ABSTRACT
Speaking of the merits and flaws of deregulation clearly presupposes a consideration of regulation - a concept to which deregulation remains linked, although antithetically. Selznick (1985), an American legal theorist, provides a helpful description in his definition of regulation as a sustained and focused control exercised by a public agency over activities that are socially valued. l
An environmental policy perspective requires, in addition to this formulation, that we distinguish basically between two strands of regulation from the outset. The first is intended to compensate for a lack of market control (especially in the domains of so-called natural monopolies, such as the large communications and electricity distribution networks, to name but two). The second, apparently more central to our topic, aims at safety control through technical rules imposed on activities (production of goods, etc.) which in other respects (price, quality, etc.) are controlled by market forces (Noll, 1982; Grindley, 1995). The first strand of regulation, which in many ways has found in Europe a different but functionally equivalent solution in 'public services' (especially the French concept of 'seroice public'), is still prominent in this domain (Boiteux, 19%; Collier, 1995).
