Methods and trends of performance benchmarking in UK utility regulation

Regulation is subject to information asymmetries that can lead to allocative and productive inefficiencies. One solution, suggested by Shleifer in 1985 and now adopted by many regulatory bodies round the world, is 'benchmarking', which is sometimes called 'yardstick competition'. In this paper we consider Shleifer's original approach to benchmarking and contrast this with the actual use of benchmarking by UK regulatory bodies in telecommunications, water and the energy sector since the privatizations of the 1980s and early 1990s. We find that benchmarking plays only one part and sometimes a small part in the setting of regulatory price caps in the UK. We also find that in practice benchmarking has been subject to a number of difficulties, which mean that it is never likely to be more than one tool in the regulator's armoury. The UK's experience provides lessons for regulation internationally. © 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Inside ‘Inside View’: reflections on stimulating debate and engagement through a multimedia live theatre production on the dilemmas and issues of pre-natal screening policy and practice

Background The role of applied theatre in engaging both lay and professional publics with debate on health policy and practice is an emergent field. This paper discusses the development, production performance and discussion of ‘Inside View’.1 Objectives The objectives were to produce applied theatre from research findings of a completed study on genetic prenatal screening, exploring the dilemmas for women and health professionals of prenatal genetic screening, and to engage audiences in debate and reflection on the dilemmas of prenatal genetic screening. Methods ‘Inside View’ was developed from a multidisciplinary research study through identification of emergent themes from qualitative interviews, and development of these by the writer, theatre producer and media technologist with input from the researchers. Findings Inside View was performed in London and the Midlands to varied audiences with a panel discussion and evaluation post performance. The audiences were engaged in debate that was relevant to them professionally and personally. Knowledge translation through applied theatre is an effective tool for engaging the public but the impact subsequently is unclear. There are ethical issues of unexpected disclosure during discussion post performance and the process of transforming research findings into applied theatre requires time and trust within the multidisciplinary team as well as adequate resourcing.