Procedimento legislativo e qualita' della legislazione. Criticita' e prospettive

La tesi riprende un tema che è stato oggetto in passato di studi anche molto approfonditi; oggi sembra essere tornato alla ribalta grazie ad alcuni contributi che hanno nuovamente stimolato la dottrina a confrontarsi su aspetti così delicati anche alla luce della crisi economica. E'stato da sempre rilevato che la buona scrittura delle norme è un fattore fondamentale per il rilancio dell’economia del paese, per la semplificazione e per garantire ordine, coerenza e chiarezza all’ordinamento giuridico. La prima parte è incentrata su una ricostruzione storica e giuridica delle fonti che hanno disciplinato le “regole per la qualità delle regole”, oltre ad una panoramica della dottrina che si è occupata in passato del tema. Segue l’individuazione specifica di quali sono le regole formali e sostanziali di drafting. In particolare, una parte è dedicata alla giurisprudenza costituzionale per comprendere se esiste o meno un aggancio per la Corte Costituzionale da permetterle il sindacato sulle “regole oscure” e dichiararle illegittime. La seconda parte analizza le pressai, in particolare si è scelto di analizzare il rapporto tra Governo e Parlamento nelle problematiche principali che attengono al procedimento legislativo e alla cornice entro la quale viene esplicato in relazione alla decretazione d’urgenza, maxiemendamenti, questione di fiducia, istruttoria in commissione, gruppi di pressione. Ciò che è stato rilevato, è una scarsa aderenza ai principi e ai criteri di better regulation, peraltro difficilmente giustiziabili da parte della Corte costituzionale e sottratti al controllo di chi, al contrario, ha competenza in questo settore, ossia il Comitato per la legislazione e il DAGL. Le conclusioni, pertanto, prendono le mosse da una serie di criticità rilevate e tentano di tracciare una strada da percorrere che sia rispettosa dei canoni della “better regulation” anche alla luce delle riforme costituzionali e dei regolamenti parlamentari in corso di approvazione.

The Law and Economics of Eco-labels

Eco-labels and certification are one of the many environmental policy tools that have been under scrutiny in recent years. This is because the damages of environmental degradation are becoming more apparent over time. Hence there is a pressure to come up with tools that help solve even small parts of the problem. Eco-labels have been around for over 30 years. However the market, the environment and eco-labels have changed drastically during this period. Moreover, in the last 5 years there has been a sudden increase in eco-labels making them more visible in the market and to the average consumer. All this has made evident that little is known about the effectiveness of eco-labels as environmental policy tools. Hence, there is a call to find answers regarding the actual effects of eco-labels on the market and on the environment. While this work cannot address whether eco-labels have an environmental impact it addresses the effects of eco-labels on the markets. Moreover, this work aimed to find the role of law in eco-labelling. In addition, it aims to find a legal solution that would improve the performance of eco-labelling and certification.

The Application of European Competition Law in Arbitration Proceedings

This work provides several policy proposals capable to strengthen the private enforcement of EU competition law in arbitration. It focuses on the procedural law aspects that are permeated by legal uncertainty and that have not yet fallen under the scrutiny of the law and economics debate. The policy proposals described herein are based on the functional approach to law and economics and aim to promote a more qualified decision making process by: adjudicators, private parties and lawmakers. The resulting framework of procedural rules would be a cost-effective policy tool that could sustain the European Commission’s effort to guarantee a workable level of competition in the EU internal market. This project aims to answer the following broad research question: which procedural rules can improve the efficiency of antitrust arbitration by decreasing litigation costs for private parties on the one hand, and by increasing private parties’ compliance with competition law on the other hand?Throughout this research project, such broad question has been developed into research sub-questions revolving around several key legal issues. The chosen sub-research questions result from a vacuum in the European enforcement system that leaves several key legal issues in antitrust arbitration unresolved. The legal framework proposed in this research project could prevent such a blurry scenario from impairing the EU private enforcement of competition law in arbitration. Therefore, our attention was triggered by those legal issues whose proposed solutions lead to relevant uncertainties and that are most suitable for a law and economics analysis.

Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Retrofit Options to Support Decision Making

How to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of repair/retrofit intervention vs. demolition/replacement and what level of shaking intensity can the chosen repairing/retrofit technique sustain are open questions affecting either the pre-earthquake prevention, the post-earthquake emergency and the reconstruction phases. The (mis)conception that the cost of retrofit interventions would increase linearly with the achieved seismic performance (%NBS) often discourages stakeholders to consider repair/retrofit options in a post-earthquake damage situation. Similarly, in a pre-earthquake phase, the minimum (by-law) level of %NBS might be targeted, leading in some cases to no-action. Furthermore, the performance measure enforcing owners to take action, the %NBS, is generally evaluated deterministically. Not directly reflecting epistemic and aleatory uncertainties, the assessment can result in misleading confidence on the expected performance. The present study aims at contributing to the delicate decision-making process of repair/retrofit vs. demolition/replacement, by developing a framework to assist stakeholders with the evaluation of the effects in terms of long-term losses and benefits of an increment in their initial investment (targeted retrofit level) and highlighting the uncertainties hidden behind a deterministic approach. For a pre-1970 case study building, different retrofit solutions are considered, targeting different levels of %NBS, and the actual probability of reaching Collapse when considering a suite of ground-motions is evaluated, providing a correlation between %NBS and Risk. Both a simplified and a probabilistic loss modelling are then undertaken to study the relationship between %NBS and expected direct and indirect losses.