it's not about what the regulations AIM to do, it's what they achieve, and also if they could feasibly achieve something closer to their aim, which is what was suggested.

that's to say, if emission testing was done differently, maybe we would have caught these cars earlier. Now it seems likely every single non-electric car on the market is polluting more than advertised/allowed, which begs the question if there is a systemic issue here. I tend to agree that there is.

The 'systemic issue' is that conducting lab tests in cooperation with automakers is clearly an inadequate way of enforcing the regulations. That does not imply the regulations are faulty, it implies they need a more robust enforcement methodology.

yes, i see now i formulated that rather poorly. this is what I meant by systemic failure. the regulations themselves are not the issue.

What if the AIM was to create the incentive for electric cars manufacturing

As we've seen with Facebook, Equifax, and VW, shame has no lasting effects. It seems that even fines end up being slaps on the wrist.

The regulations might have a good aim, but when everybody is violating them it's probably safe to say something is wrong with them. I don't know if the problem is in the content or in the enforcement, but it exists.

I don't think criticism of regulations should replace shaming of auto manufacturers, but it might be more effective.