Lainsäädännön kilpailuvaikutusten arviointi

125
Appropriate impact analysis enables also the critical evaluation of different alternatives
to meet the intended outcome of regulation. Therefore, successful analysis
helps to avoid or at least minimize any adverse impacts of regulation and utilize
more effectively the advantages, which viable competition creates for the firms
and, furthermore, by improving the productivity of society as a whole.
Impact analyses are never perfect and hence the development of the analysis methods
has to be a continuing process. In order to meet a sound methodology, it is vital
that individuals and organizations in charge of the development process
open-mindedly utilize the experiences and feedback given by all the relevant stakeholders.
This naturally requires that feedback provided to the developers should
be constructive and genuinely forward looking, and on the other hand, the method
developers should appreciate the long-term experience behind the given feedback.
This process raised a number of questions worth further research. One of these
questions was how to take the point of view of companies into account in the impact
analysis. Typically, lobbying has a negative image in the political decision
making. But one can also ask, is lobbying really a negative phenomenon for the
common good. Even if the feedback or criticism given by the interest groups is an
outcome of their own goals and hence biased, most of the legislative proposals have
a complex impact not only on firms, but also on the competition process itself.
Therefore, the variety among commentators is important for the purpose of creating
a better regulatory environment. Also, the problem of special pleading can be
largely avoided by creating proper instructions for the persons in charge of the legislative
proposals. This supports the creation of a procedure of requests for comment
as well as for the analysis of comments.
One may also dwell upon the question whether the impact analysis should be carried
out by external experts. The presented methodology with a transparent impact
analysis and subsequent thorough documentation enables a critical assessment of
the analysis. This, in turn, sets constraints to both the political and economic special
pleading, but also encourages the using of external expertise. It can, however,
be useful to create some kind of de minimis rules for the use of specialists outside
the legislative proposal makers in order to carry out appropriate impact analyses in
more extensive and complex cases.