Search results

This paper sets out to examine how private health insurance (PHI) supports the private interests of consumers of healthcare services. The focus is on how insurance companies promote PHI to consumers.

Using interviews with insurance company marketing managers and others, the paper is a case study on the introduction of PHI in Sweden.

The interviewed insurance company managers argue that PHI supports two types of consumers' private economic interests. One type is the employers' interest in managing their total health‐related costs for their employees and the promise of PHI to reduce these costs. The second type relates to the interests of employees, particularly sports professionals, in managing economic risks and the promise of PHI to limit such risks.

The paper focuses on how insurance companies promote PHI to consumers. There is no exploration of how PHI policyholders actually use their insurance. The study focuses on Sweden where private companies are the major PHI policyholders. In other European countries, PHI may be adapted to other consumer groups in order to develop other private interests. The paper points to the value of short waiting times in public healthcare.

The paper provides valuable insights for academics and practitioners who are interested in how the private interests of consumers may affect the healthcare sector.

Nobody concerned with political economy can neglect the history of economic doctrines. Structural changes in the economy and society influence economic thinking and, conversely, innovative thought structures and attitudes have almost always forced economic institutions and modes of behaviour to adjust. We learn from the history of economic doctrines how a particular theory emerged and whether, and in which environment, it could take root. We can see how a school evolves out of a common methodological perception and similar techniques of analysis, and how it has to establish itself. The interaction between unresolved problems on the one hand, and the search for better solutions or explanations on the other, leads to a change in paradigma and to the formation of new lines of reasoning. As long as the real world is subject to progress and change scientific search for explanation must out of necessity continue.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to understand the role of the statutory auditing profession in France. The study is theoretically based on distinctions between a functionalist view of professions and a neo-weberian view. Prior research, conducted in Anglo-American countries has shown that the auditing profession has focussed primarily on protecting the private interests of the profession. Hence, there is a need to conduct research on this topic in a code law country where the state is expected to play a significant role in protecting the public interest.

The methodology involves a content analysis of 148 disciplinary decisions issued against statutory auditors in France from 1989 to 2006. This analysis identified 21 types of violations grouped into public interest or private interest offences. Because visible offences are public and are more likely to threaten the reputation of the profession, these types of decisions are also studied with respect to their visibility.

The results reveal that in a code law country such as France the auditing profession tends to defend both the public interest as well as its private interests. The results also support the “visibility” effect.

The written disciplinary decisions have been anonymized so that the names of the auditors and the clients cannot be identified.

This paper differs from previous studies conducted in the Anglo-American context which show an emphasis on protecting the private interests of the auditing profession. Moreover, this study reveals the existence of “mixed” offences and underlines that a profession primarily focusses on these cases. Thus, the work reconciles in part the functionalist and neo-weberian perspectives. Lastly, this paper confirms the importance of the visibility effect.

To expand one's understanding about how accounting helps to shape, mediate and constitute the public interest, the private interest, and their relationships.

An interpretive approach is utilized to analyze the documents that have both informed and legitimized the Japanese financial regulatory changes since the end of 1970s.

The paper finds that the concepts of private and public interest, and their relationships have been mutable in the deployment of accounting rhetoric. The concept of private interest was given more concrete shape as the market‐oriented reform advanced in the name of public interest.

This paper sheds light on the constructing role of accounting in society, which in turn helps to understand changing conceptualizations of the public interest, the private interest, and their relationships.

The equation of unified knowledge says that S = f (A,P) which means that the practical solution to a given problem is a function of the existing, empirical, actual realities and the future, potential, best possible conditions of general stable equilibrium which both pure and practical reason, exhaustive in the Kantian sense, show as being within the realm of potential realities beyond any doubt. The first classical revolution in economic thinking, included in factor “P” of the equation, conceived the economic and financial problems in terms of a model of ideal conditions of stable equilibrium but neglected the full consideration of the existing, actual conditions. That is the main reason why, in the end, it failed. The second modern revolution, included in factor “A” of the equation, conceived the economic and financial problems in terms of the existing, actual conditions, usually in disequilibrium or unstable equilibrium (in case of stagnation) and neglected the sense of right direction expressed in factor “P” or the realization of general, stable equilibrium. That is the main reason why the modern revolution failed in the past and is failing in front of our eyes in the present. The equation of unified knowledge, perceived as a sui generis synthesis between classical and modern thinking has been applied rigorously and systematically in writing the enclosed American‐British economic, monetary, financial and social stabilization plans. In the final analysis, a new economic philosophy, based on a synthesis between classical and modern thinking, called here the new economics of unified knowledge, is applied to solve the malaise of the twentieth century which resulted from a confusion between thinking in terms of stable equilibrium on the one hand and disequilibrium or unstable equilibrium on the other.

