Presenter: David Murphy (Bank of England & LSE Law)
Title: "Some perspectives on and problematics of regulatory impact analysis"
Time: 18:00 Uhr s.t.
Abstract: Regulation can be analysed, either in the rule-writing phase or after it has been finalised. This process can reveal features of the rules which were not evident to the rule writers, and it can provide information on the potential costs, benefits, and risks of the rules. However, it is a contestible process: different stakeholders can reasonably differ on what constitutes a ‘good’ analysis, and what conclusions can be drawn from it. The talk will consider some of these issues. It will begin with a discussion of the need for analysis, the tools used to conduct it, and the parties involved. Given that financial regulation is often quantitative, particular insights are available from conducting a cost/benefit analysis of it, so this approach is discussed in detail. A framework for comparing costs and benefits is introduced, based on potential harm in futures states of the world with and without regulation. This will be familiar to economists from the work of von Neumann and Morgenstern, and it forms a useful tool to open up questions of Knightian uncertainty, precaution, re-distribution and adaptation. A comparison of two regulatory impact analyses, the MAGD assessment of the post-crisis OTC derivatives regulatory reforms and a cost-benefit analysis of margin procyclicality tools, helps to uncover the contested normative basis of regulatory impact analysis. The territory of analysis will be found to span justification and the bolstering of authority as well as a more exploratory dialogue.