In this first working paper the authors present and compare systems of indicators of regulatory quality, analyzing their conceptual underpinnings, technical properties, and usage by governments, stakeholders and academics. After having discussed the datasets and the types of data available, they authors consider a set of critical aspects related to the design, data gathering and utilization of indicators, providing suggestions for improvement. The authors' major findings and proposals are the following: systems of indicators have been developed ad hoc, by organizations pursuing different objectives over time and across the world. Conceptual underpinnings, modalities of data-gathering, and types of usage reflect different operationalizations of regulatory quality. In the construction of regulatory indicator datasets, the first essential step is to gauge the quality of data, in order to construct insightful and meaningful measurements. Especially in developing countries, the consideration of the quality of data is preliminary to any technical and statistical discussion on how to treat data. Western governments tend to use single measures with the specific purpose of improving methods of regulatory analysis (through studies that analyze the conduct of regulators). The authors have not found systematic attempts to measure how regulatory reform is changing the attitudes towards regulation of regulators and policy officers who develop legislation. Aggregation should reflect basic technical rules, but more importantly, it should be performed in a way that conveys messages to those who are supposed to make use of the composite measures. To illustrate, if the goals of regulatory reform are institutionalization, economic growth, accountability, interaction with the stakeholders and communication, aggregation should be performed along these four dimensions, not in relation to abstract technical properties
