1
Organizing for Impact
Assessment: Patterns of RIA
Implementation in CEE
Katarína Staroňová
staronova@governance.sk
Ústav verejnej politiky a ekonómie
Fakulta sociálnych a ekonomických vied
Univerzita Komenského v Bratislave
Overview
• Research question:
- What is the pattern of RIA institutionalization and
implementation in CEE?
- Does RIA foster the strength of executive center (and
regulatory control)?
• Observing micro-levels of implementation change in 5
cases: longitudinal qualitative research
• Focus on: Czech republic, Hungary, Estonia, Slovakia
and Slovenia
3
Institutionalization and
implementation
• Scope of RIA (targeting RIA)
• Presence of coordinating and oversight/Quality
control body (independent review)
• Existance of guidelines/trainings
• Consultation process
• Structural issues (options, data collection
methods and analyses)
RIA- the process of systematically assessing the
likely effects of a range of proposed regulations
and other measures
Policy Making Framework for RIA
adoption
• Legal formalism vs. Policy Making
• Set by Constitution and laws, mainly legislative
procedure of Government and Parliament: focus on
technical issues of legislative drafting
• No formal rules or guidelines to policy development
• Legislation – key policy instrument (not linked to
budgeting) : low quality of products
• Central coordination capacity limited
• 1st Phase - Adoption: most of CEE countries within
timeframe of 1996 – 2000,
• 2nd Phase - Implementation: RIA modernization
and adaptation around 2010
Institutional background
Aspects
Policy on Better
Regulation adopted
Czech Republic
Estonia
Hungary
Slovakia
Slovenia
2005
2011
2008
2007
2005
Body responsible for
Better
regulation
Ministry of Interior (moved
from Government Office in
2006)
Ministry of Justice +
State Chancellory
Ministry of Justice
Ministry of Economy
Ministry of Public
Administration
IA system adopted
1998 (January 2008 in effect)
1999
1994
2001
2004
IA system updated
2011
2012
2010
2008, in full adoption
2011
2009
Legislative Quality
assurance
review body
Legislative Council
State Chancellory,
Ministry Justice,
Parliament
PMO office, from
2010 MoPA&J
Legislative Council
Government Office for
Legislation
IA overseeing body
Until 2006 Government
Office, 2006-2010 MoInterior,
from 2010 Government
Office
+ From 2012 RIA Committee
From 2012 MoJustice
Ministry of Justice
since 2010 four
supervising bodies
no
Strategic planning
coordination
No
State Chancellory
no
No
The Government Office
for Development and
European Affairs
Special department in
Ministry of Interior
From 2012 each
ministry
From 2011
ECOSTAT Gvt.
Center for RIA
Since 2010 in 4
supervising ministries
no
Special unit or
analysts within
ministry
assisting with IA
1st phase: Situating IA within
Existing Political Architectures
Czech Republic
Estonia
Hungary
Slovakia
Slovenia
IA system adopted
1998 (January 2008 in effect)
1999
1994
2001
2004
IA Scope
All legislation for Government
session
All legislation for
parliamentary session
All legislation for
Government session
All legislation for
Government session
All legislation for
Government session
IA guidelines,
trainings
Prepared by Government
Office in 2005 (pilot), not
adopted
Prepared by State
Chancellory in 2005,
adopted
Prepared by Ministry
of Justice in 2003-4,
not adopted
no
Prepared by Ministry of
Economy in 2006, not
adopted
Legislative Quality
assurance
review body
Legislative Council
State Chancellory,
Ministry Justice,
Parliament
PMO office, from
2010 MoPA&J
Legislative Council
Government Office for
Legislation
IA overseeing body
Until 2006 Government
Office, 2006-2010 MoInterior,
no
MoJustice
no
no
Strategic planning
coordination
No
State Chancellory
no
No
no
Special department in
Ministry of Interior
no
no
no
no
Special unit or
analysts within
ministry
assisting with IA
1st Phase results: Adoption, no
implementation
• Scope: All legal texts (no administrative capacity)
• Formalism: IA made ex post to fulfill bureaucratic
measure and legitimizing decisions (symbolic
policies – Radaelli)
• Absence of clear methodology, guidance and
training (interpretations, how to conduct, etc.)
• Structural issues: no options, consultation=interministerial review process
• Absence of supervision and quality control
mechanism (except for Estonia)
8
Modernizing IA systems across EE
countries from 2010
•
•
•
•
Scope of IA - Application of a two-tier process:
Preliminary vs. full IA: Czech republic
Quick Test: Slovakia
Introductory policy document: Estonia (??? As of 2014)
Delegated complicated assessments: Hungary
Anchoring Supervising Body into the System:
IA Committee: Czech republic
1 Body: Estonia (MoJustice), Hungary (MoPAJ)
Several Bodies: Slovakia (4)
Structural Issues of IA:
consultation process: Estonia, Czech republic, Hungary
Options: Czech republic
Linking IA to EU policy making: Slovenia
9
2nd phase: Adaptation
Aspects
Czech Republic
Estonia
Hungary
Slovakia
Slovenia
IA system adopted
1998 (January 2008 in effect)
1999
1994
2001
2004
IA system updated
2011
2012
2010
2008, in full adoption
2011
2009
Legislative Quality
assurance
review body
Legislative Council
State Chancellory,
Ministry Justice,
Parliament
PMO office, from
2010 MoPA&J
Legislative Council
Government Office for
Legislation
IA guidelines and
trainings
Prepared by Government
Office in 2005 (pilot), adopted
in 2008, 2011
Prepared by State
Chancellory in 2005,
adopted
Prepared by Ministry
of Justice in 2003-4,
adopted in 2011
Prepared by 4
ministries in 2008,
adopted in 2011
Prepared by Ministry of
Economy in 2006, not
adopted
IA overseeing body
Until 2006 Government
Office, 2006-2010 MoInterior,
from 2010 Government
Office
+ From 2012 RIA Committee
From 2012 MoJustice
From 2011 Ministry
of Justice
(ECOSTAT)
since 2010 four
supervising bodies
no
Strategic planning
coordination
Special unit or
analysts within
ministry
assisting with IA
No
State Chancellory
no
No
The Government Office
for Development and
European Affairs
Special department in
Ministry of Interior
From 2012 each
ministry
From 2011
ECOSTAT Gvt.
Center for RIA
Since 2010 in 4
supervising ministries
no
2nd phase results: RIA – becoming
part of a system?
• Anchoring into existing Legislative/Strategic
Planning system (adaptation)
• Strong actors
• Establishing central coordinating (and quality
control) unit
• Limiting volume of material to which RIA is
required: sophistications of methods used
• Development of the tool (Preparing manuals and
guidelines to assist fulfillment and implementation of
the legislation for civil servants)
• Development of the capacity (Designating specific
posts within civil service to deal with some of the
issues more specifically: network of professionals +