The rest of the indexes reflect the second and third levels of analysis and their indicators derive from the ERGI. The Formal/Informal Autonomy Indexes, Formal/Informal Transparency Indexes, and Formal/Informal Accountability Indexes are aimed at identifying relationships between agencies’ formal and informal regulations.<sup>4</sup> The different aspects of agencies’ autonomy (political, managerial, and regulatory), transparency (social and institutional), and tools (regulatory and institutional) are reflected in seven indexes composed of indicators related to each of these aspects: Political Autonomy Index, Managerial Autonomy Index, and Regulatory Autonomy Index; Social Transparency Index and Institutional Transparency Index; Regulatory and Institutional Tools Indexes. They were developed to better assess the performance of an agency’s governance in each of the variables. In addition, they constitute a useful tool to compare the scores of regulatory agencies in each variable and its components.

All the indexes measure their indicators with a value range between 0 (lowest) and 1 (highest), giving all variables the same weight. Although the majority of the agencies responded to the 97 questions that were part of the survey, in some cases questions were not answered. This occurred because either the agency simply did not answer or the question was not applicable. For example, an agency answered negatively to the question regarding the existence of mechanisms to involve stakeholders in the rule-making process, and thus did not answer the question related to the actual involvement of stakeholders in the same process, as it was not applicable.

Questions that were not answered because the agency omitted the response were not counted in the agency’s score. In the cases of those questions that were not answered because they were not applicable to the agency, we filled that gap by considering the purpose of the index. In the ERGI and in those indexes related to agencies’ formal and informal regulation ( _e.g._ Formal/Informal Autonomy Index), we did not count questions that were not applicable. The rationale behind this decision is the fact that in those indexes the formal and informal aspects of agencies’ governance are considered separately; hence classifying the lack of response to the informal questions as negative would unfairly affect an agency’s score. In those indexes that resulted from disaggregations of the ERGI ( _e.g._ Political, Managerial, and Regulatory Autonomy Indexes), we merged questions related to the formal and informal aspects of the same subject and considered one response. Using the example again of the question related to stakeholders’ participation, if an agency said it did not have mechanisms to involve stakeholders in its rule-making process and then said the question related to their actual involvement was not applicable, then a negative value (0) would be assigned. If the agency’s law did establish the participation of stakeholders in its rulemaking process, but they did not actually get involved, then we also considered both questions as one and also assigned a negative (0) value.

**Table 1: Levels of Analysis and Corresponding Indexes**

|LEVEL OF ANALYSIS|DESCRIPTION|INDEX|OUTCOME|
|---|---|---|---|
|**OVERALL PERFORMANCE OF**<br>**AGENCIES’ GOVERNANCE**|Analysis of agencies’<br>autonomy, transparency,<br>accountability and tools.|Electricity Regulatory<br>Governance Index (ERGI)<br>Autonomy Index<br>Transparency Index<br>Accountability Index|Ranking of LAC<br>agencies in terms of the<br>quality of their<br>regulatory governance.<br>Ranking of LAC<br>agencies in autonomy,<br>transparency,<br>accountability and tools|

- 13 -