Better by design: Rethinking interventions for better environmental regulation

Better regulation seeks to extend existing policy and regulatory outcomes at less burden for the actors involved. No single intervention will deliver all environmental outcomes. There is a paucity of evidence on what works why, when and with whom. We examine how a sample (n=33) of policy makers select policy and regulatory instruments, through a case study of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), UK. Policy makers have a wide range of instruments at their disposal and are seeking ways to harness the influence of non-governmental resources to encourage good environmental behaviour. The relevance of each influence varies as risk and industry characteristics vary between policy areas. A recent typology of policy and regulatory instruments has been refined. Direct regulation is considered necessary in many areas, to reduce environmental risks with confidence and to tackle poor environmental performance. Co-regulatory approaches may provide important advantages to help accommodate uncertainty for emerging policy problems, providing a mechanism to develop trusted evidence and to refine objectives as problems are better understood. ► A typology of environmental policy and regulatory instruments has been refined through interviews with UK policy makers. ► Factors affecting policy makers' choices of instrument are identified. ► Direct regulation is considered necessary in many areas, to reduce environmental risks and tackle poor performance. ► Co-regulatory approaches may offer advantages for managing uncertainty, developing evidence and refining objectives. ► Policy makers' skills for effective design of policy and regulation are examined.