Australia recently released its Annual Regulatory Reform Report: 1 January 2016 –30 June 2017 which detailed a reduction in net compliance costs of AUD 1.1 billion per year, contributing to a total reduction of AUD 5.9 billion since the introduction of the Deregulation Agenda in 2013. Australia also adopted a Regulator Performance Framework in 2014 under which Federal regulators and departments assess their performance against six key performance indicators. These relate to: reducing regulatory burdens; communication with regulated entities; regulators’ actions are proportionate and risk‑based; compliance and monitoring procedures are streamlined; regulators are transparent in their actions; and regulators undertake continuous improvement.

In Austria, RIA has been mandatory for all primary laws and subordinate regulations since 2013. A threshold test introduced in 2015 determines whether a simplified or full RIA has to be conducted for draft regulations. The new threshold limits the requirement for ex post evaluations introduced in 2013 to regulations passing the threshold. Assessments of whether underlying policy goals have been achieved, the comparison of actual and predicted impacts, and the identification of costs, benefits and unintended consequences of regulations are part of the standard methodology for ex post evaluations.

The institutional and policy framework for regulatory quality at the federal level has remained relatively stable since the 2015 Regulatory Policy Outlook. RIA is mandatory for all primary and subordinate legislation submitted to the Cabinet of Ministers at the federal level and is usually shared with social partners as a basis for consultation. Periodic ex post review of legislation is mandatory for some legislation and sunsetting clauses are sometimes used. Within the executive, since 2013 the Agency for Administrative Simplification (ASA) within the Prime Minister’s Office, which was responsible for assessing administrative burdens, is also responsible for the whole better regulation policy. The ASA is supported by an Impact Assessment Committee that provides advice on RIA.

In Canada, the process for developing primary laws (Acts) and subordinate regulations differs significantly. Subordinate regulations typically elaborate on the general principles outlined in Acts, and establish detailed requirements for regulated parties to meet.

Chile recently introduced the overarching 2014-18 National Agenda for Productivity, Innovation and Growth which comprises measures for improving regulatory governance and increasing the quality of regulations. Chile also took steps to embed stakeholder engagement and Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) into the rule making process.

Colombia has gradually embedded the regulatory practices enshrined in the policy document CONPES 3816/2014 and the National Development Plan which set out the regulatory reform agenda. The strategy includes establishing an institutional mechanism to promote regulatory quality, building capacities for RIA, carrying out RIA for subordinate regulation, requiring regulators to consult with stakeholders prior to the issuance of regulation, and reducing administrative burden.

The regulatory policy reform agenda is strongly linked to the National Strategy on Simplification and Better Regulation 2014-2018 (Estrategia Nacional de Simplificación de Trámites y Mejora Regulatoria) which chiefly focusses on red tape reduction mechanisms. In this sense, regulatory management tools like stakeholder engagement, RIA and ex post evaluation have been established to improve the quality of administrative procedures and reduce red tape. The strategy is tied to the government’s efforts to strengthen competitiveness and to foster the functioning of and access to markets. Following a reform of Law 8220 on Protection from the Excess of Requirements and Administrative Procedures in 2016 the Preliminary Control System (SICOPRE) was implemented. The SICOPRE is a centralised webpage (controlprevio.meic.go.cr) that enhances the transparency of RIAs and public consultations by making them publicly available and allowing for comments to which regulators respond. Having set the building blocks, Costa Rica would benefit from broadening the scope of its regulatory policy agenda to go beyond administrative procedures, and communicating with stakeholders on the progress made so far. For example, SICOPRE is a big step forward but could be more user-friendly to engage with a wider range of stakeholders.

The Czech Republic has a well-developed regulatory impact assessment process including mechanisms for quality control through the RIA Board operating at arm’s length from the government. All draft primary and secondary legislation prepared by the executive has to be accompanied by a basic impact assessment; a full RIA has to be carried out for those drafts with new and significant impacts. The quality of RIA could be improved especially in terms of quantifications of impacts. RIA is not obligatory for legislative initiatives of the MPs, which represent about 40 % of laws.

Regulatory reform has been an important feature of the Danish government agenda since the 1980s. The initial focus on competitiveness has been extended to burden reduction and more recently to the promotion of innovation-friendly business regulation. Established in 2012 and 2015 respectively, the Danish Business Forum for Better Regulation monitors the implementation of national regulation, and the EU-Implementation Committee and EU-Implementation Council monitor the implementation of EU business regulation. As from July 2018 all regulations must comply with the newly-introduced principles on agile and digital-proof legislation.

Estonia did not make any major changes to its regulatory framework in the past three years. In line with the “Guidelines for development of legislative policy until 2018” adopted in 2012, preliminary RIAs are prepared for all primary laws and selected subordinate regulations. For regulations with significant impacts, in-depth RIAs are conducted.

The European Commission (EC) is the executive of the European Union (EU). It proposes new initiatives and legislation, which are adopted by the European Parliament and the Council. With its 2015 Better Regulation Package, the EC has introduced significant changes to its Better Regulation policy, further refined in 2017.

There has been a long-standing increase in attention to improving the quality of legislation and regulation in Finland. The current government programme (since 2015) proposes to create enabling regulation, promote deregulation and reduce administrative burdens. Finland has also introduced a pilot stock review (one in one out) in 2016-2017 for two ministries, whereby new compliance or administrative costs for business have to be off-set by corresponding savings. An evaluation of the pilot in 2018 states it has resulted in reduced stock and costs and increased transparency, and recommend the continuation of the pilot. The areas of regulation subject to ex post evaluations have increased since 2015, albeit without consistent methodologies.

Since 2013, France has engaged in important simplification efforts. Following waves of simplification measures, the 2017 programme “Action publique 2022” identifies administrative simplification as one of the five priority actions and ministers are tasked to develop simplification plans. France also introduced a “one-in, two-out” regulatory offsetting approach in 2017. When transposing EU legislation, the adoption of requirements going beyond those set by the EU measure is prohibited.

Germany has made several improvements to its regulatory policy system, especially with respect to ex ante impact assessments. RIA has been mandatory for all laws and regulations since 2000 and has most recently been extended in 2016 with the introduction of SME-test guidelines to promote SME-friendly policy development. Germany has put a strong emphasis on the reduction of costs of regulation, revising the EU ex ante procedure in 2016 to avoid compliance costs stemming from EU legislative acts and introducing the One-In, One-Out rule in 2015. The same year, Germany incorporated a behavioural insights team in the Policy Planning Unit in the Chancellery to act as a service unit for all Federal Ministries to inform legislative and administrative processes.

Law 4048 of 2012 sets an obligation for all ministries to apply the principles of Better Regulation to all legislative developments. Major challenges, however, still persist with its implementation. Regulatory impact assessment (RIA) is obligatory for all primary laws; however the quality is poor due to the short time period in which new drafts are developed. Public consultations are required for all primary laws. In practice, consultation usually takes place through exchanges with selected groups. Some draft primary laws and subordinate regulations are published on a consultation portal (www.opengov.gr). While Law 4048 requires that a public consultation report sums up comments received and which comments were taken into account, it is still not fully implemented, so that it is unclear how consultation comments are taken into account to finalise draft regulations.

There have been little changes to the institutional and policy framework for regulatory quality in the last years. Stakeholder consultation is required for all primary and subordinate legislation. Draft legislation is posted on the governmental website and comments can be sent by email. No consultation is required in the early phases of the design of legislation. RIA is mandatory for all primary and subordinate legislation. Principle-based reviews on administrative burden were conducted in 2016 and 2017, focusing on reducing the average processing time of administrative procedures for business and citizens.

Iceland has made significant efforts over the last few years to improve their systems for RIA and stakeholder engagement. On 1 January 2016, the new Law on Public Finances no. 123/2015 came into force, which establishes the requirement to conduct RIA for all primary laws (Article 66). This provision is reinforced by the Cabinet Resolution of 10 March 2017, which establishes the requirement to draft and circulate a “Legislative Intent” document with preliminary impact assessment to other Ministries for comment prior to drafting a bill. Once the Ministries have commented, the Resolution also requires an early-stage consultation on the same document and preliminary RIA with citizens and stakeholders. The Resolution also calls for public consultation on the full draft bill and full RIA before being presented to Cabinet.

Ireland recently made some improvements to its regulatory policy system, particularly in the areas of consultation and ex post evaluation.

Israel made significant progress in improving its regulatory policy since 2015. The Government Resolution No. 2118 of 22 October 2014, accompanied with stricter rules and RIA guidance in 2016, provides a solid basis for a whole-of government regulatory policy. The focus is mostly on reducing regulatory burdens, both through comprehensive reviews of the existing regulations and through ex ante regulatory impact assessment.

In September 2017, the Italian government introduced a new set of procedures for regulatory impact assessment (RIA), ex post evaluation, stakeholder engagement and regulatory planning. Ministries have to prepare a simplified RIA, providing a first assessment of expected impacts and a justification for not conducting a full RIA for low impact proposals, which is reviewed by the Department of Legal and Legislative Affairs (DAGL) within the Presidency of the Council of Ministers, whose gatekeeping role has also been strengthened. Ministries are also required to publish twice a year a 6-month legislative programme, highlighting planned RIAs and consultations. The programmes are to be posted on the central government website and the website of individual ministries. New guidelines to support public consultation aimed at enhancing transparency and participation were introduced in 2017 and new guidance on RIA and ex post evaluation was introduced in February 2018. Ex post evaluations have become more commonplace across a wider range of policy areas since 2015.

Japan has made significant efforts to improve its regulatory environment. In 2017, the government has stressed its commitment to regulatory reform by introducing a Basic Program on Reducing Administrative Burden. The program is linked to Japan’s Revitalization Strategy (2016) and aims to introduce new frameworks, principles, and mechanisms for regulatory and institutional reform, with the view of achieving the program’s intended targets and objectives by 2019. Japan has also revised its Implementation Guidelines for Policy Evaluation of Regulations in 2017, which provides an update of the 2007 guidelines, and further elaborates on the information and criteria in relation to quantifying and qualifying impacts and costs, including the various techniques and processes that ministries can adopt under specific circumstances. The 2017 guidelines also clearly define the necessity of conducting ex post evaluations of regulations within the period of five years since its implementation.

Korea has significantly improved its regulatory policy system over the recent years. Ex post evaluation is mandatory for all regulations developed by the executive and central ministries are required to outline the intended evaluation plan as part of each RIA. Korea has been putting effort into systematically implementing this approach in practice. RIAs are undertaken for all subordinate regulations in Korea and for the primary laws initiated by the executive. To increase the quality of RIA and reduce the burden of preparing RIA statements, e-RIA was launched in May 2015, providing public officials with the data necessary for cost-benefit analysis.

There is no single document comprehensively articulating regulatory policy in Latvia. However, many particular elements of regulatory policy are firmly embedded in strategic documents of the government. The obligation to conduct regulatory impact assessment (RIA) was introduced in 2009. RIA is required for all draft legal acts including subordinate regulations submitted to the Cabinet. RIA should be prepared early in the policy-making process and undergoes public consultation with the draft law. The impacts assessed cover mostly financial, budgetary, and administrative costs. Quantification of impacts tends to be rare. There is a structured and systematic process for consulting with social and civil partners. Reviews of regulatory stock are mostly business-oriented. While there is no explicit programme on ex post reviews of regulation, the regulatory framework is being improved continuously through intensive co-operation with stakeholders.

There is no single formal government regulatory policy in Lithuania, though some elements are embedded in several strategic documents. While impacts are required to be assessed for any legislative acts, RIA remains a largely formal exercise to justify choices already made, rarely based on data or analysis of alternative options. Around two-thirds of about 900 draft laws submitted to the Seimas every year are parliamentary drafts with similar requirements for conducting RIA and public consultations as for those developed by the executive, however, without any oversight. Consultations in the development of regulations are anchored in the administration and interaction between stakeholders and the government sometimes takes place before a decision to regulate is made. Yet consultations currently lack methodology and technical guidance.

