Closing the Licensing and Permit Regulatory Implementation Gap at the Sub-national Level in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) is classified as a Fragile and Conflict-Affected State. It has a complex government structure which is plagued with significant political turmoil each election cycle. BiH comprises the national (federal) level governmen...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Language: | English en_US |
| Published: |
International Finance Corporation, Washington, DC
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2015/08/24919392/closing-licensing-permit-regulatory-implementation-gap-sub-national-level-bosnia-herzegovina-case-study http://hdl.handle.net/10986/22479 |
| Summary: | Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) is
classified as a Fragile and Conflict-Affected State. It has
a complex government structure which is plagued with
significant political turmoil each election cycle. BiH
comprises the national (federal) level government, and two
entities, the Federation BiH, Republika Srpska (RS), and
Brcko District, all of which have strong legislative powers
aff ecting day-to-day business operations. The Federation
BiH is further divided into 10 cantons, each with their own
government and legislative powers, although ultimately they
are governed by the laws of the Federation BiH. Both the
Federation BiH and RS are further subdivided into 143 cities
and municipalities, each with their own municipal councils.
Such a complex structure gives rise to overlapping
competencies, conflicting legislative provisions, and a
regulatory implementationgap at the sub-national level. The
aim of this paper is to analyze and describe the approach,
process and tools used by the team in identifying the
problem of ambiguity in the text and the inconsistency of
application of the same legislation across several BiH
jurisdictions; and how the team’s decisions, activities and
actions contributed to and influenced the results, that is
to say in closing the regulatory implementation gaps at the
sub-national level. The study also revealed the causal
effect of the team’s efforts in terms of enabling the
private sector to realize real benefits from the implemented
reforms. The study consists of four parts. The first part
details how the team identified the existence of a
regulatory implementation gap and its causes. The second
part analyses and describes the process of addressing the
specific regulatory implementation gap identified in part
one. The third part provides details of the process of the
regulatory simplification the team used to address the
regulatory implementation gap across jurisdictions, and to
link these reforms with a reduction of the administrative
burden and increased transparency. Finally, the study also
distills the lessons learned during this process that may be
relevant for similar situations and environments elsewhere
in the future. Part four cites those lessons. |
|---|