Genealogies of Cost-Benefit Analysis in TTIP's Regulatory Cooperation
Comparative European Politics Volume 15, special issue on Genealogies of European Governance (Mark Bevir and Ryan Phillips, eds.) (2017), Forthcoming
29 Pages Posted: 28 Jun 2016 Last revised: 30 Sep 2016
Date Written: June 10, 2016
Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) has become a quintessential tool in administrative law informing a variety of modes of regulatory governance. It provides a justification for the regulation of markets based on a quasi-scientific and seemly neutral logic to assess the impact of secondary legislation by government agencies. A new frontier for CBA is the promotion of trade liberalization. It features prominently in the regulatory chapter of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). During the TTIP negotiations scholars have deployed CBA as a ‘neutral’ tool to achieve greater convergence, or reassert divergence and experimentalism in regulatory governance across the Atlantic. A genealogical examination reveals the existence of at least two strains of cost-benefit analyses in Western legal thought. A first one goes back to social orientations in private law translating into social-scientific expertise for regulators and proportionality for judges. A second one goes back to neoclassical economics in private law, translating into economic-scientific expertise for regulators and balancing for judges. Today scholars in their convergentist, divergentist or experimentalist approaches to governance deploy CBA and regulatory science as a neutral and quasi-scientific method to legitimize the subjection of national regulation to more demanding standards. A genealogical approach instead reveals that CBA is a contingent and open-ended regulatory tool that justifies contestable political decisions about regulatory strategies while allowing lawyers who apply CBA to remain agnostic on its distributive impact.
Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis, Regulation, Administrative Law, Genealogy, Welfare Economics, Chicago Law and Economics, Social Law, Judicial Balancing and Proportionality, Legal reasoning, Regulatory cooperation, Regulatory review, Red Tape, Transatlantic trade, TTIP
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation