Abstract

The paper explores the question of how best to increase the effectiveness of advocacy activities in order to improve competition friendly regulation, an objective which is shared both by regulators and competition authorities. In this framework, three tools are analysed and compared: the use of competition concepts in rule-making, traditional advocacy interventions, and competition impact assessment. The paper concludes that ("ex ante" and "ex post") competition impact assessment might be considered a new advocacy tool and the most effective among them. Its effectiveness is related to the intrinsic characteristic of this tool, which is used before a formal rule-making is opened, is based on the economic analysis, and which always takes into consideration the option not to intervene through regulation. However, competition impact assessment effectiveness depends on some procedural choices and that is not used in a ritualistic way. The paper also underlines that the involvement of competition authorities might increase the effectiveness of competition assessment, even though some issues remain unsolved, one of the most important being how best to balance the role of regulators and competition authorities.