Search results

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

‘Tragedy of the commons’ is a powerful concept to analyse a variety of problems related to environmental sustainability. The commons problem can be solved if individuals behave altruistically. In the business context, this chapter studies the proposition that corporate social responsibility (CSR) can avert the tragedy of the commons by examining one case study in depth: Coca-Cola's bottling operations in Rajasthan, India. In spite of choosing a context favourable to the proposition, the results indicate that CSR does not avert the tragedy of the commons. To address the major environmental challenges, it is essential to develop regulatory regimes with appropriate incentives and ability to enforce sanctions.

Regulating common‐pool resources is welfare enhancing for society but not necessarily for all users who may therefore oppose regulations. The purpose of this paper is to examine the short‐term impact of common‐pool resource regulations on welfare distribution.

The authors model a game of common‐pool resource extraction among heterogeneous users.

It was found that market‐based regulations such as fees and subsidies or tradable quotas achieve a higher reduction of extraction from free‐access than individual quotas with the same proportion of better‐off users. Also, they make more users better‐off for the same resource preservation.

The quota regulation has attractive fairness properties: it reduces inequality while still rewarding the more efficient users.

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

In the UK, food poverty has increased in the last 15 years and the food aid supply chain that has emerged to tackle it is now roughly 10 years old. In this time, we have seen the food aid supply chain grow at a rate that has astounded many. Recently that growth has been aided by a grant of £20m from a large supermarket chain. It appears institutionalisation is just around the corner, if not already here. It also appears that there is far greater emphasis on dealing with the symptoms as opposed to solving the root causes of the problem. As an opinion piece, this paper reflects on some of the prevalent issues, and suggests some ways forward.

THE idea of a central service and supplies organisation for libraries—a “Library Centre”— such as exist abroad and are described in Library Supply agencies in Europe, is like most ideas in librarianship, not a new one, even taking into account the establishment of Norway's Biblioteksentralen over 60 years ago in 1902, which at that time was called Folkeboksamlingenes Ekspedisjon. This idea, like so so much else, seems to have originated in the fertile brain of Melvil Dewey, taking its final and lasting form as the Library Bureau, established by Dewey himself in 1882.

Policy-oriented responsibility initiatives are institutional attempts to make innovations more responsible. One such initiative is offered by the European Commission’s responsible research and innovation (RRI) keys (public engagement, gender equality, science education, open access and ethics). This study is conducted in the context of an EU Horizon 2020 project and focuses on the introduction of RRI keys to innovation projects of the additive manufacturing (AM) industry. This study aims to understand how these RRI keys are perceived and adopted by industry project partners.

The authors use an ethnographic study based on “participant observation”, supported by interviews and workshops with AM industry experts. In particular, the analysis covers two specific innovation use cases – one in the medical field, and second in the automotive field, in the context of the EU project. The analysis, based on ethnographic data, is inductive and interpretative.

The authors take a critical approach towards the implementation of RRI policy keys as measurable indicators, and argue that they are not easy tools to implement. The authors portray how RRI keys were understood and welcomed by industrial organisations, and how their implementation raised controversies. The authors also found that RRI keys are difficult to understand. They are not easy to measure and report, and this contrasts with earlier proposals of how RRI keys should be governed or implemented. The governance, meaning the dialogue between stakeholders both internal and external to the organisation, was time-consuming and required constant organisational learning.

Due to the insightful ethnographic methodology, the authors could well underline the faults and difficulties of the application of policy-oriented responsibility in innovation. The findings illustrate the difficulty of implementing RRI in an industry that mainly operates business-to-business. This can help future policymakers to find more successful ways of pushing industry and innovators to be more responsible. It can also suggest better ways of reaching higher organisational learning for the purpose of more responsible innovations.