By Date

As 'market referees', regulators contribute to the delivery of essential public utilities. Their organisational culture, behaviour and governance are important factors in how regulators, and the sectors they oversee, perform. The OECD Performance Assessment Framework for Economic Regulators (PAFER) looks at the institutions, processes and practices that can create an organisational culture of performance and results. The report uses PAFER to assess elements linked to both the internal and external governance of Portugal’s Energy Services Regulatory Authority (ERSE). The review acknowledges the well-respected status of ERSE within the institutional framework, analyses the key drivers of its performance, and identifies a number of challenges and opportunities to help the regulator prepare for the future, including in the context of deep market transformation and the COVID-19 crisis.

Most digital security incidents are caused by malicious actors (e.g. cybercriminals and state-sponsored groups) exploiting vulnerabilities in organisations’ digital ecosystems. Addressing vulnerabilities before attackers take advantage of them is an effective means of reducing the probability of cybersecurity incidents. This paper discusses vulnerabilities in products’ code such as software and firmware, and in how products are implemented in information systems. It shows that the technical community has progressed in developing good practice for treating vulnerabilities, including through co-ordinated vulnerability disclosure (CVD). However, significant economic and social challenges prevent stakeholders from adopting good practice, such as legal frameworks that do not sufficiently protect 'ethical hackers' from legal proceedings. The paper stresses that public policies aimed at removing obstacles and encouraging vulnerability treatment could significantly reduce digital security risk for all. The findings from this paper will inform the development of a new OECD Recommendation in this area.

Economies and societies are increasingly reliant upon 'smart products' that contain code and can connect to one another, e.g. through the Internet. Recent cyber-attacks such as Mirai, WannaCry, NotPetya and SolarWinds have underlined that the exploitation of vulnerabilities in smart products can have severe economic and social consequences. Such attacks increasingly threaten users’ safety and well-being, as well. This report shows that economic factors play an important role in the relative 'insecurity' of smart products. It develops an analytical framework based on the value chain and lifecycle of smart products, and applies the framework to three case studies: computers and smartphones, consumer Internet of Things (IoT) devices and cloud services. It demonstrates that complex and opaque value chains lead to a misallocation of responsibility for digital security risk management, while significant information asymmetries and externalities often limit stakeholders’ ability to behave optimally.

From 'traditional' software to cloud services and Internet of Things (IoT) devices, our economies and societies are increasingly reliant upon 'smart products' that contain code and can connect to each other, e.g. through the Internet. Such products are vulnerable to cyber security risk, and economic factors often play a major role in their relative ‘insecurity’. This report discusses how policy makers can address key challenges that prevent smart products from reaching an optimal level of digital security. Increasing transparency and information sharing, promoting co-operation (including at the international level), and ensuring the duty of care of supply-side actors (e.g. through the principles of security-by-design, security-by-default and responsible end-of-life) are important avenues for policy action. Policy makers can leverage many tools to achieve these objectives, from public procurement, certification and multi-stakeholder partnerships, to labels and ex ante legal requirements.

The impacts of laws and regulations on competitiveness have strong implications for OECD economies, as they can lead to unforeseen negative externalities and considerable regulatory costs for businesses and citizens. Nevertheless, the use of regulatory policy to assess the impacts of regulations on competitiveness has seldom been examined. This paper fills this gap by reviewing OECD members’ regulatory impact assessment (RIA) frameworks and the extent to which the competitiveness effects are currently appraised. It categorises regulatory impacts on competitiveness into three strongly interrelated components – cost competitiveness, innovation, and international competitiveness – and builds upon the OECD’s expertise to examine how regulations affect each component of competitiveness in turn. In doing so, the paper proposes a more complete structure that regulators can use to define and assess the competitiveness impacts of regulation as part of their RIA processes framework.