Abstract

AbstractAlthough regulatory competition has been hailed in some quarters as a superior alternative to Council‐driven harmonization, little empirical investigation has been carried out to demonstrate how regulatory competition might work in actual EC practice, and therefore whether its expected benefits will, in fact, materialize.We construct a framework stylizing the iterative process of regulatory competition, and illuminate its emergence from five elements of the regulatory strategy of the EC‐1992 internal market programme.The framework presented shows that the process of regulatory competition is a complex and unpredictable one. Two case studies are provided to exemplify the difficulties. These practical limitations severely weaken the case for regulatory competition based on theoretical economic arguments. Moreover, a comparative cost‐benefit analysis of regulatory competition and harmonization suggests that, where relevant, regulatory competition and harmonization should be seen as complements, rather than substitutes. The demarcation between the two is best determined on a case‐by‐case basis according to the principle of subsidiarity.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.