Pilot study of a combined postal, telephone and structured interview methodology for assessing the impact on business of existing regulation
A report prepared for the Cabinet Office Regulatory Impact Unit.
A report prepared for the Cabinet Office Regulatory Impact Unit.
The Regulatory Policy Institute’s Better Government Programme was established to focus on practical proposals for improving accountability and transparency in UK and EU policy and regulatory processes. Consideration of political risk – uncertainty arising from actions or the structure of policy or regulatory processes – falls naturally within that remit and is topical at a time when considerable attention is being paid to risk assessment and management as an integral part of directors’ and financiers’ duties.
The Risk Commission was originally assembled under the aegis of the Social Market Foundation. The work was subsequrntly transferred to the RPI
Consideration of political risk – uncertainty arising from actions or the structure of policy or regulatory processes – is topical at a time when considerable attention is being paid to risk assessment and management as an integral part of directors’ and financiers’ duties. The RPI assembled a group of politicians, former officials and Special Advisers, and corporate and City specialists to work with us in assessing the evidence.
Regulatory risk is a controversial topic. Firstly, does the presence of an industry regulator create regulatory risk, and, secondly, if regulatory risk does exist, should investors be compensated in the form of extra return? This study investigates these issues for UK regulated businesses, and, importantly, it also investigates whether the notion of regulatory risk should be widened to include the actions of one industry regulator imparting risk upon the whole regulatory sector. Capital market data is collected in connection with an announcement concerning a possible change in the regulatory regime for elctricity companies. We find substantial evidence of a consistent market reaction to the announcement acroos the electricity and water industries, with less compleeing evidence for other regulated companies. The market reaction is not explained as an adjustment for systematic risk. Therefore the conclusions from this evidence are that regulatory risk is present, that this risk may not be confined to an industry, and it is risk that does not require compensation in the form of additional return – it is unsystemic risk.
Between July 1995 and January 1996 a series of one-to-one reviews were carried out with all the regulatory bodies, seven investment analysts, five companies each in the electricity and water industries, British Gas (BG), British Telecom (BT and British Airports Authority (BAA). Issues focused on the sources and nature of risk, the cost of capital and other pressing concerns of interviewees. This document provides a summary of the views expressed.