Lawyers, Confidentiality and Whistleblowing: Lessons from the McCabe Tobacco Litigation
In: Melbourne University Law Review, Band 40, Heft 3
67 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Melbourne University Law Review, Band 40, Heft 3
SSRN
In: Melbourne Univeristy Law Review, Band 40, Heft 3
SSRN
In: Regulation & governance, Band 11, Heft 4, S. 368-387
ISSN: 1748-5991
AbstractIn Australia, labeling for consumer choice, rather than higher government regulation, has become an important strand of the policy approach to addressing food animal welfare. This paper illustrates the usefulness of "regulatory network analysis" to uncover the potentials and limitations of market‐based governance to address contentious yet significant issues like animal welfare. We analyzed the content of newspaper articles from major Australian newspapers and official policy documents between 1990 and 2014 to show how the regulatory network influenced the framing of the regulatory problem, and the capacity and legitimacy of different regulatory actors at three "flashpoints" of decisionmaking about layer hen welfare in egg production. We suggest that the government policy of offering consumers the choice to buy cage free in the market allowed large‐scale industry to continue the egg laying business as usual with incremental innovation and adjustment. These incremental improvements only apply to the 20 percent or so of hens producing "free‐range" eggs. We conclude with a discussion of when and how labeling for consumer choice might create markets and public discourses that make possible more effective and legitimate regulation of issues such as layer hen welfare.
In: Regulation and Governance, Forthcoming
SSRN
In: Evidence & policy: a journal of research, debate and practice, Band 18, Heft 3, S. 524-542
ISSN: 1744-2656
Background:In 2019, Public Health England commissioned the authors of this paper to conduct research examining healthcare professionals' conversations about work with their patients to inform policy aimed at reducing work loss due to ill health.
Aims and objectives:The purpose of this paper is to show how the commission provided a unique opportunity for the authors to collaborate with the funders to address obstacles to policy progress.
Methods:A steering group was established to revise the original remit of research. In outlining that process here, qualitative data collected from a wide range of healthcare professionals as part of the commission are presented for the first time. We are able to further illuminate and expand on the previously published report findings and policy recommendations, revealing novel insights on researcher-policy engagement.
Findings:Robust implementation of 'work-focused healthcare' policy has been limited, resulting in an overwhelming lack of empirical data and misguided directives. However, the existing evidence did provide important information about obstacles to policy progress and how to overcome them. The qualitative data were instrumental in this respect, with healthcare professionals revealing various interpretations of, and discourse on the policy.
Discussion and conclusions:This paper adds to the expanding literature which suggests that long term, mutualistic, collaborative working is central to addressing barriers to improving evidence use and mobilising health policy into practice. It was shown that tacit, generous, open, empathic and ongoing knowledge exchange, advocacy, and alliances are needed.
In: U of Melbourne Legal Studies Research Paper No. 519
SSRN
Working paper
In: Social work: a journal of the National Association of Social Workers, Band 40, Heft 4, S. 456-463
ISSN: 1545-6846