Search results

The concept of light-handed regulation, including light-handed approaches to the regulation of airport services, is discussed. The rationale for the economic regulation of airport services and the traditional approaches used for economic regulation of airport charges are summarized. The evolution of international practice of light-handed regulation is outlined, including the experience with minimal regulation across monopoly industries in New Zealand and the acceptance of “negotiated settlements” in utility industries in North America. General reasons for moving to light-handed regulation of airports include the disadvantages of the price cap approach in practice and the benefits of facilitating greater negotiation between airports and users. Comparisons are made between alternative approaches to light-handed regulation of airport services, including price and quality of service monitoring, information disclosure regulation and negotiate-arbitrate regulation, approaches that have been applied to airport services in Australia and New Zealand. The role and nature of the incentives under each approach are discussed. The chapter concludes that whether light-handed regulation provides a suitable alternative approach to direct regulation depends on the market circumstances and the design characteristics of the light-handed approach.

To analyse the changes brought about by the new EU Prospectus Regulation, which replaced the EU Prospectus Directive, which has been the cornerstone of EU securities regulation for over a decade. The Regulation is part of the EU Commission’s plans for a Capital Markets Union launched in September 2015, which is intended to achieve a true single market for capital across the EU and allow companies to access the capital markets in a more cost efficient way.

This article discusses the key changes to the European prospectus regime included in the new EU Prospectus Regulation and highlights the changes compared to the old prospectus regime.

The new Prospectus Regulation will change current prospectus rules and practice for both equity and debt issuances in several areas and will contribute to a more uniform European prospectus regime. For EU Member States, the format of a regulation (rather than directive) that the new Prospectus Regulation has taken means that there will be much less room for divergence of prospectus rules across its member states. The Regulation’s success in making EU capital markets more uniform will depend to a great extent on whether the application of the new rules by member states’ regulators will be more consistent.

Key EU securities law changes are explained by an experienced EU and US securities lawyer practising in London.

Knight's Industrial Law Reports goes into a new style and format as Managerial Law This issue of KILR is restyled Managerial Law and it now appears on a continuous updating basis rather than as a monthly routine affair.

By these we mean the parliamentary counsel responsible for drafting the many statutes and statutory instruments of every kind, against whom there has been much criticism in recent years for the mass of indigestible legislation, a little of it almost incomprehensible, inflicted on society generally. What prompts us to return to the subject, after so recently castigating it as “hurry scurry” law, is the Labelling of Food Regulations, 1970. Not that this particular measure is anything but good, but looking at it, one cannot help wondering what was the purpose of the 1967 Regulations; a useless exercise in law‐making, since they will never come into force, being precipitately revoked by the new ones. Nor does it seem to have been hurried legislation, since it followed the reports of the Food Standards Committee after a lapse of several years. However, instances in which measures have been rushed through the legislative process, to prove subsequently inadequate, perhaps unworkable in parts, and sometimes completely disastrous, are multiplying during the life of the last Parliament. This may not always be the fault of the ligislature, for sometimes a new problem emerges or grows so rapidly that the law cannot keep up with it; then there is excuse for measures being rushed through to cope.

In the Court of Appeal last summer, when Van Den Berghs and Jurgens Limited (belonging to the Unilever giant organization) sought a reversal of the decision of the trial judge that their television advertisements of Stork margarine did not contravene Reg. 9, Margarine Regulations, 1967—an action which their Lordships described as fierce but friendly—there were some piercing criticisms by the Court on the phrasing of the Regulations, which was described as “ridiculous”, “illogical” and as “absurdities”. They also remarked upon the fact that from 1971 to 1975, after the Regulations became operative, and seven years from the date they were made, no complaint from enforcement authorities and officers or the organizations normally consulted during the making of such regulations were made, until the Butter Information Council, protecting the interests of the dairy trade and dairy producers, suggested the long‐standing advertisements of Reg. 9. An example of how the interests of descriptions and uses of the word “butter” infringements of Reg. 9. An example af how the interests of enforcement, consumer protection, &c, are not identical with trade interests, who see in legislation, accepted by the first, as injuring sections of the trade. (There is no evidence that the Butter Information Council was one of the organizations consulted by the MAFF before making the Regulations.) The Independant Broadcasting Authority on receiving the Council's complaint and obtaining legal advice, banned plaintiffs' advertisements and suggested they seek a declaration that the said advertisements did not infringe the Regulations. This they did and were refused such a declaration by the trial judge in the Chancery Division, whereupon they went to the Court of Appeal, and it was here, in the course of a very thorough and searching examination of the question and, in particular, the Margarine Regulations, that His Appellate Lordship made use of the critical phrases we have quoted.

