Abstract
Although not all risks fall under the responsibility of public authorities, there is a need for risk regulation in cases where individuals have no effective means and powers to protect themselves, or no interest in preventing or reducing risks imposed on others. On the EU level, regulation of health, safety and environmental risks is mostly motivated by the need to harmonise rules in order to ensure the functioning of the internal market. Critics of EU “overregulation” often ignore the enormous simplification brought by such regulation compared to the alternative of a 28-Member States fragmented market. Formal requirements on quality and transparency of EU regulation are not new and both the Treaties and the European Court’s case law clarify that all measures must be motivated and that the Union must take into account the available scientific and technical data. Moreover, a good part of the harmonisation legislation is based on a regulatory approach that makes only essential safety requirements mandatory, leaving to industry and other interested parties to set up detailed (voluntary) standards. The European Commission has set a Better Regulation approach in order to ensure the quality of legislation, review and revise existing legislation and ensure transparency and the involvement of stakeholders and the public, across the entire life cycle of regulations. It of the utmost importance to put evidence and science at the core of the preparatory and evaluation process. However, regulation may be “science and evidence-based” only in the sense that evidence and science are of great importance to inform the decision-making process. Other factors play an essential part in the process, and the final outcome is determined by a dialectical, political appraisal and the democratic exercise of institutional power. In order to ensure the effectiveness and acceptance of regulatory measures, the government process must be framed within a broader governance approach, where technical assessment is complemented by a broader concern appraisal and decisions are designed in light of inputs coming from a participatory approach.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) is an independent non-profit organisation which aims to help improve the understanding and management of risks and opportunities by providing insight into systemic risks that have impacts on human health and safety, on the environment, on the economy and on society at large.
References
Bevir, M. (2013). Governance: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2013.
Collingridge, D. (1980). The social control of technology. New York: St. Martin’s Press; London: Frances Pinter, 1980.
European Commission. (2001). White paper on European Governance. COM 428, 2001.
European Commission. (2015). Better regulation for better results. COM 215, 2015-1.
European Commission. (2015). Proposal for an institutional agreement on better regulation. COM 216, 2015-2.
European Commission. (2015). Regulatory scrutiny board mission, tasks and staff. C8 3262, 2015-3.
European Commission. (2015). Decision establishing the REFIT platform. C b3261, 2015-4.
European Commission. (2015). The REFIT platform structure and functioning, C. 3260, 2015-5.
European Council. (1985). Resolution 85/C136/01.
European Council. (2000). Presidency conclusions 23–24 March 2000.
European Court of Justice. (1984). Case 258/84.
European Court of Justice. (1987). Joined cases. 279, 280, 285, 286/84.
European Court of Justice. (2010). Case C-343/09.
European Court of Justice (General Court). (2015). CaseT-521/14.
European Union. (2002). Regulation (EC) no 178/2000 of the European Parliament and the Council laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety.
European Union. (2006). Regulation (EC) no 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council concerning the registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals.
Hufty, M. (2011). Investigating policy processes: The Governance Analytical Framework (GAF). In U. Wiesmann, H. Hurni, et al. (Eds.), Research for sustainable development: Foundations, experiences, and perspectives (pp. 403–424). Bern: Geographica Bernensia.
IRGC (International Risk Governance Council). (2005). Towards an integrative approach.
Majone, G. (1996). Regulating Europe. London: Routledge.
Mandelkern Group on Better Regulation. (2001). Final report.
Redaelli, C. M. (2005). What does regulatory impact assessment mean in Europe. AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Washington, D.C.
The Evaluation Partnership. (2007). Evaluation of the commission’s impact assessment system.
US NRC (National Research Council). (2012). Using science as evidence in public policy. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2012.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Delogu, B. (2016). Risk Regulatory Policy and Risk Governance. In: Risk Analysis and Governance in EU Policy Making and Regulation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30822-7_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30822-7_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-30821-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-30822-7
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)