No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Between Effectiveness and Efficiency: The System of “In-Depth” RIAs in the Swiss Federal Decision-Making
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2017
The Swiss Federal Council (FC, the Swiss government) published a report on reducing administrative burdens on business in August 2011, in which it addressed also the performance of Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) at the federal level. The report reviews the measures undertaken by the FC since 2007 and sketches initiatives to be launched throughout the next four years. Administrative simplification and the reduction of regulatory costs have gained on relevance in the Swiss policy and political debate in the past few months – not least as a part of the campaign for the national political elections held in October 2011, with the economic crisis as a background. A national political party has launched a popular initiative against over-bureaucratisation, and the issue is brought forward by a number of stakeholders too.
The August 2011 report also fits into a wider debate about the legitimacy of RIA systems and the right balance between their effectiveness and efficiency. This brief note draws from a comprehensive evaluation of the system of in-depth RIAs in Switzerland, which supported the government's report and developed some avenues for further investigating those dimensions.
1 Federal Council (2011), Allégement administratif des entreprises: bilan 2007–2011 et perspectives 2012–2015, Bern, available on the Internet at <http://www.evd.admin.ch/aktuell/00120/index.html?lang=fr&msg-id=40711> (German version also available) (last accessed on 28 October 2011).
2 In this note, reference is always made to the federal level.
3 L. Allio, Évaluation des analyses d’impact approfondies et des études Standard Cost Model effectuées par la Confédération entre 2007 et 2009, Rapport final, Etude mandatée par le Secrétariat d’Etat à l’économie, Berne, 24.8.2011, available on the Internet at <http://www.news.admin.ch/NSBSubscriber/message/attachments/23926.pdf> (last accessed on 28 October 2011).
4 Federal Council, Bericht des Bundesrates über Massnahmen zur Deregulierung und administrativen Entlastung, of 3 November 1999.
5 Federal Council, Richtlinien des Bundesrates für die Darstellung der volkswirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen von Vorlagen des Bundes, of 15 September 1999.
6 Parliamentary Control of the Administration (PCA), Die drei „KMUTests“ des Bundes: bekannt? genutzt? wirkungsvoll?, Bericht der Parlamentarischen Verwaltungskontrolle zuhänden der Geschäftprüfungskommission des Nationalrates, Bern (2005); and Control Committee of the National Council (CC-N), KMU-Tests des Bundes und ihr Einfluss auf die Gesetz- und Verordnungsgebung, Bericht der Geschäftsprüfungskommission des Nationalrates auf der Grundlage einer Analyse der Parlamentarischen Verwaltungskontrolle, Bern (2005).
7 OECD, Regulatory reform in Switzerland. Government capacity to assure high quality regulation, OECD (2006), Paris.
8 Federal Council, Vereinfachung des unternehmerischen Alltags. Massnahmen zur administrativen Entlastung und Erleichterung der Regulierung, Bericht des Bundesrates, Bern (2006).
9 Available on the Internet at <http://www.seco.admin.ch/themen/00374/00459/00465/04054/index.html?lang=fr> (available also in German) (last accessed on 28 October 2011).
10 Ackerman, F. and Heinzerling, L., Priceless. On knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing (The New Press, 2004)Google Scholar; W. Harrington et al. (eds), Reforming Regulatory Impact Analysis, Resources for the Future Report, Washington, DC (2009).
11 Wiener, J.B., “Better Regulation in Europe”, in 59 Current Legal Problems (2006), pp. 447–518 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
12 Sunstein, C.R., “Humanizing Cost-Benefit Analysis”, in 2(1) European Journal for Risk Regulation (2011), pp. 3–8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
13 See, for instance, the US President Executive Order 13563 on Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, of 18 January 2011.
14 Thaler, R.H. and Sunstein, C.R., Nudge. Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness (Yale University Press, 2008)Google Scholar; and Livermore, M.A., “A brief comment on ‘Humanizing Cost-Benefit Analysis’”, in 2(1) European Journal of Risk and Regulation (2011), pp. 13–18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
15 European Commission, Communication on Smart Regulation in the European Union, COM(2010) 543 of 8 October 2010; and Allio, L., “On the smartness of Smart Regulation. A brief comment on the future reform agenda”, in 2(1) European Journal of Risk and Regulation (2011), pp. 19–20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
16 L. Allio, Évaluation des analyses d’impact approfondies et des études Standard Cost Model effectuées par la Confédération entre 2007 et 2009, supra note 3.
17 Johnson, R.B., “Toward a theoretical model of evaluation utilization”, in 21 Evaluation and Program Planning (1998), pp. 93–110 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Nutley, S.M., Walter, I., and Davies, H.T.O., Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services (Bristol: The Policy Press, 2007)Google Scholar.
18 R.B. Johnson, “Toward a theoretical model of evaluation utilization”, supra note 17.
19 It should be noticed that the Swiss federal parliament consists of “militia” members, who are not paid corresponding to a full time job.
20 F. Sager and C. Rissi, The limited scope of policy appraisal in the context of referendum democracy – The case of Regulatory Impact Assessment in Switzerland, Paper prepared for Workshop 30 „The Politics of Policy Appraisal” at the 2009 ECPR Joint Sessions in Lisbon, April 14–19, 2009.
21 Supra note 2.