Workstream (3) : The Dynamic and Politics of Better Regulation: dealing with Better Regulation and its role in a dynamic and multilateral context
Draft of the conference in Warsaw – January from 12:00 in 17thto 12:00 in 18th, 2011 (as a part of the IRRC conference in NL)
Basic set up:
- 3-5 articles prepared before conference (problem identification)
- A plenary -problem stating- session, introducing the workstream’s theme directly after lunch on first day
- Two parallel –problem solving- sessions in the afternoon
- A plenary wrap up and discussion (morning)
- Website discussion
Pre-meeting paper(s)
The aim of pre-meeting papers is to prepare area for later analysis. Preferably these papers should be prepared by plenary speakers, so there would be more room for discussion than for simple presentation. There is no obligation to present a paper[1], but by preparing them speakers would have more impact over the workstream content.
In each paper a panelist should address one or more questions and problems proposed for one or both parallel workshops.
JANUARY 17TH, 2011
Plenary session – problem stating presentations
Introducing the Workstream
Better Regulation policies tend to be ‘technical’ in nature, based on rational assumptions, techniques and preferences and neglecting the political context of the Better Regulation practice. This goes for the academic theory, and cascades down to the operational manuals practitioners use.
Politics and better regulation are not ‘natural allies’. The first dealing with feasibility before quality, the second dealing with quality before feasibility. The first dealing with next week, the other dealing with next year. The best temporal solution is not the best for the long time, and “quick and dirty” approach is usually effecting in significant costs and create new problems. Costs are covered by taxes and fees, problems are solved by another “quick and dirty” solutions creating a loop broken only with great effort during the crisis. These loops would be nonexistent if proper solutions were developed at the early stage.
This mismatch between ‘what ought to be’ and ‘what is’ is seriously hindering the effectiveness of Better Regulation policies. Put it the other way around: the effectiveness of the Better Regulation and other policies could be greatly helped if the political sensitivity of BR-policies would rise.
This leads to two subjects: one is how –in daily operations- to deal with the political dimension in which better regulation takes place. The other –taking a dynamic perspective- is how to sequence the build up of a comprehensive better regulation policy, gradually embedding it in the system in order to make it less vulnerable to electoral cycles.
The lessons learnt from the historical development of other ‘horizontal management’ issues within the government, e.g. budget discipline, will also be highlighted.
The common theme is to increase the political sensitivity of Better Regulation Policies
Via presentations, followed by a panel discussion amongst the presenters, the theme of the Workstream will be introduced in the morning session.
Speakers:
-perspective of an academic (Dr Radosław Zubek;)
-perspective of one or two practitioners (Prof. Artur Nowak–Far;)
-perspective of one or two politicians (Mr. Adam Jasser, Prime Minister,s plenipotentiary for Reduction of Bureaucracy;)
Moderator: Otylia Trzaskalska-Stroinska, Poland;
Lunch
Workshop session 1: “BR in a political context”
This workshop will be focused on the organization of countervailing powers and mechanisms to stimulate that BR-tools will be properly applied in a political(-organisational) context. An analogy with the development of the budgetary governance will be used to inspire the discussion.
Round the table (moderator: Marcin Korolec Viceminister of Economic Affairs, Poland)
Proposed topics for discussion:; compliance with BR-tools; role of oversight and watchdogs; role and quality of the social partners, think tanks; increasing political awareness in BR-tools; analogy with budgetary governance
Proposed questions and problems:
- How to countervail short term focus in decision making?
- How to stimulate compliance with better regulation tools? What roles can oversight bodies and watchdogs play?
- How to involve outsider-involvement (business organizations, think tanks) in order to countervail internal resistance to simplification?
- What role can target-setting and maximizing accountability play?
- How to embed political rationale in BR-tools?
- How to organize the political responsibility for this horizontal theme?
- What are the lessons for BR-governance from the development and organization of budgetary discipline in governments?
+ open discussion
Proposed speakers:
- Speaker about Budgetary Governance and bridging to former OECD-conference, and its follow up (Josef Konvitz;)
- Political angle (Jakub Koniecki;)
Rapporteur: Artur Kopijkowski – Gożuch, Regulatory Reform Unit, Poland
JANUARY 18TH, 2011
Workshop session 2: „Better Regulation politics:sequencing andembedding BR”
During this workshop the participants will take a dynamic perspective and discuss how a comprehensive better regulation framework can be gradually build up, keeping in mind constraints in budget, expertise and experience. They will relate this to the need of an incremental development of a governance structure –which can be the result of a current phase as well as a precondition of a next phase in the building of a BR-policy framework.
Round the table (moderator:Jeroen Nijland, the Netherlands)
Proposed topics for discussion:evolution of BR-policies, gradually embedding it in the system: where to start BR, and where to go from there; (interrelation with) elements of governance;
Proposed questions and problems:
- How to put Better Regulation on the agenda? How to keep it on the agenda?
- Where to start Better Regulation policies when capacity, expertise and/or political support is constrained?
- How to sequence from there?
- What is the interrelation between the development of the agenda on the one hand, and the governance structure needed on the other hand?
- Are shortcuts necessary or possible?
- How to manage transition from one phase to the next?
+ open discussion
Proposed speakers:
-(North-) African perspective (Sherif Fawzi Abdel Gawad;)
-European perspective: (Andrzej Przybylski;)
-IFC/Worldbank (Floretin Blanc;)
Rapporteur: Natalia Cerrato, Regulatory Reform Group, the Netherlands
Lunch
The plenary wrap up
-Moderator from morning session
-Rapporteur session 1: Artur Kopijkowski – Gożuch
-Rapporteur session 2: Natalia Cerrato
-Academic reflection on what we have learned and what should be on the agenda (Claudio Radaelli;)
-Practitioners reflection on what we have learned and what should be on the agenda (Michael Fruhmann;)
-What will happen next: the road towards the IRRC
The aftermath
There will be a possibility to carry the discussion on the IIRC webpage.
Draft Programme:
JANUARY 17TH, 2011
11:30 - 12:00 Registration, cofee
12:00 Welcome - Vice Minister Marcin Korolec
12:15 Plenary Session
Moderator: Otylia Trzaskalska-Stroinska;
Speakers:
-Dr Radosław Zubek;
-Prof. Artur Nowak – Far;
-Vice Minister Adam Jasser,
14:00 Lunch
15:00 Workshop session 1: “BR in a political context”
Moderator: Vice Minister Marcin Korolec;
Speakers:
•Speaker about Budgetary Governance (Josef Konvitz;)
•Speaker bridging to former OECD-conference, and its follow up (Josef Konvitz;)
•Political angle (Jakub Koniecki;)
17:00 End of the first day
JANUARY 18TH, 2011
10:00 Workshop session 2: „Better Regulation politics: sequencing and embedding BR”
Moderator: Jeroen Nijland, the Netherlands
Speakers:
-(North-) African perspective (Sherif Fawzi Abdel Gawad, Egypt)
-European perspective: (Andrzej Przybylski, Poland;)
-IFC/Worldbank (Floretin Blanc;)
11:30 Coffee break
12:00 The plenary wrap up, end words;
13:00 Lunch
[1]Some speakers could not have time to prepare such a paper. We should expect ca. 3 papers.