Search results

The area of law where the principle of transparency is applicable is expanding fast. Also many financial markets have recently become subject to new regulations requiring transparency, such as EU directives MIFID II or Solvency II. Here, what is expanding is not just the applicability of the principle as such, but also the scope of issues which are affected by transparency, that is, remuneration or conflict of interests. In the light of these regulations, it may seem that transparency has simply become a sole legislative measure assuring values such as consumer protection, market stability or – most of all – high-quality governance. Indeed, transparency is thought to contribute to the quality of governance in several different ways, although its implementation must meet certain standards if it is to produce the desired results, especially when it comes to financial institutions. Financial institutions are commonly required to be particularly transparent due to the fact they often act as public trust entities. As the activity of financial institutions is of such importance, the issue of transparency efficiency is worth discussing. Although it is said that the emergence of the principle of transparency in the EU law is a fairly new phenomenon, the existence of transparency obligation is not. Therefore, some doubts may arise as to the question whether the principle of transparency actually adds much to existing rules and principles. In this chapter the author explored and discussed how mandatory transparency affects financial institutions’ activity, and whether it performs its function efficiently.

This study aims to investigate how the public formed their need for information in the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. Exploring the formation of information needs can reveal why the public's information needs differ and provide insights on targeted information service during health crises at an essential level.

The data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 46 participants and analyzed using the grounded theory approach. Concepts, sub-categories and categories were developed, and a model was built to examine how the public formed the need for information about the pandemic.

The authors found that participants were stimulated by information asymmetry, severity of the pandemic and regulations to control the pandemic, which triggered their perceptions of information credibility, threat and social approval. After the participants perceived that there was a threat, it activated their basic needs and they actively formed the need for information based on cognitive activities. Moreover, information delivered by different senders resulted in a passive need for information. Participants' individual traits also influenced their perceptions after being stimulated.

Long-term follow-up research is needed to help researchers identify more detailed perspectives and do comparative studies. Besides, this study conducted interviews through WeChat voice calls and telephone calls, and might be limited compared with face-to-face interviews.

The findings of this study provide theoretical contributions to the information needs research and practical implications for information services and public health management.

There is little systematic research on how the public formed information needs in the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak.