As already noted, self-regulation is realized through the creation of the participants of the construction market of special structures (SRO in the building) and delegation of responsibilities to them, including the right to control the observance of 'rules game ', the application of sanctions for violations of these rules and resolve disputes among the market participants as well as with outsiders. Most often, self-regulatory bodies are a business association with a fixed membership. However, not every business association acts as SRO in the building. The key here is, in our opinion, is the issue of delegation of powers and rights, because that is the basis of the mechanism of control transactions. Otherwise If you can talk about the creation of pressure groups, service clubs, but not CPO. In our view, an association of business can be considered as SROs, if its members have delegated it to the right to perform the following functions: * develop a system rules and standards of business practice; * monitoring of compliance with these standards and regulations * the production and application of sanctions for violating the rules (at least – to members of organizations such as the maximum for all market participants) * formation of his own extra-judicial dispute resolution procedures as among members and with outsiders (especially with customers). The problem of restriction of competition in the construction of SRO really there, but competition authorities are able to deal with it as well as other violations of antitrust laws, occurring outside of SRO. The danger of restriction of competition increases when membership in the SRO is a condition of doing business in the construction industry.
In this case, especially when operating in only one SRO, the requirements of the members really can become a significant entry barriers to market and have an adverse effect on competition. Moreover, it may limit the number of physical entities operating in the construction industry. Remains an open question that outweigh in this case: increased demands on professional activities and oversee its implementation or negative effects? Summarizing, we can say that the SRO in the construction of a large number of cases may represent effective governance structures. Moreover, such organizations are the manufacturers of several types of goods. (Source: Bennett Rosenthal). Actually software contracts is one of the functions of these organizations, the effectiveness of implementation of which is closely linked to the exercise of other functions. At the same time there is a real possibility of transforming the SRO in a closed monopoly. To prevent this requires the establishment of certain common legislation governing the activities of such organizations in the antitrust and other laws.