Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl


2015 | 2 | 109-128

Article title

Regulatory Impact Analysis Practice in New Zealand in the Light of Models of Evaluation Use – Inspiration for the Polish Government



Title variants

Languages of publication



Purpose: The paper describes the functioning of the RIA system in New Zealand using the analogy of RIA and the evaluation of public interventions. Presented solutions can provide inspiration for the Polish government in the process of improving the quality and extent of the use of RIA. Methodology: The analysis is based on a review of government documents and literature, as well as individual interviews and correspondence with representatives of the government of NZ. Conclusions: The RIA system in NZ is not error-free and its shortcomings include inter alia the lack of solutions with respect to ex-post analysis and insufficiently rigorous methodological approach. At the same time, a number of solutions can be regarded as good practice, e.g.: regular external quality reviews of RIS, obligation to supplement each RIS with ‘quality assessment’ and a ‘disclosure statement’ outlining their credibility and utility. Practical implications: The presented strengths of the RIA system in NZ may serve as an inspiration for modifying the RIA system in Poland. Originality: The RIA system is presented through the prism of the model of evaluation use, which is a related tool of collecting information about non-regulatory interventions.






Physical description




  • Kozminski University


  • Alkin, M.C. (1985). A guide for evaluation decision makers. Beverly Hills: CA, Sage.
  • Alkin, M.C. and Coyle, K. (1988). Thoughts on Evaluation Utilization, Misutilization and Non-Utilization. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 14(3): 331–340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-491X(88)90027-2
  • Cabinet Office (2008). Cabinet Manual 2008, Cabinet Office, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Wellington, New Zealand.
  • Caroll, P. (2014). Ex Ante Evaluation in Australia and New Zealand: the case of Regulatory Impact Assessment, http://reggov2014.ibei.org/bcn-14-papers/41-19.pdf (15.10.2014).
  • Carroll, P. (2010). Does regulatory impact assessment lead to better policy? Policy and Society, 29(2): 113–122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2010.03.009
  • Castalia (2012). Regulatory Impact Analysis Evaluation 2012, http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/guidance/regulatory/riareview/ria-review-jun12.pdf (15.10.2014).
  • Castalia (2013). Regulatory Impact Analysis Evaluation 2013, http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/guidance/regulatory/riareview/ria-review-jun13.pdf (15.12.2014).
  • Castalia (2014). Regulatory Impact Analysis Evaluation 2014: A Detailed Review of Options Analysis,http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/guidance/regulatory/riareview/ria-review-jun14.pdf (15.10.2014).
  • Clarke, A. (1999). Evaluation Research: An Introduction to Principles, Methods and Practice. London: Sage.
  • Cousins, J.B. (2003). Utilization effects of participatory evaluation. In: T. Kellaghan, D.L. Stufflebeam
  • and L.A. Wingate (eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation. Boston: Kluwer.http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0309-4_16
  • Cousins, J.B. and Leithwood, K.A. (1986). Current empirical research on evaluation utilization.Review of Educational Research, 56(3): 331–364. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543056003331
  • Cousins, J.B. and Leithwood, K.A. (1993). Enhancing knowledge utilization as a strategy for schoolimprovement. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 14: 305–333.
  • Drozd, M. (2014). Ocena skutków regulacji. Lecture in the framework of a post-graduate programme “Akademia Ewaluacji Programów Rozwoju Społeczno-Gospodarczego” (6th edition). Warszawa.
  • Dunlop, C.A., Maggetti, M., Radaelli, C.M. and Russel, D. (2012). The many uses of regulatory impact assessment: A meta-analysis of EU and UK cases. Regulation & Governance, 6(1): 23–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2011.01123.x
  • Gruening, G. (2001). Origin and theoretical basis of New Public Management. International Public Management Journal, 4(2001): 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7494(01)00041-1
  • Guerin, K. (2003). Encouraging Quality Regulation: Theory and Tools. New Zealand Treasury Working Paper 03/24. Wellington, http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2003/03-24/twp03-24.pdf (15.12.2014).
  • Haber, A. and Szałaj, M. (eds.) (2009). Ewaluacja wobec wyzwań stojących przed sektorem finansów publicznych. Warszawa: Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości.
  • Hertin, J., Jacob, K., Pesch, U. and Pacchi, C. (2009). The Production and Use of Knowledge in Regulatory Impact Assessment – An Empirical Analysis. Forest Policy and Economics, 11: 413–421. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2009.01.004
  • Højlund, S. (2014). Evaluation use in the organizational context – changing focus to improve theory.Evaluation, 20(1): 26–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356389013516053
  • Johnson, K., Greenseid, L.O., Toal, S.A., King, J.A., Lawrenz, F. and Volkov, B. (2009). Research on Evaluation Use: A Review of the Empirical Literature From 1986 to 2005. American Journal of Evaluation, 30(3): 377–410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214009341660
  • Johnson, K.W. (1980). Stimulating Evaluation Use by Integrating Academia and Practice. Science Communication, 2(2): 237–262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107554708000200205
  • Johnson, R.B. (1998). Toward a theoretical model of evaluation utilization. Evaluation and Program Planning, 21(4): 93–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189(97)00048-7
  • Kupiec, T. (2014a). Użyteczność ewaluacji jako narzędzia zarządzania regionalnymi programami operacyjnymi. Studia Regionalne i Lokalne, 2(56): 52–67.
  • Kupiec, T. (2014b). Wykorzystanie ewaluacji w zarządzaniu programem operacyjnym na przykładzie RPO. Evaluation Conference, Kozminski University, Warszawa, 6 March 2014.
  • Kupiec, T. (2015). Ewaluacja jako narzędzie zarządzania w sektorze publicznym. Studia z Polityki Publicznej, 2, Kolegium Ekonomiczno-Społeczne SGH.
  • Ledermann, S. (2011). Exploring the Necessary Conditions for Evaluation Use in Program Change. American Journal of Evaluation, 33(2): 159–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214011411573
  • Leeuw, F.L. and Furubo, J.E. (2008). Evaluation Systems: What Are They and Why Study Them?. Evaluation, 14(2): 157–169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356389007087537
  • Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Mark, M.M. and Henry, G.T. (2004). The Mechanisms and Outcomes of Evaluation Influence. Evaluation 10(1): 35–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356389004042326
  • New Zealand Treasury (2013). Regulatory impact analysis handbook. Wellington.
  • Nilsson, M., Jordan, A., Turnpenny, J., Hertin, J., Nykvist, B. and Russel, D. (2008). The use and non-use of policy appraisal tools in public policy making: an analysis of three European countriesand the European Union. Policy Sciences, 41(4): 335–355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11077-008-9071-1
  • NZIER (2008). Compliance with Regulatory Impact Analysis Requirements: 2007 Evaluation [for the Ministry of Economic Development], http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/guidance/regulatory/riareview/ria-review-feb08.pdf (15.12.2014).
  • NZIER (2011). Regulatory Impact Assessment Evaluation 2010, http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/guidance/regulatory/riareview/ria-review-feb11.pdf (15.12.2014).
  • OECD (1997). Regulatory Impact Analysis – Best Practices in OECD Countries. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/35258828. pdf (7.12.2014).
  • OECD (2002). Regulatory Policies in OECD Countries: From Interventionism to Regulatory Governance. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
  • OECD (2008). Building an Institutional Framework for Regulatory Impact Analysis: Guidance for Policy Makers. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/40984990.pdf (7.12.2014).
  • OECD (2008). Introductory Handbook for Undertaking Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA). Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/44789472.pdf (7.12.2014).
  • OECD (2009). Regulatory Impact Analysis: A Tool for Policy Coherence. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/42047618.pdf(7.12.2014).
  • Offices of the Ministers of Finance & Regulatory Reform (2013). Regulatory systems paper two: improving New Zealand’s regulatory performance, www.treasury.govt.nz/economy/regulation/inforeleases/pdfs/reg-2597298.pdf (15.10. 2014).
  • Olejniczak, K. (2008). Mechanizmy wykorzystania ewaluacji. Studium ewaluacji średniookresowych INTERREG III. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
  • Olejniczak, K., Kupiec, T. and Raimondo, E. (2015). Brokerzy wiedzy. Nowe spojrzenie na rolę jednostek ewaluacyjnych. In: A. Haber and K. Olejniczak (eds.), (R)ewaluacja 2. Warszawa: Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości.
