Toward A More Perfect Union: Regulatory Analysis and Performance Management
Two separate but similar federal initiatives attempt to apply a scientific approach to improve government decision-making and results: performance management and regulatory analysis. Performance management finds its legislative home in the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, while the main regulatory analysis mandate can be found in Executive Order 12,866.
Both initiatives seek to identify the nature of the problems government is trying to solve, develop alternative solutions, and evaluate the effectiveness and costs of the alternatives. Both require measurement of costs and outcomes. Both involve rigorous analysis to identify whether, and to what extent, government actions cause particular results to occur. Their analytical methods can be used ex ante, to evaluate alternative prospective courses of action, or ex post, to assess what consequences actually flowed from the alternative that was chosen and identify opportunities for improvement.
Yet performance management and regulatory analysis rarely cross paths. Scholars who specialize in performance management tend to be in public administration or policy analysis departments; scholars who focus on regulatory analysis tend to be economists or lawyers. To our knowledge no one has drawn the link between the two in the legal literature.
Our paper explains the connection between the two concepts and their respective embodiments in the law. We show that neither standing alone brings to bear all of the benefits of their foundational concepts, but each can each be used to supplement the other. To that end we outline steps that the Office of Management and Budget can take today to increase the effectiveness of each concept, as well as recommend changes to the law.
Jerry Brito and Jerry Ellig. 2008. "Toward A More Perfect Union: Regulatory Analysis and Performance Management" ExpressO
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/jerry_brito/2