This paper is an attempt to theorise the recent changes to accounting practices in local government in the UK. The principal theory used is regulation theory, which incorporates aspects of hegemony theory and governance. Regulation theory attempts to explain major changes in national economic structures by examining underlying systems of capital accumulation, regulation and hegemony. Central to these structures and systems are the role and operation of the state and its institutions. Changes in economic structures will result in conditions, which favour different governance structures for these institutions; comprising markets, hierarchies, civil society, and heterarchic combinations. Several researchers in these areas have characterised “traditional” institutional practices as Fordist and are associated with a particular approach to regulation. However, the underlying economic structure is seen to be in crisis and a new Post‐Fordist regime may be emerging. Post‐Fordism is associated with new institutional practices, particularly decentralised management, contracting out of public services, extended use of public private partnerships and concerns for value for money, charters and league tables. The introduction of such practices may therefore be explained by the changes in underlying structures rather than as a teleological development of accounting. Moreover, some researchers have characterised such changes as representing a fundamental shift from government to governance. The very nature of the relationship between governance, accountability and accounting may therefore have also changed. These issues are explored in the paper.

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

This paper aims to address how organizational routines paradoxically affect the process of organizational innovation based on a new construct of routines or to investigate the coexistence of both hindering and promoting effects from routines and their differentiated affecting paths.

This paper adopts an interpretive and exploratory case study on the business model innovation of Yimu Technology Company Limited (Yimu Tech) from product standardization to customization. Considering that this innovation reflects a successful down-up rather than traditional up-down innovation, this paper focuses on it to explore how the most micro routines affect the whole process of innovation. Almost two years were spent in collecting data from Yimu Tech and in following the innovation through approaches of semi-structured interviews, archival data and observation; the data were analyzed through a five-step process before a framework showing the paradoxical effects was finally set up.

This research specifies the construct of organizational routines and promotes a five-dimensional concept covering the organizational, collective and individual levels of an organization. It confirms the interaction between the performative and ostensive aspects of routines, by showing that the ostensive aspect may not only guide tasks performing but also allow multiple changes, and the performative aspect may affect the ostensive aspect through the down-up or up-down path. Also, it finds that routines may paradoxically affect all three phases of innovation, with a strong up-down hindering effect but a weak down-up promoting effect in the preparation phase, a strong down-up promoting effect but a weak hindering effect in the emergence phase and both significant effects in the consolidation phase.

This research is constrained by several limitations. The set up framework of routines and their paradoxical effects on innovation need a further confirmation in more contexts or organizations; more elements should be considered in exploring the evolution of routines and their effects on innovations; little attention has been paid to the relationship between these two types of effects, conflicting with each other, joining together or working independently.

The findings offered some valuable insights for further research on organizational routines and organizational innovation and hold important implications for management practices. This research enriched the two-aspect view of routines by constructing a five-dimensional framework; further research studies on routine dynamics by showing the interaction between the performative and ostensive aspects can contribute to the study on effects of organizational routines on innovations by showing how routines promote and hinder innovation simultaneously throughout the whole process. It reminds managers of the strong power from the microlevel of an organization in innovation.

Three events of significance to this country took place in 1899 – the British Food Journal was launched, Australia retained the Ashes, and the Boer War hostilities commenced. If challenged on the order of their importance, cricketers and Empire‐builders may be excused their preference. However, looking at it purely from the standpoint of pro bono publico, the dispassionate observer must surely opt for the birth of a certain publication as being ultimately the most beneficial of the three.

The purpose of this paper was to study the novel food (NF) industry in Europe and how regulations have affected companies' collaboration and openness towards other actors during new product development. The research question, therefore, was “How do the European NF regulations affect radical innovation in the food industry?”.

A multiphase mixed-methods design was used to combine three sets of data as follows: the NF applications and copies of these from 1997 to 2018; the applications in the first 18 months of the revised NF regulation period after 2018 and interviews with six NF applicant companies and seven experts on NF.

Interactions with research and development (R&D) suppliers appear to be common during development of NF products for companies of all sizes. Ownership of knowledge and a conscious intellectual property rights strategy are important for companies' openness during radical innovation and collaboration. The decentralised NF regulations from 1997 to 2017, with reduced possibilities for data protection, prevented innovation. However, both old and new NF regulations facilitate easy routes for second-to-market approach. Companies of all sizes apply for NF-approved products under the new NF regulations, which ensure data protection.

Future NF pioneers, food R&D suppliers and food-industry policymakers will benefit from open innovation and NF insights by gaining an understanding of NF regulations and insight into how a policy with open governance affects collaboration and co-creation.

The NF regulations and their effect on radical food innovation have not previously been studied according to innovation management theory. Understanding various forms of selective partnership and collaboration among actors in the food industry is valuable for future growth.