Since 2015, Luxembourg has made some minor improvements to its regulatory management tools. Digital means of consultations are now undertaken in Luxembourg, albeit not systematically. Members of the public can now choose to participate in some consultations through a central government website in addition to ministry websites. Over time, it will be important to expand the usage of the central website to all regulatory proposals.

In Mexico, since 2000 RIA and public consultation on draft regulation has been mandatory for all regulatory proposals coming from the executive. Mexico strengthened its RIA process by adding in 2016 assessments of impacts on foreign trade and consumer rights, which complement existing assessments on competition and risk. Since 2012, mandatory guidelines require the use of ex post evaluation of technical regulations, and since 2018 regulations with compliance costs have to be evaluated every five years.

The Netherlands has a long-standing tradition of regulatory reform, with a strong emphasis on the reduction of burdens for business and citizens. This focus has largely remained in the centre of recent Better Regulation initiatives.

New Zealand has made substantive changes to its regulatory management policy as a result of introducing its regulatory stewardship approach. The expectation of regulatory stewardship applies to all regulatory agencies and involves adopting a whole-of-system, lifecycle view of regulation. It also includes an express expectation of an increased focus on international regulatory cooperation, which may help to reduce regulatory overlap and improve regulatory coherence, including with key partners such as Australia.

Norway improved its standard procedure for developing regulations by updating the Instructions for Official Studies and Reports in 2016. Now under the responsibility of the Ministry of Finance, these Instructions establish whole-of-government procedures regarding the requirements and guidance on preparing regulatory proposals, RIA, stakeholder engagement and ex post evaluations. The Instructions establish new thresholds for determining when a simplified versus full analysis is required, as well as requiring the quantification of costs/benefits when the regulation is expected to have a large impact on many people. Transparency could be enhanced by publishing all RIAs online as well as the reasoning behind conducting a simplified analysis, when applicable.

Poland has made a number of changes to its regulatory management practices since 2015, based on the new rules of work of the Council of Ministers, which was an activity within the Better Regulation Programme. The rules applying to the Council of Ministers which took effect in 2015 introduced public consultation as a general principle of the regulation making process, as well as requiring a consultation report. In the event that consultation does not take place, ministries are required to provide detailed justifications in Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA). There has been a significant improvement in stakeholder engagement with the general public via the introduction of a central government website; and the government also maintains an active list of participants who have stated that they wish to be informed about regulatory proposals.

In March 2017 through Resolution No. 44, the Council of Ministers took key steps in installing RIA in Portugal. Under its current implementation, the so-called Legislative Impact Analysis requires policy makers to qualitatively describe benefits and to quantify the impact of new regulations on businesses. It also includes an SME Test and a competition impact assessment. The Technical Unit for Legislative Impact Assessment (UTAIL), was established to provide oversight and support for the new RIA. In 2018, ministries will also be required to assess legislative impacts on citizens and as of 2019 impacts on public administration.

The Slovak Republic has made significant progress in implementing some of the regulatory management tools. The RIA 2020 – Better Regulation Strategy represents a comprehensive approach towards a whole-of-government regulatory policy focusing, among other issues, on improving bot ex ante and ex post evaluation of regulations. The obligation to conduct regulatory impact assessments according to the “Unified Methodology for the Assessment of Selected Impacts” has been in place since 2008 with reforms introducing strong methodology for assessing economic, social and environmental impacts including an SME Test and impacts on innovation in 2015. Despite these improvements, in many cases Slovak ministries still struggle with the quantification of wider impacts, focusing mainly on budgetary impacts and, to a lesser extent, impacts on business. Procedures for public consultations in the later stage of the regulation-making process are well developed, with automatic publication of all legislative documents on the government portal. The 2015 reforms made early-stage consultations more prominent, especially those with business associations. Ex post reviews of existing regulations have so far focused mostly on administrative burdens, however, the RIA 2020 Strategy contains plans for more comprehensive reviews.

Slovenia has adopted a whole-of-government framework for regulatory policy, which is set out in a number of government resolutions and documents, such as the Resolution on Legislative Regulation and the Rules of Procedure of the Government. RIA and stakeholder engagement are compulsory and are almost always conducted in practice for primary laws in Slovenia. Stakeholder engagement is often done for a short period and RIA often includes only a qualitative assessment, although the situation has improved modestly. Slovenia could strengthen oversight of these regulatory policy tools to ensure that they are used effectively.

Spain is gradually broadening its Better Regulation agenda from an initial focus on administrative simplification to stakeholder engagement and evaluation. A new user‑friendly website has been recently set up by the Spanish Government (http://transparencia.gob.es) which includes the annual regulatory planning agenda for primary and subordinate regulations, as well as a centralized platform to provide access to public consultations. Still, stakeholder engagement is not yet undertaken on a systematic basis in Spain.

Simplification remains a cornerstone of Sweden’s regulatory policy. In the 2017 budget, simplification efforts focus on two areas: “Better service” and “More fit-for-purpose regulations”. The government will monitor “Better Service” efforts against how much easier and faster it becomes to submit information and receive a response. For the area "More fit-for-purpose regulations", the objective is for regulation to promote economic growth and to reduce regulatory compliance costs for businesses.

Switzerland did not undertake any major reforms of its regulatory policy framework since 2015. RIA has to be conducted for all regulations in Switzerland. While most RIAs are simple RIAs that focus on qualitative analysis, in-depth RIAs that contain more thorough analysis and quantify impacts are conducted only for a few economically significant regulations. The Swiss Federal Audit Office reviewed the quality of the Swiss RIA framework in 2016. It found that available RIA tools are underused and that close to 30% of RIAs examined were of insufficient quality. The report recommends to further improve RIA quality by enhancing quality control mechanisms.

Turkey started its better regulation agenda in the early 2000s. The “By-Law on Principles and Procedures of Drafting Legislation” decree issued 17 February 2006 by the Council of Ministers (referred to as the By-Law), is the foundational framework for improving and maintaining legal and regulatory quality in Turkey.

The United Kingdom continues to invest in its regulatory policy system, with a particular focus on business. UK government departments regularly conduct post implementation reviews, in particular for all measures with an impact on business following the introduction of the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act in 2015. The government also established over the last years the Business Impact Target programme and the Cutting Red Tape reviews programme to reduce regulatory costs for business.

The Administrative Procedure Act governs the rulemaking process in the U.S., requiring agencies to provide public notice and seek comment when proposing new regulations or revising or repealing existing ones. Agencies must consider the comments and in the final rule explain how they addressed significant issues raised by commenters. A final rule is subject to judicial review to ensure it conforms with legal requirements, including those concerning notice and comment. The evaluation of regulatory costs and benefits is well developed in the U.S. RIAs are required for all significant regulatory proposals, and full RIAs are required for proposals with annual impacts over USD 100 million. Ex post evaluation of subordinate regulations is mandatory since 2011. A stock-flow linkage rule introduced in 2017 requires agencies to issue two deregulatory actions for every regulatory action, in a way that the total cost of regulations does not exceed the agency’s Fiscal Year Cost Allowance, as approved by the Office of Management and Budget. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) located within the Executive Office of the President provides oversight and guidance on the implementation of ex post evaluations and the stock-flow linkage rule. The U.S. could benefit from strengthening the link between ex ante and ex post evaluation, for example by requiring regulators to identify a process for assessing progress in achieving a regulation’s goals as part of RIA or by mandating a post-implementation review for regulations exempted from RIA.

The 2017 Regulatory Indicators Survey is structured around the areas of good practices described in the 2012 Recommendation(OECD, 2012). It supported the collection of data on the content of regulatory policies, as well as on the requirements and practices of countries in the areas of: stakeholder engagement, regulatory impact assessment and ex post evaluation (see details of the survey structure in ).