X = multiple interpretations

This chapter examines public versus private sector roles in addressing CSR/Sustainability issues in the United States. It provides an historical perspective on the primacy of market-driven corporate practice in the United States and recent moves by the state to “balance” private and public interests through both regulatory and non-regulatory means. A typology of government and business roles, based on “who leads” and “who makes the rules,” illustrates shared governance of CSR/Sustainability in a variety of multisector and public–private partnerships.

Case studies examine how the U.S. government interacts with business and NGOs and its varied roles in the shared governance of sustainability. Examples from field interviews with business leaders in global operator General Electric (Global Business Initiative on Human Rights), apparel maker-and-seller Patagonia (Aquatic “Hitchhikers”), electronics retailer Best Buy (product recycling), IBM (global corporate volunteering), and others illustrate varieties of shared governance between business and the state in operation today.

Depending on “who leads” and “who makes the rules,” there are variations in whether responsible actions by the private sector are regulatory versus voluntary and whether government’s role involves mandating, partnering, facilitating, or endorsing private sector efforts. Successful shared governance depends on business’s “license to cooperate” and the multiple parties’s sharing responsibility for their goals, operations, and results.

There is a substantial literature on multi-business CSR-related networks and on business–NGO partnerships. Less attention has been given to the role of governments in this space, particularly in the United States where, partly for historical reasons, a company’s relationship with and obligations to society have been regarded as discretionary more so than regulatory activity and where government intervention in markets and in the affairs of companies has been sharply resisted, particularly by business interests, and is suspect among the citizenry.

Canada's institutions, by comparison with America's, have created a unique normative regime. When it comes to conflict of interest, the main problem in Canada has not been that private interests encumber governmental judgment, but that government itself, and in particular the publicly sourced emoluments controlled by the prime minister, can encumber the judgment of ministers and legislators. When it comes to campaign finance law, the problem is that parties are treated as if they are self-interested entities, while interest groups have often been treated as if they are parties. I explore the institutional causes and regulatory consequences of Canada's unique normative approach.

The primary aim of this study is to examine the descriptive power of the private interest model of professional accounting ethics developed by Parker in 1994. This examination is undertaken over an extended time period in the Irish context. It develops prior research which concluded that the operation of the professional ethics machinery of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland (CAI) facilitated private interest motives on the part of the ICAI. The paper draws on evidence regarding three critical events occurring outside the disciplinary process of the ICAI but impacting directly on its operation as well as on perceptions from within the process. The discourse surrounding the disciplinary process from 1994 to 2001 is examined using media coverage and ICAI pronouncements. This is augmented with in‐depth interviews held with members of the ICAI disciplinary committees. The analysis provides evidence of pockets of support for the descriptive power of Parker’s model but also illustrates how the rigid and static nature of the separate roles depicted within the model can often fail to capture the complexity of the various changes occurring over the period examined. The study presents evidence which challenges the proposed interrelationships between the various private interest roles depicted in the model and makes some suggestions for the modification of the model, particularly the interrelationships depicted therein.

It is basically argued that, as the world economy progresses and the means of transportation and communication become increasingly available, the interdependence among means and ways of life also becomes inevitable and human relations tighten accordingly. However, though every individual tends to follow the patterns and directions of his (her) society′s way of living, he or she often conserves some peculiarities which can be identified with his or her personality. Individual and social behaviours are today becoming so interdependent that it is difficult to demarcate between “privacy” and “sociality”. This is particularly true in an advanced and complex society in which conflict between private and social interests is apparent. It is proposed that with effort this conflict can be removed or at least attenuated by adopting a more pragmatic approach to the humanistic economic system in which both private and social interests are allowed to be traded off without one necessarily impinging on the other.