Regulatory Policy in Peru 2026

2. The context of regulatory policy in Peru

Abstract

Peru’s regulatory policy is grounded in a unitary but highly decentralised administrative system. Since 2016, the country has progressively built a regulatory policy framework aligned with OECD standards, emphasising tools such as RIA and stakeholder engagement. Strong political support, pilot initiatives, and capable economic regulators have advanced implementation, though broader institutional coherence and inclusion of the legislative branch remain pending.

Introduction

This chapter provides an overview of the Peruvian administrative landscape which underpin the adoption of a whole-of-government regulatory policy. The section briefly presents the background for better regulation in Peru and sets the scene for the rest of the report.

The administrative landscape in Peru

Peru is a unitary presidential country, comprising three branches and three sub-national levels of government. The country’s return to democracy in 1980 marked the beginning of a series of structural reforms. The administrative reorganisation, namely, the centralisation of the state in few ministries and the creation of regulatory agencies in charge of the supervision of the newly privatised sectors, led to a relatively small public sector with some islands of good practices (OECD, 2016[1]). Despite the episodes of political instability, the administrative and institutional landscape has not changed significantly.

At the national level, the PCM plays a crucial role co-ordinating multi-sector policies and leading the modernisation and decentralisation process in the country. Despite being a unitary country, sub-national governments have significant legal powers and responsibilities. Administratively, the country has one regional level and two local levels with a sub-division at the municipal level between provinces and districts. Peru has 26 departments (regional governments, including Lima and Callao), 196 provinces and 1 874 municipal districts. The high level of heterogeneity across sub‑national governments and the different competences that are under the purview of regional and local administrations call for clear co-ordination mechanisms to ensure coherence of public action.

The configuration of the country’s institutional framework and macroeconomic discipline has helped drive the implementation of key reforms, amid political turmoil.

Background for regulatory policy in Peru

Peru’s efforts to introduce regulatory management tools date back to 2016, following the publication of the report Regulatory Policy in Peru: Assembling the Framework for Regulatory Quality (OECD, 2016[2]). The Review provided recommendations designed to assist Peru in establishing the building blocks for a whole‑of-government regulatory policy. Support from the highest political level has been a critical element to promote the adoption and use of good regulatory practices in the national administration and help ensure the long-term sustainability of the reform.

Peru’s national government followed a gradual approach to the introduction of regulatory policy. The country defined a clear roadmap for the implementation of several regulatory management tools. The plan included the staged introduction of policy documents that would underpin the implementation of specific tools across the administration. Additionally, it developed an awareness raising and capacity building campaign with the objective of creating technical capacities and support for the better regulation agenda in line ministries and government entities. Third, it carried out pilot programmes to test the use of RIA and, to a lesser extent, of stakeholder engagement activities obligations before rolling out the requirement to the administration. This approach has helped introduce the use of regulatory policy tools in the country.

Economic regulators have made significant progress in the implementation of regulatory policy tools and practices. The regulatory agencies OSIPTEL, OSINERGMIN, OSITRAN, and SUNASS have embedded RIA and stakeholder engagement practices in their rule-making activities. Moreover, these agencies have taken steps to strengthen their governance arrangements in line with the OECD Best Practice Principles on the Governance of Regulators (OECD, 2014[3]).

Regulatory policy tools and practices are exclusively applicable to the Executive Branch, not to Congress. Although this is a common practice in several OECD countries, extending these tools and practices to include regulations that are emitted by the Legislative Branch could result in more efficient rules and yield positive public outcomes.

References

[1] OECD (2016), OECD Public Governance Reviews: Peru: Integrated Governance for Inclusive Growth, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264265172-en.

[2] OECD (2016), Regulatory Policy in Peru: Assembling the Framework for Regulatory Quality, OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264260054-en.

[3] OECD (2014), The Governance of Regulators, OECD Best Practice Principles for Regulatory Policy, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264209015-en.