Darcy W. E. Allen, C. Berg, A. Lane, P. McLaughlin
{"title":"The Political Economy of Australian Regulatory Reform","authors":"Darcy W. E. Allen, C. Berg, A. Lane, P. McLaughlin","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3682317","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The problem of regulatory accumulation has increasingly been recognized as a policy problem in its own right. Governments have then devised and implemented regulatory reform policies that directly seek to ameliorate the burdens of regulatory accumulation (e.g. red tape reduction targets). In this paper we examine regulatory reform approaches in Australia through the lens of policy innovation. Our contributions are twofold. We first examine the evolutionary discovery process of regulatory reform policies in Australia (at the federal, intergovernmental and state levels). This demonstrates a process of policy innovation in regulatory mechanisms and measurements. We then analyse a new measurement of regulatory burden based on text analytics, RegData: Australia (see Al-Ubaydli and McLaughlin 2017; McLaughlin et al 2019). RegData: Australia uses textual analysis to count “restrictiveness clauses” in regulation — such as “must”, “cannot” and “shall” — thereby developing a new database (RDAU1.0). We place this “restrictiveness clauses” measurement within the context of regulatory policy innovation, and examine the potential for further innovation in regulatory reform mechanisms.","PeriodicalId":255520,"journal":{"name":"English & Commonwealth Law eJournal","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English & Commonwealth Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3682317","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
The problem of regulatory accumulation has increasingly been recognized as a policy problem in its own right. Governments have then devised and implemented regulatory reform policies that directly seek to ameliorate the burdens of regulatory accumulation (e.g. red tape reduction targets). In this paper we examine regulatory reform approaches in Australia through the lens of policy innovation. Our contributions are twofold. We first examine the evolutionary discovery process of regulatory reform policies in Australia (at the federal, intergovernmental and state levels). This demonstrates a process of policy innovation in regulatory mechanisms and measurements. We then analyse a new measurement of regulatory burden based on text analytics, RegData: Australia (see Al-Ubaydli and McLaughlin 2017; McLaughlin et al 2019). RegData: Australia uses textual analysis to count “restrictiveness clauses” in regulation — such as “must”, “cannot” and “shall” — thereby developing a new database (RDAU1.0). We place this “restrictiveness clauses” measurement within the context of regulatory policy innovation, and examine the potential for further innovation in regulatory reform mechanisms.
管制积累问题已日益被认为是一个本身的政策问题。随后,各国政府制定并实施了监管改革政策,直接寻求减轻监管积累的负担(例如减少繁文缛节的目标)。在本文中,我们通过政策创新的视角来审视澳大利亚的监管改革方法。我们的贡献是双重的。我们首先考察了澳大利亚(联邦、政府间和州一级)监管改革政策的进化发现过程。这体现了监管机制和措施的政策创新过程。然后,我们分析了基于文本分析的监管负担的新度量,RegData:澳大利亚(见Al-Ubaydli和McLaughlin 2017;McLaughlin et al 2019)。RegData:澳大利亚使用文本分析来计算法规中的“限制性条款”,例如“必须”、“不能”和“应该”,从而开发了一个新的数据库(RDAU1.0)。我们将这种“限制性条款”衡量置于监管政策创新的背景下,并研究监管改革机制进一步创新的潜力。