Évaluer les régulateurs équitablement: Associer les connaissances scientifiques aux évaluations d'impact

Translated title of the contribution: Assessing regulators fairly: matching scientific knowledge with impact assessments

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

16 Downloads (Pure)


Retrospective analyses, regulatory performance measures and scorecards have been used for assessing the quality of impact assessments. However, these methods neglect the actual scientific knowledge available at the time of conducting a specific policy appraisal and do not enable to capture the extent of diachronic learning related to a specific regulatory reform. By focusing on the EU rail liberalisation, the aim of this paper is to assess the quality of economic analyses within impact assessments vis-à-vis the quality of scientific knowledge. The research design is straightforward. A review of the economic literature traces the progress in the scientific methods for evaluating the economic impact of rail liberalisation. By matching such scientific knowledge with the knowledge expressed in the practice of impact assessment, the main hypothesis to test is whether economic models are fully exploited by policy evaluators. The contribution of the paper is two-fold: on the one hand, it enhances the methodology for regulatory policy evaluation and, on the other hand, it contributes to the literature of the use of scientific knowledge in policy making.
Translated title of the contributionAssessing regulators fairly: matching scientific knowledge with impact assessments
Original languageFrench
Pages (from-to)131-151
Number of pages21
JournalPolitiques et Management Public
Issue number3-4
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2018


  • European Commission
  • rail liberalisation
  • quality of impact assessments
  • retrospective analyses


Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing regulators fairly: matching scientific knowledge with impact assessments'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this