Workshop developed for the National Economic and Social Development Council of Thailand. Presented 22-24 May 2019

1. 1
Regulatory Impact Analysis
National Economic & Social Development Council
22-24 May 2019
Workshop Developed & Presented by:
Chiang Mai University School of Public Policy
Presented by:
William P. Kittredge, Ph.D.
Jin Rojanayol

2. 2
Workshop Overview
● Welcome
● Your instructors
● Objectives
● Workshop Process
● Schedule
● RIA in Context – an Overview

3. 3
Instructors
● William P. Kittredge, PhD
– Over 40 years ‘pracademic’ international policy
development & analysis experience
– USG Representative to OECD
– Carnegie-Mellon & UGA faculty
– PhD Maxwell School, Syracuse University
● Jin Rojanayol
– AIT PhD candidate
– Johns Hopkins Field Work Team Leader

4. 4
Workshop Objectives
● Refine and Extend Understanding of RIA
– Process
– Benefits
– Rationales
● Facilitate RIA Application in the service of the
Royal Thai Government
● Learn Practical Skills by Doing RIA using Thai
policy examples

5. 5
Workshop Process
● Form Groups
– Appoint a Spokesperson who will present group
findings
● Work through a completed RIA
– Thailand Motorbike Accidents involving Children
– Examine the steps in detail in facilitated groups
– Groups present results for each step, discuss, class
consensus
– Review the case study ‘solution’ and compare with
class consensus

6. 6
Workshop Process
● Work through a current draft RIA
– Manpower Project for Engineering Technology &
Innovation RIA
– Review stepwise in facilitated groups
– Groups present results for each step and discuss
– Document group consensus for each step

7. 7
Workshop Schedule
● 22 May
– Workshop Overview & Group Formation
– RIA Introduction
– Begin Motorbike Case Study Exercise
● 23 May
– Complete Motorbike Case Study Exercise
– Engineering Manpower Project Introduction
– Begin Stepwise Review Manpower Project RIA

8. 8
Workshop Schedule
● 24 May
– Complete Review Manpower Project RIA
– Summarize and document suggestions and observations
of individual groups
– Workshop Wrap up

9. 9
Context
● Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) is a
popular tool used by most OECD countries and
increasingly within APEC.
● RIA is used to review existing and new
legislation and regulation.
● Thailand adopted the OECD Reference
checklist for regulatory decision-making in
1995.

10. 10
Rationale
● The benefits of RIA are numerous but some of
the key benefits include improving business
productivity, reducing business costs, creating a
business environment to invest, grow and
create jobs, improving consumer choice,
protecting the environment and public health
and safety, and providing a foundation for
improving the standard of living.

11. 11
High Quality Analysis
● Requires superior analytical skills
● A willingness to find and develop analyses
where no data, poor data, or limited data exists
about the problem.
– Reliance on secondary data
● Patience
● Humility

12. 12
Key Challenges
● Differing perceptions and positions of key
stakeholders, including government.
● The challenge is even greater when a Minister
makes an election promise or a public
announcement introducing a proposed law or
regulation.
● RIA informs decision-making.

13. 13
Evidence Critical
● OECD RIAs ‘market failure’ justification
– Used frequently describe nature and extent
– Very little, if any, empirical evidence in most cases
as a result of socialist bias
● Regulatory failure most common result

14. 14
Key RIA Process Elements
● 1. Identification of the problem
● 2. Objectives
● 3. Identification of Options
● 4. Assessment of Options
● 5. Preferred Option
● 6. Consultation
● 7. Proposed Regulations

15. 15

16. 16
Problem Identification
● The problem section is the most critical part of
the RIA.
● Key weaknesses include the tendency to limit
the problem identification to an overview of the
problem using high-level, aggregated data.
– Actual causes are not analyzed
– Problem overstatement
– Benefits overstatement in CBA phase
– Over-regulation and non-delivery of the policy
objective

17. 17
Solid Problem ID Benefits
● Confirm or refute the existence and/or
perceived extent of the problem
● Enable key stakeholders to make informed
comments
● May enable some key stakeholders to
reconsider their positions
● Enable government to make policy adjustments

18. 18
Problem Identification Example
● Australian liquor licensing analysis.
● Liquor licensed premises third most frequent type
of premises (behind residential and outdoors) for
reported assaults, with data suggesting 66.7% of
all assaults were alcohol-related.
● Suggests most liquor licensed premises produce
alcohol-related violence.
● The solution developed and applied to all liquor
licensed premises.

