Why Is Administrative Simplification So Complicated? Looking beyond 2010

This report looks beyond 2010 and presents policy options for administrative simplification that are in line with current trends and developments. It provides policy makers with guidance on the available tools and explains common mistakes to be avoided when designing, undertaking and evaluating administrative simplification programmes.


"Too much ‘red tape’!" is one of the most common complaints from businesses and citizens in OECD countries. Administrative simplification is a regulatory quality tool to review and reduce administrative and regulatory procedures. It has remained high on the agenda in most OECD countries over the last decade and continues to be so. Countries’ efforts to strengthen their competitiveness, productivity and entrepreneurship during the current recession have made simplification efforts even more urgent. Acronyms Executive Summary Introduction Chapter 1. New Developments in Administrative Simplification Rapid spread of the use of the Standard Cost Model Other trends in administrative simplification Does public perception reflect results? Notes Chapter 2. Future Policy Directions for Administrative Burden Reduction Policy Option 1. Broaden and widen administrative simplification projects Policy Option 2. Quantify, but cautiously Policy Option 3. Integrate administrative simplification with other regulatory reforms and e-government Policy Option 4. Create efficient institutional structures, involve sub-national governments Policy Option 5. Strengthen communication with stakeholders Policy Option 6. Assess programmes’ “value-for-money” Notes Conclusions Bibliography Annex A. Policy Options Annex B. Evaluating Administrative Burden Reduction Programmes and their Impacts Tables B.1. Organisational arrangements and methodological approaches to evaluation: An overview of the conceptual and practical steps B.2. Forms of policy evaluations B.3. Empirical techniques used in the United Kingdom measurement B.4. Evaluating the Commission’s use of the SCM in impact assessment B.5. Ensuring a continued, multi-actor evaluation effort