Abstract
The idea behind evidence-based instruments for policy-making is to provide objective information regarding the costs, benefits and risks involved in legislative proposals. An example of these instruments is the integrated Impact Assessment system, which has been in place in EU policy-making since 2003. Impact Assessments are designed according to rational decision models and aim to enhance the neutrality and objectivity of policy-making. This paper draws a comparison between the rational paradigm emerging from the EU template and the empirical evaluations carried out to date on Impact Assessments. It questions the conventional concept of Impact Assessments as rational policy-making instruments, because of the influential roles played by individual knowledge and data quality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ackerman, F., & Heinzerling, L. (2004). Priceless: On knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. New York: The New Press.
Adelle, C., Hertin, J., & Jordan, A. (2006). Sustainable development ‘outside’ the European Union: What role for impact assessment? European Environment, 16, 57–62.
Andrews, P. (2007). Are market failure analysis and Impact Assessment useful? In S. Weatherill (Ed.), Better regulation. Oxford: Hart.
Baldwin, R. (2007). Better regulation: Tensions aboard the enterprise. In S. Weatherill (Ed.), Better Regulation. Oxford: Hart.
European Commission. (2005). Impact Assessment Guidelines, SEC(2005) 791.
Fairman, R. (2008). Operationalising risk: How organisations uses data and values in risk assessment tools and the implications for decision-making. Journal of Risk Research (forthcoming).
Farrow, S. (2001). Improving regulatory performance: Does executive office oversight matter? Working paper, Center for the Study and Improvement of Regulation. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
Hayek, F. (1945). Knowledge and society. American Economic Review, 25(4), 519–530.
Hertin, J., Turnpenny, J., Jordan, A., Nilsson, M., Russel, D., Nykvist, B. (2009). Rationalising the policy mess? Ex ante policy assessment and the utilisation of knowledge in the policy process. Environment and Planning A, 41(5), 1185–1200.
Hutter, B. (2005). The attractions of risk-based regulation: Accounting for the emergence of risk ideas in regulation discussion paper 33. London: Carr-LSE.
Institute for European Environmental Policy. (2004). Sustainable development in the European Commission’s Integrated Impact Assessments for 2003. London: IEEP.
Jasanoff, S. (2005). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton: University Press.
Kirkpatrick, C., & Franz, J. (2007). Integrating sustainable development into European policymaking: The role of Impact Assessments. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy Management, 9(2), 1–20.
Kirkpatrick, C., & Lee, N. (2004). A pilot study on the quality of European commission extended Impact Assessments. Manchester: Institute for Development Policy and Management.
Lawson, T. (2003). Reorienting economics. London: Routeldge.
Loasby, J. (1999). Knowledge, institutions and evolution in economics. London: Routledge.
Löfstedt, R., & Vogel, D. (2001). The changing character of regulation: A comparison of Europe and the United States. Risk Analysis, 23, 411–421.
Mahoney, C. (2007). Lobbying success in the United States and the European Union. Journal of Public Policy, 27, 35–56.
Meuwese, A. (2008). Impact Assessment in EU lawmaking. Leiden: Liede University.
Mishan, J. (1982). The new controversy about the rationale of economic evaluation. Journal of Economic Issues, 16, 29–47.
Moroz, D. (2005). Production of scientific knowledge and radical uncertainty: The limits of the normative approach in innovation economics. European Journal of Law and Economics, 20, 305–322.
OECD. (1995). Recommendation of the council of the OECD on Improving the quality of government regulation. Paris: OECD Publications.
OECD. (1997). Regulatory impact analysis: Best practice in OECD countries. Paris: OECD Publications.
Ogus, A. (2004). W(h)ither the economic theory of regulation? What economic theory of regulation? In J. Jacinta & D. Levi-Faur (Eds.), The politics of regulation. Cheltenham: Elgar.
Parsons, W. (1995). Public policy: An introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis. Cheltenham: Elgar.
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.
Porter, T. (1996). Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Radaelli, C. (2005). Diffusion without convergence: How political context shapes the adoption of regulatory impact assessment. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(5), 924–943.
Renda, A. (2006). Impact Assessment in the EU. The state of the art and the art of the state. Brussles: CEPS.
Rossi, H., & Freeman, H. (1993). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Newbury Park: Sage.
Sunstein, C. (2002). The cost-benefit state: The future of regulatory protection. Chicago: American Bar Association.
Torriti, J. (2007). (Regulatory) Impact Assessments in the European Union: A tool for better regulation, less regulation or less bad regulation? Journal of Risk Research, 10(2), 239–276.
Torriti, J. (2008). EU Impact Assessments and emerging technologies: From precaution to smart regulation? In E. Einsiedel (Ed.), Emerging technologies: Hindsight and foresight. Washington: University of British Columbia press.
Van Nispen, F., & Ringeling, A. (1998). On instruments and instrumentality: a critical assessment. In G. Peters & F. Van Nispen (Eds.), Public policy instruments. Cheltenham: Elgar.
Vibert, F. (2004). The EU’s new system of regulatory Impact Assessment—A scorecard. London: European Policy Forum.
Viscusi, K. (2006). Monetizing the benefits of risk and environmental regulation. AEI-Brookings Joint Center working paper no. 06-09. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=979335.
Weimer, D., & Vining, A. (1992). Policy analysis: Concepts and practice, Englewood. Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Welch, D. (2001). The art of effective decision-making. New York: Prometheus.
Zerbe, R. (2007). The legal foundation of cost-benefit analysis. Working Paper, University of Washington.
Zerbe, R., & McCurdy, H. (1999). The failure of market failure. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18, 558–578.
Acknowledgments
This paper was written as part of the Jean Monnet Fellowship at the Florence School of Regulation, European University Institute, Florence. I thank Alberto Alemanno (European Court of Justice), Robyn Fairman (King’s College London), Nicola Hargraves (European University Institute) Veerle Heyvaert (London School of Economics), Colin Kirkpatrick (University of Manchester) and Ragnar Löfstedt (King’s College London) for their useful comments. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Torriti, J. The unsustainable rationality of Impact Assessment. Eur J Law Econ 31, 307–320 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-010-9202-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-010-9202-y