The intention of deregulation is the liberalization of the markets, with the aim
- Promote innovation through competition
- Promote investment and thus create new jobs
- to achieve greater efficiency in companies
- to enable the state to relieve the public budget .
These goals can all be pursued together or individually, separately. Deregulation can be based on the strength (reduction in the number of special provisions) and the scope (reduction in the number of areas) of regulation. You can rely on prices, quantities, standards , regulations - such as B. Environmental regulations - refer.
Deregulation is justified with the limits of the controllability of complex processes. If the state regulation goes too far, negative micro- and macroeconomic consequences result. B. prevent economic activities or steer them in the wrong direction. From the point of view of competition policy , deregulation is intended to eliminate market-economy distortions . However, many economists assume that government intervention is necessary in the event of market failure , while in cases where there is no market failure, he should withdraw from the market, for example in the case of private goods .
Various studies attribute a job-creating effect to deregulation. According to an analysis of the data from 20 OECD countries for the period 1980 to 1998 prepared by BAK Basel Economics, the Institute for Applied Economic Research (IAW) Tübingen and Prognos AG Basel, deregulation of the goods markets clearly has positive effects on growth and employment in the medium term . According to the study, however, deregulation of the labor market does not affect the development of unemployment . In contrast, the Cologne Institute of the German Economy (IW) came to the conclusion in 2006 that the share of long-term unemployment in total unemployment in countries with less regulation is almost 20%, which is much lower than in Germany (over 50%).
According to a study, deregulation on the financial markets is assessed as aggravating the crisis after the financial crisis from 2007 onwards . In contrast, a deregulated labor market had a stabilizing effect.
Antitrust and price regulation
Deregulation alone does not always lead to (permanently) functioning markets. For example, the break-up of the AT&T group in 1984, which had become a monopoly through the regulation of the American telecommunications market , led to many individual companies that were in competition with one another. In the meantime, however, through mutual purchases from the original circle, only three of them remain. In order to maintain functioning markets, state intervention by the cartel authorities is therefore seen as necessary. In this respect, privatization goes hand in hand not only with forms of deregulation, but also with re-regulation: in addition to competition law, this also applies to pricing policy . Numerous regulatory authorities have been set up in connection with privatizations in OECD countries. The political scientist Giandomenico Majone therefore speaks of deregulation as “a notoriously misleading term”. From the perspective of the theory of regulative capitalism , it is argued that the extent of regulation through the efforts towards privatization and globalization has increased rather than decreased since the early 1980s .
After private companies were approved for tasks that were previously carried out by state or municipal companies in the interests of basic services ( mobility , postal services, job placement, etc.), these private companies picked "the cherry on the cake", they only took over the most lucrative branches of business on the free market ( Rail traffic on main lines, parcel service). Less lucrative sectors (rail traffic on branch lines, mail delivery in areas with a low population density) remained in the field of responsibility of the public sector. But as the profitable divisions across financed the unprofitable divisions in the community and thus enabled only these unprofitable services remaining after loss of " cash cows " (English for "economic driving forces" and " cash cow ") the costly services in the portfolio of the public sector. As a result, the state or the municipalities have to cover the following deficits in terms of basic services or these costly services are discontinued (discontinuation of branch lines, discontinuation of post delivery and necessary self-collection of mail from postboxes, closure of post offices and letter boxes or longer Paths of the Individual to the Few Remaining).
Economic optimization of state or municipal companies can also take place without deregulation. One example of this is the coordination of rail lines and parallel rail bus and Postbus routes in Austria. This is countered by the fact that the personnel policy of state-owned companies was often determined with the influence of owner representatives and political parties, and that the companies were "inflated" because any resulting deficits were settled from the "state coffers".
- Privatizations in Germany through the Postal Act , Telecommunications Act and the Energy Industry Act
- Conversion of public-law monopoly insurances into legal entities under private law
- In the US, the Airline Deregulation Act .
- State monopolies
- Air traffic control in Germany
- Closing hours laws
- Fixed book prices
- Chimney sweeps had regional monopolies ( sweeping monopoly ) until December 2012 . In Germany you didn't have the freedom to choose your chimney sweep. In 2007 there were 7,810 district chimney sweeps appointed.
- Lightbulb ban
- Christoph A. Müller: (De-) regulation and entrepreneurship. (PDF)
- Samuel Klaus: De-regulation of the network-based infrastructure - identification and analysis of control instruments in the context of de-regulation processes in primary infrastructure sectors . 2009
- Niklas Luhmann : The economy of society. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 1988, ISBN 3-518-28752-4 , pp. 324-349, Chapter 10: Control limits .
- JI Haidar: Impact of Business Regulatory Reforms on Economic Growth . In: Journal of the Japanese and International Economies , Vol. 26 (3), Elsevier, pp. 285-307.
- Böckler Impulse 20/2007
- Less regulations bring jobs . ( Memento of the original from November 12, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. In: Information service of the Institute of the German Economy Cologne (iwd), No. 16, April 20, 2006, p. 4.
- Olaf Storbeck: Less state, more crisis. In: Zeit Online , July 2, 2010.
- Giandomenico Majone: Liberalization, Re-Regulation, and Mutual Recognition: Lessons from Three Decades of EU Experience. In: Scottish Jean Monnet Center Working Paper Series. Vol. 1, No. 1, January 2009, pp. 1–36, here p. 11, Giandomenico Majone: Liberalization, Re-Regulation, and Mutual Recognition: Lessons from Three Decades of EU Experience ( Memento from November 12, 2013 in Internet Archive ) (PDF; 367 kB)
- Thomas Rabe : Liberalization and deregulation in the European single market for insurance. Duncker & Humblot, 1997. ISBN 3428487699 .
- Reply of the Federal Government to a 'Small Inquiry' (PDF; 105 kB) bundestag.de; As of November 15, 2007