Search results

The purpose of this paper is to discuss incongruities in the corporate entity over the matter of agency. In lieu of the traditional notion of moral agency theory, the stakeholder model offers congruent grounding to corporate governance. Socially irresponsible or unethical corporate activities are perceived to increase expenses, diminish shareholder value and tarnish business reputations. In contrast, socially responsible corporate practices contribute to positive attitudes to the company and contribute to the creation of competitive advantage.

This paper follows the ongoing evolution of the regulatory changes instituted after the scandalous corporate fiascos of the present century, such as those of Enron and WorldCom in the USA, Polly Peck in the UK, HIH Insurance and One.Tel in Australia, and Siemens in Germany, inter alia. The exposition also touches on the regulatory metamorphosis of corporate governance in its convergence towards “meta-regulation” with corporate social responsibility at the core.

While meta-regulation has so far worked in many countries, caution is expressed over the perils of over-reliance on a meta-regulatory approach. Industries or market sectors should also attempt to operate from the start within the confines of self-regulation and government regulation. Market sectors and industries need to find the framework of regulation that is best suited to their operations.

The paper concludes by discussing the observed challenges and implications of such convergence, as well as future directions for law practitioners, academics and researchers in the realm of corporate conduct.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the probable structure of bilateral derivatives contracts following international regulatory reforms.

The theoretical context of the paper is private and meta‐regulation, which the author applies to a case study and current industry analysis.

While regulations are still being written, it is likely that elements of oversight for the bilateral derivatives market will involve enforced self‐regulation. When combined with more specific outcome‐oriented regulatory requirements, the industry is well‐suited to this type of coordinated regulatory regime.

In light of the uncertainty of derivatives regulation and the future size of the bilateral, over‐the‐counter (OTC) derivatives market, practitioners should consider a likely broader range of regulation structures.

The paper fills a gap in the literature about non‐traditional governance structures for the derivatives markets following the financial crisis. Rather than considering regulation on a light/heavy axis, the paper examines whether this segment of the market can sustain a process‐oriented regulatory arrangement.

The purpose of this paper is not only seek to trace developments that have contributed to the importance of risk in regulation, but also to justify why risk has become so significant within regulatory and governmental circles.

This task will be facilitated through a consideration of theories associated with risk, and by reference to two forms of risk regulation, namely risk‐based regulation and meta regulation. As well as a consideration of the application of both in jurisdictions such as the UK, the paper adopts a comparative approach through references to the their application in jurisdictions such as Germany, Italy, and the USA, and also through a comparison between meta‐regulatory strategies and risk‐based regulation.

This paper concludes that all regulatory strategies should take into consideration the importance of management responsibilities – both on individual and corporate levels. Meta‐risk regulation has not only assumed such a prominent position in regulation through its application in Basel II, but also is preferred to risk‐based regulation – not only because of the element of ambiguity which risk‐based regulation introduces into its assessment (through a consideration of the external environment of the firm), but also because of its impact of the use of external auditors in regulation and supervision.

The practical implications of a move towards risk‐based regulatory strategies, and meta‐regulatory strategies in particular, is that courts are simply not adequately equipped to deal with the pace with which some financial instruments, such as derivatives, operate.

This paper not only introduces originality through its comparative approach and the choice of jurisdictions involved, but also through the attention it draws to the need for more innovative techniques such as meta regulation. Meta regulation can be considered to be the most evolved and collaborative form of regulation, which is best suited for such an ever‐evolving and changing regulatory environment that currently exists.

This article addresses the relationship of universities to their changing regulatory environments internationally.

This article updates analysis published in 2004 exploring the contrasting modes of, and key trends in, regulation of higher education across eight OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) states. The article offers a wider analysis of the changing patterns of regulation rooted in mutuality, oversight, competition and design, and the implications for the management of higher education institutions.

Since 2004, higher education has seen more growth in oversight-based and competition-based regulation, but also some decentralization of regulation as an increasing cast of actors, many international and transnational in character, have asserted themselves in key aspects of the regulatory environment. This article explores the implications of these changes in the regulatory mix over higher education for the ways that universities manage their regulatory environment, arguing first, that there is significant evidence of meta-regulatory approaches to regulating universities, and second, that such a meta-regulatory approach is consistent with an emphasis on university autonomy, raising a challenge for universities in how to use the autonomy (variable by country) they do have to manage their environment.

This article offers an original analysis of how universities might most appropriately respond, deploying their autonomy, however variable, to address their external regulatory environment. The author suggests we might increasingly see the external regulatory environment as meta-regulatory in character and universities making more use of reflexive governance processes.

Using the policy recommendations identified in the study as an analytical departure point, the study proposes a “public-private governance and sustainability model” that builds upon the policy options and develops implementation strategies for the key stakeholder institutions implementing the proposed solutions in the US food waste management ecosystem.

