Showing posts with label risk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label risk. Show all posts
, , ,

Konsep Regulasi Berbasis Risiko: Telaah Kritis dalam Penerapannya pada Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja

Monday, May 24, 2021


Abstrak

Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja menekankan pada kemudahan untuk melakukan usaha. Salah satu hal yang menjadi perhatian adalah penyederhanaan perizinan berusaha. Konsep Regulasi Berbasis Risiko menarik bagi program penyederhanaan perizinan karena diasumsikan bahwa penerapannya dapat mengurangi jumlah perizinan. Namun, penerapan analisis resiko untuk menapis izin merupakan sesuatu yang berbeda dengan penerapan konsep Regulasi Berbasis Risiko di negara-negara lain. Selain itu, penerapan regulasi berbasis risiko juga perlu memperhatikan kritik yang tidak terakomodasi dalam Undang-Undang. Tulisan ini menjabarkan 4 (empat) kritik atas penerapan regulasi berbasis risiko dalam Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja, yaitu (i) format omnibus merancukan penilaian risiko, (ii) risiko volatilitas belum dipertimbangkan, (iii) risiko sistemik belum dipertimbangkan serta (iv) potensi “regulatory capture”. Secara konseptual, penerapan regulasi berbasis risiko memantik diskursus akademik mengenai pengertian regulasi secara luas yang telah jauh berkembang dari pemaknaan sempit dalam wacana akademik di Indonesia yang mendefinisikannya sebatas peraturan perundang-undangan semata. 

Kata kunci: Regulasi, Regulasi Berbasis Risiko, Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja, Omnibus. 

Abstract 

The Law on Job Creation emphasizes the ease of doing business. One of the things that is of concern is the simplification of business permit. The concept of risk-based regulation is attractive to simplify the programs due to the assumption that it may cut off a number of licenses. However, the application of risk analysis to screen permits is something different from other countries. In addition, the application of risk-based regulations also needs to pay attention to the critique that is not accommodated in the Law. This paper describes 4 (four) critiques of the application of risk-based regulation in the Law, (i) the omnibus format confuses risk assessment, (ii) volatility risk has not been considered, (iii) systemic risk has not been considered and (iv) potential “regulatory capture”. Conceptually, the application of risk-based regulation has sparked an academic discourse regarding the broad understanding of regulation that has evolved far from the narrow meaning in academic discourse in Indonesia which defines it only as a statutory regulation. 

Keywords: Regulation, Risk Based Ragulation, Job Creation Law, Omnibus

Download paper disini.



 

, ,

Legal loopholes in Nano Liability

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Chris Phoenix at CRN referred us to a new report from Investor Environmental Health Network. The Report highlighted 8 loopholes under current regulations which, if go unrepaired, will trigger litigation bomb in the future.

 

,

Nanotechnology's Risk Governance

Thursday, July 12, 2007

You might want to read Swiss Re's report on its latest Conference "The Risk Governance of Nanotechnology: Recommendations for Managing a Global Issue" held on the 6th and 7th of July 2006.

Some of the report highlighted the need of differentiating the risk posed by developed vs developing nations.

Download the report yourself here.

(hat tip: Mike Treder, CRN)

 

, ,

Environmental Defense and Du Pont Launched Nano Risk Framework

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Webcast of the Nano Risk Framework is available at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars here.

Here's a glimpse of the "Framework":

The Nano Risk Framework is designed to be a comprehensive, practical and flexible tool for documenting and communicating the steps a user has taken to evaluate and address potential risks of nanoscale materials. The Framework offers guidance on the key questions an organization should consider in developing applications of such materials, and on the critical information needed to make sound risk evaluations and risk management decisions.

 

, , , , ,

Some good points on regulating the unknown

Saturday, February 24, 2007

This article from R.F.Wilson deserves a review:
This article examines our emerging knowledge base about the hazards of nano-sized particles (NSPs), focusing on risks posed by two types of exposure, inhalation of NSPs and topical application of products containing NSPs. It examines why the current regulatory framework is inadequate to respond to these risks and why regulators believe their hands are tied until new legislation is enacted. It then argues that this regulatory inaction leaves a significant role for the private insurance market, but that regulators should support this market in tangible ways, such as requiring federal grant recipients to carry commercial liability policies that would protect the public from potential adverse consequences
I still don't think that current research results on nanotoxicity is conclusive enough to start underwriting. A very limited underwriting agreement can be applied I guess. Swiss Re wrote a good report on the case, downloadable here.

 

, , , ,

Consumer demand labelling

Sunday, December 3, 2006

That was the result of a Conference held by the German's Federal Institute of Risk Assessement:
Our experience shows that an event of this kind is well suited to involving consumers in the scientific debate about the assessment of new technologies. When making their judgement, consumers took a very differentiated look at the potential risks and benefits of nanotechnology based on knowledge of the latest research and the existing uncertainty.
According to the conference, consumers were especially critical of the use of nanomaterials in foods.

With regards to the weighing between risk and benefit, consumer tends to put more weight on the risk nanotech brings, in comparison to its benefits:
Consumers felt that the promised advantages to be derived from using nanotechnology like changes to the flow properties of ketchup or the trickling properties of products were non-essential given the potential risks.