Submission at the Workshop on Risk Assessment in Regulatory Policy Analysis (RIA), Session 6, Mexico, 9-11 June 2014. Further information is available at http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/

1. Identifying
Benefits
of
Regulatory
Actions
According
to
the
World
Health
Organization,
“Global
transport
emissions
comprised
an
estimated
23%
of
direct
CO2
emissions
in
2008,
with
land
transport
accounting
for
the
largest
share
(16%)”1.
A
number
of
options
have
been
indentified
to
reduce
CO2
emissions
from
automobiles.
They
range
from
changes
vehicle
and
engine
size
to
different
fuels
to
abandoning
the
internal
combustion
engine.
Risk
analysts
and
regulatory
organizations
are
recognizing
the
importance
of
including
both
co-­‐benefits
(additional
benefits
that
will
accrue
when
a
target
risk
is
mitigated)
and
risk
tradeoffs
(dis-­‐benefits
that
will
occur
from
a
risk
management
intervention)
in
regulatory
impact
analyses.
The
US
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
Circular
A-­‐4
reminds
analysts
to
“[I]dentify
the
expected
undesirable
side-­‐
effects
and
ancillary
benefits
of
the
proposed
regulatory
action
and
the
alternatives.
These
should
be
added
to
the
direct
benefits
and
costs
as
appropriate.
In
the
table
below
are
4
options
that
have
been
put
forth
to
reduce
CO2
emissions
from
automobiles.
For
each
option
identify
potential
the
primary
benefit
and
any
co-­‐benefits
of
the
technology
and
possible
risk
tradeoffs
that
would
count
as
“costs”
of
the
technology.
Option
Benefits/Co-­benefits
Risk
Tradeoffs
Increased
fuel
efficiency
through
reduced
vehicle
and
engine
size
Switch
to
diesel
fuel
Use
of
biofuels
including
ethanol
and
biodiesel
Plug-­‐in
battery
powered
vehicles
1
http://www.who.int/hia/hgebrief_transp.pdf