Log in
Much contemporary government activity involves regulation of the economy and society. International organisations have increasingly promoted regulatory impact assessment as a tool to appraise the likely costs and benefits of regulations. Ground-breaking research by a team at the Centre for European Governance (CEG) has exposed the limitations of narrow economic approaches to regulatory impact assessment and regulatory reform. The research shows that impact assessment and regulatory measures need to be cast in their political and administrative context to operate effectively and to ensure appropriate cross-national learning about regulation. The main impacts have been:
The findings of University of Reading research around the contemporary proliferation of `regulatory myths' and media misrepresentation of health and safety law have been used by a number of stakeholder organisations and charitable bodies in evidence given to official Government reviews, and drawn upon by those reviews as part of the development of policy recommendations for Government. By reshaping the policy debate around public perceptions of safety regulation, the innovative analysis of this phenomenon developed in the research output has allowed key actors to understand and draw attention to a major policy problem in a more coherent and principled manner.
Dr Robert Falkner's research into international risk regulation for emerging technologies underpins the work of the Nanotechnology Policy and Regulation programme at LSE. On the basis of this work, Dr Falkner was tasked by the European Commission to lead the first ever comparative study of nanotechnologies regulation in the EU and US. This research has stimulated policy debates in the UK and Europe on how to strengthen regulatory capacity in the field of nanotechnologies. The research has highlighted, in particular, the importance of improved transparency about nanomaterials in consumer goods and supply chains. This research finding has influenced the conclusions of the first UK parliamentary enquiry into nanotechnologies regulation and has informed a recent shift in global policy debates towards comprehensive and mandatory nanomaterials registers.
Fisher's research on the regulation of party finance and lobbying has produced considerable impact on British government agencies, Parliament, the Council of Europe, the Georgian government and key media providers. The research has influenced policy and practice through comparative analyses of the effects of regulations in party finance and lobbying and the desirability of pursuing statutory or self-regulation. Impact has been generated through influencing forms of regulation in party finance; shaping policy recommendations by the Electoral Commission, the Committee on Standards in Public Life, the Council of Europe and the Georgian Ministry of Justice; stimulating debate and improving understanding through Parliamentary Committees and media outlets and; providing training through the Electoral Commission.
An AHRC and ESRC-funded Edinburgh research collaboration with the Argentinian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovative Production (MOST), from 2007-2012, served as a key driver in the formation of regulatory structures, norms, knowledge and social understanding, helping to overcome state non-intervention in the regulation of regenerative medicine. As a direct result of engagement with the stakeholders in law/policy, medical and scientific communities, the research exposed a strong appetite for top-down legal intervention. This culminated in the first-ever model law presented by the MOST to the Argentine legislature (Congress) in 2013.
Woodhouse's research has conceptual and instrumental impact in the UK and internationally. Instrumentally, her research has provided the basis for recommendations on accountability made by political groups, such as parliamentary committees. These relate to the mechanisms by which accountability is secured and to the constitutional relationships between Parliament and the executive, ministers and their civil servants, and MPs and their constituents. Conceptually, this impact concerns the debate by political actors on political accountability, whether of individual Members of Parliament for the standards to which they adhere or individual Ministers for their responsibilities within and outside their departments.
This case study refers to the development of strategic public affairs management and associated research on political risk and the regional economy at the University of Chester. It demonstrates both impact on business strategy at international levels and influence on government policy. The Bank of America (MBNA) case is evidenced as an example of effective public affairs research. The business is the largest service based centre in the region, accounting for 3% of Cheshire's GDP (2011). The research has informed both strategy and policy for business and government resulting in the retention of a major international business in the North West.
The four Environment Agencies in England & Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and the Republic of Ireland have introduced, or are planning to introduce, new strategies for regulating low risk treatment sites and activities. These strategies are based on Black and Baldwin's research. Implementation is planned for 2011-13 onwards. The Irish Environmental Protection Agency has led the way in 2012-13, having already implemented GRID/GRAF in a specific low risk area (domestic waste water).
Professor Jonathan Wolff at UCL has produced several important monographs which are aimed at both researchers and students, including An Introduction to Political Philosophy (1996 and 2006) and Ethics and Public Policy (2011). These books continue to have great influence on the way in which political philosophy is taught, and are widely used in schools and adult education, as well as within Higher Education Institutions. Curricula throughout the world are designed around them. Both books, but particularly An Introduction to Political Philosophy — which exists in English and in many translations — have had a profound effect, both in terms of adoption, and in the response from instructors and students.
Over the last decade, research by the Department of Geography's King's Centre for Risk Management (KCRM) has helped successive UK governments to reform regulation by making regulatory inspection and enforcement more `risk-based'. Risk-based approaches promise to make regulation more efficient by targeting regulatory activities only at cases that pose unacceptable risks rather than by trying to prevent all possible harms. KCRM research has helped make UK regulation more risk-based in three important ways. First, KCRM research significantly informed the key recommendation of HM Treasury's Hampton Review of Administrative Burdens on Business that all regulatory inspection and enforcement should be risk-based. Second, KCRM supported the implementation of that recommendation when it gained statutory force for almost all regulators in 2008 through practical advice to a number of government departments and agencies. Third, KCRM's impact on regulatory reform was reinforced by HM Government's full acceptance and ongoing implementation of Löfstedt's recommendations to strengthen risk-based regulatory practice in his 2011 Independent Review of Health and Safety Regulation.