The European Union has integrated the Better Regulation framework into its legislative process with the aim of improving the quality, effectiveness, and transparency of regulatory intervention. Nevertheless, empirical assessments of its implementation raise questions regarding its actual contribution to improving regulatory outcomes, as demonstrated by Konstantinos Saravakos (Head of Research, KEFiM), Effie Stefopoulou, and Panagiotis Karkatsoulis (Research Fellows, KEFiM) in a new study published by EPICENTER.
In the study, the authors analyse the operational and institutional weaknesses of the current Better Regulation approach, demonstrating that formal compliance with prescribed procedures does not, in itself, ensure high-quality lawmaking.
The findings, based on the EU Regulatory Quality Index 2025, indicate, inter alia, that:
- impact assessments are often characterised by insufficient cost–benefit analysis and limited quantification of economic effects,
- the systematic use of expedited legislative procedures is associated with reduced documentation and constrained ex ante scrutiny,
- public consultation processes exhibit a low degree of institutional integration and uneven quality of implementation,
- increasing regulatory complexity intensifies administrative burdens and compliance costs, with disproportionate effects on small and medium-sized enterprises.
Accordingly, the key policy issue does not concern the formal adoption and application of Better Regulation rules, but rather the capacity of the existing framework to deliver high-quality regulatory outcomes grounded in robust evidence, systematic analysis, and meaningful stakeholder engagement.
Read/download the study here: Evidence, Consultation, and Simplicity: Improving the Quality of EU Lawmaking