Making regulations accessible – The word soup and information asymmetry
Making regulations accessible – The word soup and information asymmetry
Bureaucracy is built on regulatory language, so how about we make them easily understood
What is your first reaction when you hear the term - “Regulations”? To me, it evokes an immediate sense of legalese & an immediate draining of enthusiasm to carry on with what I was reading or watching. I do persevere though since, as a part of my education in process safety, I was obliged to learn (between passing exams and doing research). This obligation does not always translate to enthusiasm and ever since, I have been trying to figure why this is the case, and why such an important pillar of modern society is relegated to the back of the class.
First, the most important question – Why should you care?
There are thousands and thousands of pages of regulations that exist, and realistically most do not really interact or interfere with everyday life. There is however an occasional point of interaction that ALL the regulations have with every citizen which is at the voting booth. Marginally, a single vote does not change the status quo, but as a collection – regulations are almost always the outcome of the choices at the voting booth.
Regulations are by their nature legalese. This is because their enforcement is backed by the judicial system in that specific jurisdiction. But they are also at the center of economic decisions made by people – choices from where to live, to setup businesses and how to run them are dictated by what regulatory compliance needs to be achieved. At a granular level, even day to day activities at many organizations, from drug manufacturers to large industrial facilities, can be dictated by the boundaries set by regulations. The trade-offs are that these compliance requirements have far-reaching impacts including what the cost of the risk imposed by them and where & how they can be minimized (in many cases, not the risk itself, but the cost of risk).
Given this understanding, there are three fronts on the information symmetry battlefront.
Accessibility: Ultimately, better information translates to well informed decision making. However, for regulations and regulatory language in general, accessibility is not the availability of information that is the stumbling block, but rather the form and format of this information. In most cases, regulations are disclosed or made available through either individual governmental agencies or an aggregate register (first available for review in the Federal Register) such as the Code of federal regulations in the United States. The advantage of this approach is that it provides a single source of truth for the regulations itself, however the ability to consume this language serve as a barrier, until now. Not to jump onto the large language model train, but from a social good perspective, a likely and exciting application is to basically rely on these models as translators for this language – translating specifically to improve accessibility. To illustrate this with an extreme example – is Chatgpt 3.5 taking on the 1910.119 Process safety management of highly hazardous chemicals. (and conceding the fact that no 5 year old is probably interested):
Given the marginal cost of deploying these tools directly on the websites of regulators, it will not only serve to enhance accessibility – but reduce ambiguity & nearly eliminate the asymmetry that exists today between the understanding of what the purpose of the regulations are with its largest stakeholder – the public.[1]
Transparency: Probably amongst the largest efforts over the last decade in the world of governmental data is the rapid take off in the availability of open source data sets. From data.gov in the United States to the data.gov.in effort in India which catalogues over 600,000 resources – these efforts will be an enduring legacy of open source. However, the transparency is not cost free, and data is not information. A way to think about all this data, is that they are generally an outcome of regulatory choices made across a cross section of governmental agencies. This is where things get interesting since establishing those relationships & many of these efforts have been left to either private think-tanks or non-profits which attempt to explain the story of the data made available. Notable efforts include the Oxford Martin School ‘s OurWorldinData effort or the USAFacts funded by Steve Ballmer. Often used as a touchstone in discussions around capital allocation by governments, this accessibility to transparency bridge is critical. Given the far-reaching impacts it beckons the question – if similar to private enterprises, regulatory authorities need to be mandated (and importantly funded) to generate regular reports that explain the trajectory of the impacts of regulations – thus creating transparency through accountability and improving trust with the public.
Value: Contrary to an increasingly popular point of view, regulations are in the business of value creation. Regulatory clarity is directly associated with the ease of doing business. However, beneath the click-bait headlines that dominate the relationship with cost of compliance with the bottom-line, lay the true value – which is regulations by nature are supposed to flatten the field for allowing competition & ultimately unlock value across the stakeholders from innovative new businesses to higher value products the public – and allowing governments to deliver a higher quality of life for its citizens. The underlying tension that this relationship enforces, has often left the value conversation skewed to the party with the largest number of resources to dictate and influence the conversation ultimately leading to asymmetry in information. Today, there really is not a clear intermediary to arbitrate this value creation - that has buy-in in terms of having a high-level of trust from all stakeholders. And this presents an opportunity – how to demonstrate this value creation & distribution by regulations but walking the opinion-free line. The congressional research service in the United States or the Government Accountability offices are some examples that in-part provide reporting on the value creation, but there continues to be both an enormous need & opportunity for more.
Accessibility, transparency, and value will allow us to have regulatory regimes that reflect choices of the public of that are directly affected by their presence. Further, they will likely supercharge the outcomes they are defined to achieve from higher business value creation, to improved health, safety & environmental outcomes – all of which contribute to a better quality of living for the global population.
To read more of Pranav ‘s writing look at the scholar profile or website.
[1] Literacy, access to web services, and user skill for interacting with such services must be considered. Artificial Intelligence is making headway against the first and second considerations. However, the user still must be aware of the hazard that may require regulation and how to connect it with candidates (who may or may not be advocating for changes).