430
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 330:
Line 330: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
When a cost-benefit analysis or a risk assessment has been done, a cost-benefit summary statement must be included in the RIAS to clearly communicate costs and benefits. It is expected that a Web link to the full cost-benefit analysis, or departmental contact that can provide the full cost-benefit analysis, also be included in this section.
When a cost-benefit analysis or a risk assessment has been done, a cost-benefit summary statement must be included in the RIAS to clearly communicate costs and benefits. It is expected that a Web link to the full cost-benefit analysis, or departmental contact that can provide the full cost-benefit analysis, also be included in this section.
===Depth of analysis===
The depth of analysis presented in this section of the RIAS should correspond with the results of the triage process. For a medium-impact regulatory proposal, this section of the RIAS should provide estimates of the following:
*Quantitative costs for each stakeholder (if available);
*Quantitative benefits for each stakeholder, if data is available (such as in literature reviews, departmental records, benefits transfer, consultation, and expert advice); or
*Qualitative costs or benefits, when quantitative costs and benefits are not available.
*For a high-impact regulatory proposal, this section of the RIAS should provide estimates of the following:
*Quantitative costs for each stakeholder (if available);
*Quantitative benefits for each stakeholder (if available); or
*Qualitative costs or benefits, when quantitative costs and benefits are not available.
This section should start by reiterating the baseline scenario that was introduced in the "Issue" section and viable options (including the proposed regulatory option) that will be assessed, based on the "Regulatory and non-regulatory options considered" section. The baseline should have a strong factual basis and, as far as possible, be expressed in quantitative terms. It should also be set for an appropriate time horizon. Although a 10-year time horizon is usually considered appropriate, this will depend on the nature of the regulatory proposal and the degree to which information is available.
This section should also provide the following:
*Summary profile of affected stakeholder groups;
*Brief description of methodology, data sources, and key assumptions used for the quantitative analysis of costs and benefits;
*Summary description of the quantitative and qualitative costs and benefits by affected stakeholder groups;
*Description of impacts on businesses, consumers, the environment, health and safety, competitiveness, trade, and investment; and
*Discussion of net benefits and sensitivity analysis.
The overarching requirement of the CDSR is to ensure that the Government of Canada's regulatory activities result in the '''greatest overall benefit to current and future generations of Canadians'''. This means that the regulation should be designed to maximize gains in relation to costs (i.e., it should maximize net benefits). Therefore, the net benefits of the regulatory action chosen must be greater than the net benefit of any other type of regulatory or non-regulatory action. Demonstrate here how the proposed regulation complies with this requirement.
This section should also demonstrate net benefits from the point of view of Canadian society as a whole. This involves an examination of benefits and costs, and then a comparison of the two. Where possible, this section should show how the costs and benefits are distributed across various affected parties (e.g., men or women, businesses and government, sectors of the economy, and regions of Canada)
Key assumptions in the analysis should be explained, and when possible, a description of how the results would change in response to variations in key assumptions—known as sensitivity analysis—should also be included. For more about sensitivity analysis, see the ''[[Canadian Cost-Benefit Analysis Guide: Regulatory Proposals]]''.
The RIAS should demonstrate how the option that maximizes the net benefits also minimizes the administrative burden and imposes the least possible cost on Canadians and businesses necessary to achieve the objectives. The option with the highest net benefit is, by definition, efficient and the least costly in relation to benefits achieved. However, it is not necessarily the option that imposes the least ''possible'' cost. If a critical objective exists that does not support maximizing net benefits, then a cost-effectiveness analysis should be presented. For guidance, please refer to the ''[[Canadian Cost-Benefit Analysis Guide: Regulatory Proposals]]''.
{| class="wikitable"
!Checklist
!CDSR references
|-
|
*Is the depth of the analysis commensurate with the level of significance determined by the triage?
*Have both the costs and benefits of regulatory and non‑regulatory measures been described?
*Have both quantitative and qualitative measures been included?
*Is there a summary of potential positive and negative economic, environmental, and social impacts on Canadians, businesses, and government of the proposed regulation and its feasible alternatives?
*Have positive and negative impacts distributed across various affected parties, sectors of the economy, and regions of Canada been identified?
*Has a Web link or departmental contact for the full cost‑benefit analysis been provided?
*Has a cost-benefit summary statement of the quantifiable and non‑quantifiable costs and benefits been presented?
|CDSR Section 4.4, Analyzing the benefits and costs of regulation
''Canadian Cost-Benefit Analysis Guide: Regulatory Proposals''
|}
===Cost-benefit summary statement===
Medium and high-impact proposals should include the following table that summarizes quantitative and qualitative benefits and costs by affected stakeholders. Please note that the format of this table must be followed to ensure consistency of presentation across regulatory proposals.
<blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;">
'''Download'''
If the following document is not accessible to you, please contact [mailto:info@tbs-sct.gc.ca info@tbs-sct.gc.ca] for assistance.
* Cost-Benefit Statement (RTF version, 40Kb)
To view the RTF version, use the document conversion features available in most word processing software, or use a file viewer capable of reading RTF.</blockquote>
