What is often misunderstood about government regulation regarding the conduct of citizens and businesses is how heavily it depends on perception.
That's probably more appreciated now, following the banking crisis and high-profile discussions over the past year about whether the government failed in its job of regulating the banking industry.
The media throngs now with scathing talk of how regulation from bodies such as the Financial Services Authority should include telling banks not to lend money to people without the means of paying it back.
Regulation has always been a bete noir of the private sector, with businesses large and small claiming that there is too much "red tape" and this government has had several bids at meeting these objections.
In April 2007, for instance, the Cabinet Office announced an overhaul, to scrutinise new regulations more carefully, "to ensure they are necessary and do not impose excessive costs on companies".
It now carries out impact assessment of new regulations, and the government says it is committed to "looking more actively" at ways to offer flexibility for small firms.
The tenor of the debate always tends to focus on a very black and white picture of regulation and evidence that it works.
But experts in the field have long argued that even if we have harder evidence that inspection works, that might count for little, if it fails to mesh with what the public thinks about and expects from a public service.
Aligning public services with citizen's expectations has played its part in the changes introduced in the way local government, for instance, is regulated, with the Audit Commission's move from the target-led comprehensive performance assessment to comprehensive area assessment.
Yesterday's report on the benefits of regulation from the Better Regulation Executive is yet another move in this direction.
The report puts a good deal of emphasis on the perception of regulation. It focuses, for instance, on how regulation is seen: "Nearly two thirds of people in Britain agreed that they benefit from regulation in their everyday lives and 70% think that the benefits of regulation outweigh the burdens."
While the report acknowledges the challenge of changing the way people think of regulation, it's a challenge the Better Regulation Executive, not always itself the best-understood government organisation, is keen to take on.
"Better understanding of the law can increase business confidence and investment, improve compliance and promote respect," says the report. "Developing simple messages on the benefits of a regulation, to use in low cost ways will almost always be worthwhile."
This promises an intriguing prospect, emphasising as it does, the use of "memorable personal stories" and using advice from communications experts to improve perceptions. It's in line with a perceptible shift in government, towards far greater emphasis on changing behaviour.
How it will sit with an adherence to evidence-based policy-making in Whitehall is not entirely clear.
But the change of emphasis is clear. The press release sent out with the new report from the Department for Business focuses not on regulation itself, but on how it is seen. It's going to be all about perception
