In order to supervise undue and unnecessary regulations, Framework Act on Administrative Regulations prescribes that the government should conduct Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) on newly established or tightened regulations. However, the quality of RIA has not been guaranteed so far. Within this context, it is necessary to be evaluated by the National Assembly. Therefore, the National Assembly Budget Office (NABO) has evaluated 328 major regulations, out of 1,259 which have been examined by Regulatory Reform Committee.

These evaluations have been conducted based on nine own valuation bases, provisions and standards set by NABO. As results, it is found that most parts of valuation provisions are not adequate except for one provision: the necessity of regulations. Especially, the most critical part of RIA, cost-benefit analysis, has not been properly conducted. In addition, in most cases, alternatives have been rarely considered, although one of the significant meanings of RIA would be making a best choice among various alternatives through comparing. This paper suggests strengthening the managing power of the National Assembly on both government bills and Member’s bills and reestablishing examine function of Regulatory Reform Committee in order to settle down the administrative RIA.

This report is consisted with three parts. In the first part, general outlook of the administrative RIA and its valuation provisions and standards are introduced. In the second part, general results from evaluation of the system are described. Then problems of the system and recommendations are also addressed. The last part includes evaluation cases of RIA on each central administrative body.