Types of Regulatory Models

1 Single-Headed Regulators vs Collegial Commissions

Different regulatory authorities have adopted models which accord with their legal and political institutional framework. Countries such as the United Kingdom, adopted the single- headed regulatory model when Oftel was established in 1984. In this model, the Director assumes chief responsibility for the functioning of the regulatory agency, and is assisted professional support staff, and possibly consultants.

Other countries opted to establish collegial bodies, comprising of several members referred to as councillors or commissioners as in the case of South Africa, Egypt and Malawi. Each model is associated with different strengths and weaknesses, and none of these models have been certified as superior. Tetrault (See telecommunications Regulatory Handbook, Infodev) for instance attests that collegial bodies are likely to ensure more checks and balances, and are less likely to be susceptible to regulatory capture. However, the latter is difficult to prove, especially in instances where retiring regulators from collegial bodies also walk into high-paying positions in companies they previously regulated. Differing interests within collegial bodies can also impact on cohesion and consistency, and undermine regulatory stability.

Although Single-headed regulators are regarded as more decisive than collegial bodies, they have been associated with autocratic leadership styles.  Operators who were dissatisfied with decisions made by single-headed regulators often revert to government to interfere on their behalf (See especially Tanzania).

Study Activity:

1. List 3 examples of a single headed regulatory model. Describe the strengths and weaknesses of this regulatory model.
2. List 3 examples of a collegial regulatory model.  Describe the strengths and benefits of this regulatory model.