Work on Regulatory Reform in APEC - Denis Hew


Published on

Presentation by Denis Hew, Director, Policy Support Unit, APEC, at the OECD Southeast Asia Forum, 25-26 March 2014, Bali, Indonesia. Further information is available at

Published in: News & Politics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Work on Regulatory Reform in APEC - Denis Hew

  1. 1. Work on Regulatory Reform in APEC Presented by Denis Hew, Director, APEC Secretariat, Policy Support Unit 25 March 2014 – Regulatory Reform Policy Dialogue
  2. 2. Starting Point: 1999 APEC Leaders’ Declaration, Auckland, New Zealand  In 1999, the APEC Leaders’ Declaration endorsed the APEC Principles to Enhance Competition and Regulatory Reform, recognizing that “open and competitive markets are the key drivers of economic efficiency and consumer welfare”.  Four endorsed principles:  Non-discrimination: Measures should not discriminate among economic entities in similar circumstances  Comprehensiveness: Broad application of regulatory principles to economic activity including goods and services, private and public business activities  Transparency: In policy and rules and their implementation  Accountability: Clear responsibilities within domestic institutions for the development, implementation and administration of policies.
  3. 3. Work on Regulatory Reform: Collaboration with OECD  In 2000, APEC Ministers endorsed the idea for a co-operative initiative with the OECD on regulatory reform.  First phase of APEC-OECD initiative completed in 2002, when it was agreed to elaborate an APEC-OECD Integrated Checklist on Regulatory Reform  Objective of Integrated Checklist: Assist on self-assessment on regulatory, competition and market openness policies  Second phase was completed in 2005, when the APEC-OECD Integrated Checklist on Regulatory Reform was completed and endorsed.  Checklist is a voluntary tool that could help APEC and OECD member economies to evaluate their regulatory reform efforts.
  4. 4.  Format: 40 questions in four sections:  Horizontal questionnaire on the degree of integration of regulatory, competition and market openness policies across levels of the government.  Questions on regulatory policies designed to maximize the efficiency, transparency and accountability of regulations  Questions on competition policies promoting economic growth and efficiency by eliminating or minimizing distorting effect of laws and regulations  Questions on market openness policies that eliminates or minimizes distorting effects of at-the-border and behind-the-border barriers laws and regulations  Exercise has been conducted by 6 APEC economies so far (Australia; Hong Kong, China; Japan; Korea; Chinese Taipei and United States) APEC-OECD Integrated Checklist on Regulatory Reform
  5. 5.  In 2004, APEC launched the Leaders’ Agenda to Implement Structural Reforms (LAISR) and regulatory reform was included as a subset of structural reform  Specific areas were specified later in the APEC New Strategy on Structural Reform (ANSSR) endorsed in 2010: open competitive markets; financial sector; labor and education; SME development; gender and vulnerable populations; and social safety nets.  In 2009, APEC endorsed the Ease of Doing Business initiative, which aims to make it faster, cheaper and easier to do business in 25% by 2015. The priority areas are starting a business; dealing with construction permits; getting credit; trading across borders; and enforcing contracts. Other works in APEC on Regulatory Reform (1)
  6. 6. Other works in APEC on Regulatory Reform (2)  Within the APEC Economic Committee, the Friends of the Chair on Regulatory Reform is implementing a work plan to study three areas: • Green Investments (2012-2013) • Innovation (2014) • SMEs (2015) • Studies explore if regulatory reform policies have been effective in promoting these areas. Policies are assessed under the following good regulatory practices criteria: • Economic efficiency and effectiveness: cost and benefit analysis; scientific integrity; flexibility and periodic review • Political and administrative feasibility: transparency; alignment among authorities or regulations