union Europeenne (2008).

13 J. Hertin, J. Turnpenny, A. Jordan, M. Nilsson, D. Russel and B. Nykvist, “Rationalising the policy mess? Ex ante assessment and the utilisation of knowledge in the policy process”, 41(5) Environment & Planning A (2008).

14 J. Graham, “Saving Lives through Administrative Law and Economics”,157(2) University of Pennsylvania Law Review (2008), pp. 395–540.

15 R. Lofstedt, “The Swing of the Regulatory Pendulum in Europe: From Precautionary Principle to (Regulatory) Impact Analysis”, 28 Journal for Risk and Uncertainty (2004), pp. 237–260.

16 J. Wiener, Risk and Regulation: Issue for Discussion, Paper for the Working Party on Regulatory Reform and Management (Paris: OECD 2006).

17 S. Jasanoff, Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States (Princeton: University Press 2005).

18 J. Graham and S. Olmstead, “Is There a Universal Precautionary Principle?”, in P. Haas J. Hird and B. McBratney (eds), Controversies in Globalization (Washington: CQ Press 2009).

19 Lofstedt, “The ‘Plateau-ing’ of the European Better Regulation Agenda”, supra note 7.

20 J. Morral, Regulatory Impact Analysis: Efficiency, Accountability, and Transparency (Singapore: US Office of Management and Budget 2001).

21 Hahn and Litan, “Counting Regulatory Benefits and Costs: Lessons for the US and Europe”, supra note 5.

22 R. Hahn and P. Dudley, How Well Does the Government Do Cost Benefit Analysis? (AEI Joint Centre 2004).

23 Morral, “Regulatory Impact Analysis: Efficiency, Accountability, and Transparency”, supra note 20.

24 S. Farrow, Improving Regulatory Performance: Does Executive Office Oversight Matter?, Working paper, Center for the Study and Improvement of Regulation (Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University 2001).

25 F. Ackerman and L. Heinzerling, Priceless: On Knowing the Price of Everything and the Value of Nothing (New York: The New Press 2004).

26 K. Viscusi, Monetizing the Benefits of Risk and Environmental Regulation, Working Paper 06-09, AEI Brookings Joint Center, 2006, available on the Internet at <http://www.aei-brookings.org/publications/abstract.php?pid=1068> (last accessed on ).

27 Ackerman and Heinzerling, “Priceless: On Knowing the Price of Everything and the Value of Nothing”, supra note 25.

28 M. Martelli, “Determinazione dei prezzi e giudizi di valore nell’Analisi Costi Benefici”, in S. Momigliano and F. Nuti-Giovanetti (eds), La valutazione dei costi e dei benefici nell’analisi dell’impatto della regolazione (Catanzaro: Rubettino 2001).

29 Viscusi, “Monetizing the Benefits of Risk and Environmental Regulation”, supra note 26.

30 T. Porter, Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life (Princeton University Press 1996).

31 R. Zerbe, The Legal Foundation of Cost-Benefit Analysis, Working Paper (University of Washington 2007).

32 C. Sunstein, “Congress, Constitutional Moments, and the Cost- Benefit State”, 48 Stanford Law Review (1996), pp. 247–309.

33 European Commission, Impact Assessment Guidelines (Brussels: EC 2005), SEC(2005) 791.

34 BiPRO, Assessing economic Impacts of the specific Measures to be Part of the Thematic Strategy on the sustainable Use of Pesticides (2004), available on the Internet at <http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ppps/pdf/bipro_ppp_final_report.pdf> (last accessed on 1 April 2010).

35 European Commission, Impact Assessment accompanying the Legislative Package on the Internal Market for Electricity and Gas (Brussels: EC 2007), SEC(2007) 1179.

36 European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation concerning the Visa Information System (VIS) and the Exchange of Data between Member States on short Stay-Visas (Brussels: EC 2004), SEC(2004) 1628.

37 For example, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Summary of Views expressed during the First Session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention on the Development of the Two-Year Work Programme that was mandated under Paragraph 7 of the Bali Action Plan, 2008, available on the Internet at <http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2008/awglca2/eng/06.pdf> (last accessed on 1 April 2010).

38 European Commission, Better Regulation for Growth and Jobs in the European Union (Brussels: EC 2005), SEC (2005)197.

39 OMB, “Report to Congress on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations”, supra note 3.

40 P. Genschel and T. Plumper, “Regulatory competition and international co-operation”, 4 Journal of European Public Policy (1997), pp. 626–642.

41 Sunstein, “Congress, Constitutional Moments, and the Cost-Benefit State”, supra note 32.

42 F. Vibert, The EU's New System of Regulatory Impact Assessment – A Scorecard (London: European Policy Forum 2004); Hahn and Litan, “Counting Regulatory Benefits and Costs”, supra note 5.

43 R. Hahn and C. Sunstein, A New Executive Order for Improving Federal Regulation? Deeper and Wider Cost-Benefit Analysis (Joint Centre 2002).

44 Alemanno, “Quis custodet custodes dans le cadre de l’initiative mieux lgifrer?”, supra note 12.

45 A. Ogus, “W(h)ither the economic theory of regulation? What economic theory of regulation?”, in J. Jacinta and D. Levi-Faur (eds), The Politics of Regulation (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar 2004).

46 S. Rose-Ackerman, “Progressive Law and Economics – And the New Administrative Law”, 98Yale Law Journal (1988), pp. 341–368.

47 G. Majone, Regulating Europe (London: Routledge 1996).

48 L. Canter, Environmental Impact Assessment (New York: McGraw- Hill 1996).

49 N. Lee, “Environmental Assessment in the European Union: A Tenth Anniversary, 10 Project Appraisal (1995), pp. 77 et sqq.

50 Canter, “Environmental Impact Assessment”, supra note 48.

51 C. Radaelli, (2009), “Desperately seeking Impact Assessments: Diary of a Reflexive Researcher”, 15(1) Evaluation (2009), pp. 31–48.

52 IMF, World Economic Outlook 2008 (Washington: International Monetary Fund 2008).

53 Hertin et al., “Rationalising the policy mess?”, supra note 13.

54 R. Baldwin, “Better Regulation: Tensions aboard the Enterprise”, in S. Weatherill (ed.), Better Regulation (Oxford: Hart Publishing 2007).