Other approaches to RQ

Other approaches or interpretations of Better Regulation / Regulatory Quality

As this site has the ambition to provide an overview of all contributions to the understanding or development of RQ, it would not be correct to limit its contents to the presentation of the regulators' policies and their promotion of their approach.
As happens whith all policies, interested parties (stakeholders) naturally want to influence the outcome of regulatory work, especially during the consultation or review phase.
In general, regulatory quality is not very frequently targeted, as it seems an innocuous enough topic. However, in a number of cases, stakeholders have attacked not only the end-product (legislation claiming to be the result of a better regulation drive), but the premises themselves, the principles of better regulation for instance, with the claim that they are ideologically driven, that they primarily seek to abolish regulation protective of certain legitimate interests. In some cases, the advocates of these causes have invested in grasping the mechanics of RQ and are denouncing bias. Such contributions enrich the discussion and may be useful in limiting known defects.

The purpose of this page is to centralise such stimulating material, whether it is supportive or critical of current policies. For the moment, these are the documents in that category which the editor has noticed:

Joint press statement by the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and the Platform of European Social NGOs (Social Platform) (page 4): Europe and its citizens and businesses need better regulation. But better regulation should not become synonymous for simple deregulation and a one-sided cost approach…The Commission and the Council [must] avoid giving ultimate priority to favouring limited cost savings for business, rather than safeguarding people’s health and environmental or social protection.” (Spring 2006);

the Better Regulation rhinoceros, by the European Trade Union Institute;

A Report by the Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) (2005): For Better or for Worse? The EU’s ‘Better Regulation’ Agenda
and the Environment;

Le dialogue social européen, orphelin de Bruxelles (UNICE, 2006);

ETUC: "The ETUC evaluation of the national reform plans on the issue of better regulation shows that there is a real danger that ‘less but better’ regulation is being replaced by a drive for ‘minimal and imbalanced’ regulation" (2006).

Please contribute to this page via the FORUM or directly to the editor: information [at] regplus.eu