  • Osbourne, D. and Gaebler, T. (1993). Reinventing Government. New York: Plume.
  • Owen, J.M. (2007). Program evaluation: forms and approaches. London: The Guilford Press.
  • Pallot, J. (1998). New Public Management Reform in New Zealand. The Collective Strategy Phase. International Public Management Journal, 1(1): 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7494(99)80083-X
  • Patton, M.Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
  • Patton, M.Q., Grimes, P.S., Guthrie, K.M., Brennan, N.J., French, B.D. and Blyth, D.A. (1977). In search of impact: An analysis of the utilization of federal health evaluation research. In: C.H. Weiss (ed.), Using social research in public policy making. Lexington, MA: Heath.
  • Pawson, R. (2002). Evidence-based Policy: In: Search of a Method. Evaluation 8(2): 157–181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1358902002008002512
  • Productivity Commission (2014). Regulatory institutions and practices. The New Zealand Productivity Commission, 30 June 2014.
  • Radaelli, C.M. (2009). Desperately Seeking Regulatory Impact Assessments: Diary of a Reflective Researcher. Evaluation, 15: 31–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356389008097870
  • Radaelli, C.M. (2010). Rationality, Power, Management and Symbols: Four Images of Regulatory Impact Assessment. Scandinavian Political Studies, 33(2): 164–188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2009.00245.x
  • Renda, A. (2006). Impact Assessment in the EU: The State of the Art and the Art of the State. Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels.
  • Rissi C., Sager F. (2013). Types of knowledge utilization of regulatory impact assessments: Evidence from Swiss policymaking. Regulation & Governance, 7: 348–364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/rego.12002
  • Rist, R. and Stame, N. (eds.) (2006). From Studies to Streams: Managing Evaluative Systems. London: Transaction Publishers.
  • RM (Council of Ministers) (2002). Rules of Procedure of the Council of Ministers. Act No 49 of the Council of Ministers of 19 March 2002, M.P. No. 13, item 221.
  • RM (Council of Ministers) (2013). “Better Regulations” programme (“Lepsze Regulacje”) for 2012–2015,adopted by the Council of Ministers on 22 January 2013.
  • Rossi, P.H., Freeman H.E. and Lipsey, M.W. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach, 7th edition,Thousand Oaks, London, Sage.
  • Sanderson, I. (2002). Making Sense of ‘What Works’: Evidence Based Policy Making as Instrumental Rationality? Public Policy and Administration, 17(3): 61–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/095207670201700305
  • Saunders, M. (2012). The use and usability of evaluation outputs: A social practice approach.Evaluation, 18(4): 421–436. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356389012459113
  • Sawyer, A. (2008). Regulatory Impact Statements and Accountability: Recent Australasian Evidence.Journal of Australian Taxation, 11(1): 42–107.
  • SGI (2014). Sustainable Governance Indicators, http://www.sgi-network.org/2014/ (7.10.2014).
  • Shulha, L.M. and Cousins, J.B. (1997). Evaluation use: Theory, research, and practice since 1986.Evaluation Practice, 18(3): 195–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0886-1633(97)90027-1
  • SSC (2014). A guide to New Zealand’s Central government agencies, State Service Commission 2014,http://www.ssc.govt.nz/sites/all/files/guide-to-central-govt-agencies-5sep2014.pdf (15.10. 2014).
  • Staroňová, K. (2014). Analyzing scientific knowledge in documents: The case of regulatory impact assessment. Human Affairs, 24(3): 299–306. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/s13374-014-0228-7
  • The Treasury (2011). Regulatory Impact Statement – Regulating for Better Regulation – What is the Potential of a Regulatory Responsibility Act? http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/informationreleases/ris/pdfs/ris-tsy-rbr-mar11.pdf (15.10. 2014).
  • Weiss, C.H., Murphy-Graham, E., Petrosino, A. and Gandhi, A.G. (2008). The Fairy Godmother – and Her Warts: Making the Dream of Evidence-Based Policy Come True. American Journal of Evaluation, 29(1): 29-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214007313742
  • Weiss, C.H., Murphy-Graham, E. and Birkeland, S. (2005). An Alternate Route to Policy Influence: How Evaluations Affect D.A.R.E. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(1): 12–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214004273337

Document Type

Publication order reference


YADDA identifier

JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.