19. 19
Problem Identification Example
● Dis-aggregated data; different story.
● Newcastle 1% licensed premises; 54% assaults
● Sydney
– 12% licensed premises – 60% assaults
– 3% licensed premises; 26% assaults
● Kings Cross
– Highest overall assault rates
– 3 licensed premises; 20% assaults

20. 20
Problem Identification Example
● Proper identification changes our appreciation of
the extent of the problem.
– High level data suggests widespread problem
involving most premises.
– Dis-aggregated data better defines the problem and
prevents over-regulation

21. 21
Problem Identification Example
● Improved identification suggests further causal
analysis required to specify the issues at high
assault incidence premises.
●
● CBA can proceed if, and only if, Problem
Identification is done right.

22. 22
Case Study Approach
● Road Safety: Children Transported by
Motorbike in Thailand
● Case Illustrates RIA process
● Groups will go through each step, report to the
entire class and come to consensus
● We will compare and contrast the class
consensus with the case, then proceed to the
next step.

23. 23

24. 24
Problem Presented & Policy Proposal
The case study relates to the problem of child motorbike traffic fatalities
and injuries in Thailand.
Specifically the recommendation to ban children less than six years of
age from being transported on a motorcycle.
Save the Children Thailand, part of a nonprofit based in the US, brought
this issue forward and makes this recommendation.
https://www.savethechildren.org/us/what-we-do/where-we-work/asia/thaila

25. 25
Problem ID – Step 1
● Your group should discuss and identify
appropriate questions to consider at the outset.
● When your group reaches consenses, write the
your framing questions on the easel pad.
● Your spokesperson will present your group’s
work and respond to questions.
● We will synthesize the questions into a class
consensus & compare our results with Handout
2.

26. 26
Problem ID – Step 2
● Nature and extent of the problem
● Begin with overview of Road Safety Problem in
Thailand.
● What data would you need and from what
sources ?

27. 27
Problem ID – Step 3
● How significant is the problem?
● What is the magnitude of the problem?
● What data do you need to answer these
questions?

28. 28
Problem ID – Step 4
● Thailand doesn’t exist in a vacuum, so it is
important to gain some insight into how
Thailand’s situation compares with similar
jurisdictions.
● This is often called ‘benchmarking’.
● What data are needed to make reasonable
comparisons?

29. 29
Problem ID – Step 5
● Given the data we already have, how will we
calculate the number of child fatalities?
● Does the official Thai and WHO data agree?
● Why or why not?

30. 30
Problem ID – Step 6
● Having established the scope, we now turn to
the nature of the problem.
● What is the loss, harm, or other adverse
consequence that is being experienced?
● If adverse consequences are being
experienced, by whom?

31. 31
Problem ID – Step 7
● Now we want to look as risk.
● What is the likelihood of an adverse event?
– How measure likelihood?
– How compare likelihood?
– Does location matter (e.g. rural-urban, North-South)
● What evidence exists to support the likelihood
estimate?

32. 32
Problem ID – Step 8
● Having established scope, nature, and a solid
knowledge base, we move on to examine
primary cause(s) of the problem.
● Your group should consider environmental,
human, and vehicle factors.
● What additional data is needed and what are
likely sources?

33. 33
Problem ID – Step 9
● Does current law or regulation exist that
addresses the problem?
● If so, are there deficiencies that, if corrected,
would suffice to fix the problem?

34. 34
Problem ID – Step 10
● Can we rely on the market and existing laws to
solve this problem?
– If so, why so; If not, why not
● What are the consequences of taking no
action?

35. 35
Problem ID – Step 11
● Will the problem self-correct in a reasonable
time frame?
● Will road construction address the problem?
● Will economic changes impact the problem?
– Might higher incomes lead to fewer children on
motorcycles?
● Are other safety measures likely to help in the
foreseeable future?

36. 36
Problem ID – Step 12
● Given our analysis to date, is there a
justification for government intervention?
● If so, what is the evidence?