UNCTAD-RPP Meeting Geneva, 11 July 2014 www.gwclc.com
advertisement
UNCTAD-RPP Meeting Geneva, 11 July 2014 www.gwclc.com INTRODUCTION GLOBAL TRANSFORMATION OF COMPETITION SYSTEMS v Increasing number of competition systems worldwide Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø By 1950 < 5 By 1975 < 15 By 1990 < 30 Today: Approximately 121 By 2020: 130 v Diversity/Experimentation in Design v Vacuum-to date there is no study analyzing institutional characteristics WWW.GWCLC.COM RESEARCH STUDY 3 STEPS TO CARRY OUT THE RESEARCH: Ø Examination of major institutional characteristics Ø Benchmark each of the characteristics § Select key defining questions for each of the characteristics § Find publicly available information § Confirm Results with NCAs Ø Regression of information & Identification of Trends WWW.GWCLC.COM RESEARCH STUDY Architecture Policy Duties Policy Making Agents Governance Portfolio of Policy Instruments Accountability Independence WWW.GWCLC.COM Competition (+) Authority Decision Making Functions RESEARCH STUDY Architecture Policy Duties Policy Making Agents Governance Portfolio of Policy Instruments Accountability Independence WWW.GWCLC.COM Competition (+) Authority Decision Making Functions POLICY DUTIES: THE TREND The Trend: Competition + Agencies Ø Increased number of agencies with multiplicity of duties Ø New and old combinations: § Competition & Consumer Protection mandates § Competition & IP mandates § Competition & Sector Regulatory mandates WWW.GWCLC.COM POLICY DUTIES: DATA 2012-COMPETITION MANDATE Exclusive Non-exclusive Non-Available WWW.GWCLC.COM POLICY DUTIES: DATA 2012 WWW.GWCLC.COM 2013 (*Preliminary Results) POLICY DUTIES: DATA 100% 90% 2012 80% 70% 60% 50% No 40% Yes 30% 20% 10% 0% Consumer Protection WWW.GWCLC.COM IP POLICY DUTIES: DATA 100% 90% 80% 2012 70% 60% Non-Available 50% No 40% Yes 30% 20% 10% 0% Sector Regulations WWW.GWCLC.COM POLICY DUTIES: IMPLICATIONS Some Questions to think about: Ø Are institutional changes relevant for agencies’ performance? Ø Are institutional changes relevant for international forums? Ø How will institutional developments affect cooperation amongst agencies? WWW.GWCLC.COM POLICY DUTIES: IMPLICATIONS ….Thinking Ahead of Time…. 2012 WWW.GWCLC.COM 2013 2016 POLICY DUTIES: IMPLICATIONS Intra-Agency Implications: Ø Manage diversity of Tasks § Different Priorities Ø Different Challenges § Searching for synergies Ø Training Programs § Adapt to new institutional design WWW.GWCLC.COM POLICY DUTIES: IMPLICATIONS Inter-Agency Implications: Ø Cooperation § Inter-Agency Cooperation Ø International Forums § UNCTAD-Invite other agencies to meetings? § ICN-Promote networking with other agencies? WWW.GWCLC.COM CONCLUSIONS v Sufficient institutional design experimentation worth observing & examining v Data provides for the menu that hopefully will inform future decisions when reforming and/or creating competition systems v Changes in the institutional arrangements shape actors & activities in the Competition community WWW.GWCLC.COM THANK YOU! WWW.GWCLC.COM ü Hassan Qaqaya, Graham Mott & rest of UNCTAD competition team ü Worldwide Competition Agencies ü Independent Competition Experts ü Extraordinary team of GW CLC research fellows 2012 DATA RESULTS INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS INDEPENDENCE 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non-Available No Yes Budget allocated annually Independence Competition (+) Authority Self-finance 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non-Available No Yes INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS ACCOUNTABILITY BEFORE THE EXECUTIVE Yes No Non-Available Independence Accountability Competitio n (+) Authority 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non-Available No Yes INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS ACCOUNTABILITY BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE Yes No Non-Available Independence Accountability Competitio n (+) Authority 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non-Available No Yes INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS ACCOUNTABILITY BEFORE THE JUDICIARY DECISIONS REVIEWED BY THE JUDICIARY Yes Yes No No Non-Available Non-Available Independence Accountability Competitio n (+) Authority INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS GOVERNANCE Single headed Multiple headed Non-Available Accountability Independence Governance Competitio n (+) Authority INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS SINGLE CHAIRMAN 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non-Available No Yes Accountability Independence Governance Competitio n (+) Authority COLLEGIATE BODY 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non-Available No Yes INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS ARCHITECTURE Self-Contained Unit Subunit Non-Available Accountability Governance Independence Architecture Competiti on (+) Authority INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS 100% POLICY DUTIES 90% 80% 70% COMPETITION MANDATE 60% 50% 40% 30% Exclusive Non-exclusive Non-Available Governance Accountabilit y Independence Architecture Competit ion (+) Authorit y Policy Duties Not-Applicable Non-Available 20% No 10% Yes 0% INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS POLICY MAKING AGENTS DIVERSE AGENCIES SECTOR REGULATORS COMPETITION MANDATE Yes No Non Available Governanc e Architectu re Accountab ility Independe nce Policy Duties Competiti on (+) Authority Policy Making Agents Yes No Non Available INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS SECTOR REGULATORS COMPETITION MANDATE 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non Applicable Non-Available No Yes Governanc e Architectu re Accountab ility Independe nce Policy Duties Competiti on (+) Authority Policy Making Agents MOU’S WITH SECTOR REGULATORS 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non Applicable Non-Available No Yes INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS PORTFOLIO OF POLICY INSTRUMENTS 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non-Available No Yes Governan ce Architect ure Policy Making Agents Accounta bility Independ ence Policy Duties Competit ion (+) Authorit y Portfolio of Policy Instrume nts 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non Applicable Non-Available No Yes INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS PORTFOLIO OF POLICY INSTRUMENTS POWERS TO ISSUE SECONDARY LEGISLATION Yes No Non-Available Governan ce Architect ure Policy Making Agents Accounta bility Independ ence Policy Duties Competit ion (+) Authorit y Portfolio of Policy Instrume nts 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Non-Applicable Non-Available No Yes INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS PORTFOLIO OF POLICY INSTRUMENTS POWERS TO CONDUCT MARKET RESEARCH Yes No Non-Available Governan ce Architect ure Policy Making Agents Accounta bility Independ ence Policy Duties Competit ion (+) Authorit y Portfolio of Policy Instrume nts REPORTING POWERS Yes No Non-Available INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS DECISION MAKING FUNCTIONS PROSECUTORIAL VS. NON PROSECUTORIAL MODEL Prosecutorial Non Prosecutorial Non Available Architec ture Policy Duties Governa nce Portfolio of Policy Instrum ents Account ability Indepen dence Policy Making Agents Compet ition (+) Authori ty Decision Making Function s UNBUNDLE INVESTIGATION & DECISION MAKING UNITS WITHIN NCAS Yes No Non Available Non Applicable