Within an exploratory research perspective, an affinity diagram is employed to help identify important policy recommendations identified with key policy reports. Moreover, the study employs a “meta regulation” approach that employs four essential characteristics of any regulatory instrument or approach: target, regulator, command and consequences.

The study has identified the recommended solutions identified as most effective, and developed recommended implementation strategies that could accomplish the goal of potentially reducing food waste in the US at the consumer level. The study recommends passage of federal legislation that specifies what form of administrative rule-making and enforcement process should be instituted, as well as who are the important stakeholders to be considered and authority provided in this rule-making and enforcement process.

This study offers a comprehensive “proposed public-private governance and sustainability model” addressing food waste management safety and quality date labeling implementation challenges by the enforcing federal, state and local governments, as well as collaborating with industry associations and consumer interest groups.

Debate is growing around the expansion of risk-based regulation. The regulation scholarship provides evidence of regulatory failure of the risk-based approach in different domains, including financial regulation. Therefore, this paper aims to provide cautionary evidence about the risk of regulatory failure of risk-based strategy in the financial regulation while using enterprise risk management (ERM) as a meta-regulatory toolkit.

Based on interview data gathered from 30 risk managers of banks and five regulatory personnel, combined with secondary data, this study mainly explores the challenges for meaningful use of ERM based self-regulation in regulated banks. The evidence helps to assess the risk of regulatory failure of the risk-based regulation while using ERM.

The evidence reflects that regulated banks face diverse challenges arising from both peripheral and internal environments that limit the true internalization of ERM-based self-regulation. Despite this, the regulator uses this self-regulation as a meta-regulatory toolkit under the risk-based regulation to achieve the regulatory aims. However, the lack of true internalization of ERM based self-regulation is likely to raise the risk of regulatory failure of risk-based regulation to achieve the regulatory goals. Risk-based regulation is an evolving strategy in the regulatory regime. Therefore, care should be taken while using ERM as a regulatory toolkit before relying on it substantially.

The paper provides empirical insights about the challenges for effective use of ERM as a meta regulatory toolkit that might be useful practically both to the regulators and regulated firms.

This paper explores different approaches to regulating corporate social responsibility (CSR) patterns of adopting codes of conduct, and discusses the approach that courts should embrace.

Case studies from various legal systems will be examined. The paper presents new typology relating to different patterns of the Corporate Social Performance (CSP) model, based on aspects of the CSR pyramid, namely, legislative CSR and ethical CSR. Legislative CSR includes adoption of thin codes which reflect compliance within current legal standards of the criminal code, while ethical CSR includes codes reflecting ethical norms and corporate social citizenship beyond mere compliance. The paper also includes the interplay of different patterns of CSR and three approaches to regulation regarding these patterns.

Both the Israeli negative CSR regulatory approach and the American legislative CSR regulatory approach present difficulties.

The paper introduces a theory for regulating CSR within criminal law, drawing on the pyramid of CSR. It presents an original discussion of distinct approaches to regulation of corporate liability, while further developing the institutional theory of CSR and the interplay of regulation and CSR. The paper suggests a novel solution regarding the regulation and acceptance of CSR: the granting of protection from criminal liability to corporations who adopt CSR.

The purpose of this paper is to argue that there are structural and functional limits to corporate social responsibility (CSR) that determine the boundary conditions of corporate social initiatives. The current preoccupation with win-win situations in CSR may not serve societal interests. For CSR to produce social outcomes that are not necessarily constrained by corporate rationality there needs to be a change in the normative framework of public decision making at the institutional level. The author develops a global governance framework for CSR that provides more democratic forms of decision making in the political economy that will enable corporate social responsibility to overcome the constraints imposed by corporate rationality.

This is a conceptual paper and critique.

The author develops a global governance framework for CSR that provides more democratic forms of decision making in the political economy that will enable corporate social responsibility to overcome the constraints imposed by corporate rationality.

The paper contributes to theoretical development of CSR.

The purpose of this article is to explore the problematic question of government's role in ensuring corporate social responsibility in an African context. This question may initially appear paradoxical yet it is becoming increasingly relevant in the face of linkages between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and development. The article uses the example of Nigeria's attempt to pass a CSR bill mandating contributions towards development to identify several questions arising in such contexts. It advises a contextual approach to identifying CSR objectives and recognises the need for frameworks which law can provide.

This article adopts a conceptual approach analysing the current debates about CSR and its linkage with development as well as the implications and issues raised by the attempted CSR law.

The main findings suggest that though CSR in general refers to business and society relationships, its content and targets need to be defined in context. Attempts to pass mandatory CSR laws (even where they do not succeed), hint at the need to concretise objectives particularly where CSR is linked to development. This can be done through frameworks which include the use of law in all its forms.

This article identifies a new direction that CSR may be taking in developing countries. It uses the Nigerian example to show that larger questions are looming for CSR, especially in connection with development. While current attempts to adopt a structured approach to CSR through legislation may not be wholly successful, they cannot be entirely ignored as this suggests the need for frameworks and concrete objectives in an African context like Nigeria.