Regulatory reform aims at strengthening national competitiveness and restoring life quality of citizen by deterring unnecessary regulation from being recklessly created. The reform starts from holding down poor and low quality regulation. Therefore, it is needed to prove the necessity of regulation by scrutinizing the costs and benefits of regulation when regulation is newly introduced and reinforced. In that sense, ‘Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA)’ is the essential tool eligible to this purpose. In an effort to assessing government regulatory reform, the National Assembly Budget Office (NABO) conducted evaluation on RIA in 2008 and 2009. However, assessing only RIA report has the limit to implement multilateral evaluation on government regulatory reform. Therefore, this report not only includes RIA but also extends the evaluation scope to ‘temporary suspension of regulation’ and ‘extension of regulatory sunset,’ referred as evolutionary measures of regulatory reform in current administration.
Evaluation outcomes are as follows:
First, in case of ‘RIA,’ although there has been improvement on review item of alternatives of regulation, qualities of analysis on other items like cost-benefit analysis still remain unimproved. Therefore, the government needs to seek out various methods to enhance the qualities of RIA. In particular, since fundamental problems of RIA originated from lack of advancement in system operation, government should try to find the solution to change perceptions and the behaviors that government poised toward RIA.
Second, in case of ‘temporary suspension of regulation,’ NABO finds out that outcome is not sufficient due to the delay of related-law or ordinance and the shortage of in depth review while choosing the topic. Hence the government needs to run ‘temporary suspension of regulation’ that regulation should be abolished or eased after choosing the task with less side effects in the course of regulatory reform.
Finally, as for ‘regulatory sunset,’ it is demonstrated that application of the sunset is not enough while reviewing on regulation newly introduced or reinforced. Therefore, the government needs to promote institutional improvement on this issue.
Evaluation outcomes are as follows:
First, in case of ‘RIA,’ although there has been improvement on review item of alternatives of regulation, qualities of analysis on other items like cost-benefit analysis still remain unimproved. Therefore, the government needs to seek out various methods to enhance the qualities of RIA. In particular, since fundamental problems of RIA originated from lack of advancement in system operation, government should try to find the solution to change perceptions and the behaviors that government poised toward RIA.
Second, in case of ‘temporary suspension of regulation,’ NABO finds out that outcome is not sufficient due to the delay of related-law or ordinance and the shortage of in depth review while choosing the topic. Hence the government needs to run ‘temporary suspension of regulation’ that regulation should be abolished or eased after choosing the task with less side effects in the course of regulatory reform.
Finally, as for ‘regulatory sunset,’ it is demonstrated that application of the sunset is not enough while reviewing on regulation newly introduced or reinforced. Therefore, the government needs to promote institutional improvement on this issue.
Yeo Chamin