Search

In the COVID-19 pandemic, whistleblowers have become the essential watchdogs disrupting suppression and control of information. Many governments have intentionally not disclosed information or failed to do so in a timely manner, misled the public or even promoted false beliefs. Fierce public interest defenders are pushing back against this censorship. Dr Fen and Dr Wenliang were the first whistleblowers in China to report that a new pandemic was possibly underway, and ever since, numerous other whistleblowers around the world have been reporting on the spread of the virus, the lack of medical equipment and other information of public interest. This paper maps the relevant whistleblowing cases in China, the USA and Europe and shows that many whistleblowers are initially censored and face disciplinary measures or even dismissals. At the same time, whistleblowing during the COVID-19 pandemic has drawn public attention to the shortcomings of institutional reporting systems and a wider appreciation of whistleblowers as uniquely placed to expose risk at early stages. Ultimately, whistleblowing as a means of transparency is not only becoming ever less controversial, but during COVID-19 it has become the "remedy" to censorship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers the author's insights related to the contribution of U.S. Donald Trump on the growing populism in the country. The author discusses the approach of the periodical "European Journal of Risk Regulation" to address the issue after being developed to focus on issues like disaster response regulation, banking, and foodstuff. He mentions various guides for the periodical in terms of tackling the issue.

The article focuses on the policies of European Union (EU) on cybercrime and cyber-security by assessing the internal and external factors of the EU security. It mentions that rulemaking in terms of cybersecurity can be the same in the U.S. as that of in the EU. It adds that EU laws manifest themselves as risk regulations and manifest how EU depends on the external norms to regulate risk.

The article discusses the emerging risk communication challenges linked with shale gas development in the U.S. and Europe. These challenges are contested risk information, changing information needs and risk perceptions, and communicating risk-benefit tradeoffs of natural gas development. It provides a background of shale gas development which requires novel technologies that use large amounts of water, sand, and chemical under high pressure.

For nearly three decades scholars have studied issues of EU risk regulation, first presented as regulation of safety of products and persons,1 later on as true issues of risk regulation. This short comment will give brief, and at times personal, insights into the development on scholarly thinking on EU risk regulation and sketch a few challenges for the future. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The United States' Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) revises the US Food and Drug Administration's regulatory authority. While expanding FDA's authority, the legislation replicates and relies on private systems of standards and third party audits, albeit with modifications. This article argues that public and private actors develop food safety regulations within multiple types of institutional venues, including private standards regimes, courts, congresses, and government regulatory agencies. It examines how interactions within each of these venues are shaped by stakeholders' interests, and how the relevant subset of interactions within these venues ultimately shaped the FSMA. The article concludes by offering insights into what consequences these interactions and outcomes may have on the roles and capacities of affected stakeholders in food safety governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a debate in the U.S. on the switch of pharmaceutical products to over-the-counter to prescription (Rx). It states that the switch becomes an important public policy issue in the U.S. and it expands the roles of pharmacists in identifying policies and delivering health care. It also discusses the costs of adverse events, issues involving on the product access, and health care costs.

The article focuses on the legitimate potential of private norms on the administration of public goods and the relationship between world trade and social welfare as well as environment protection. It cites the marketing and sales of tuna and tuna products in the U.S. through contesting the country's regulations on the said products. It adds that the participative legitimacy and acceptance of standards reflects the balance of economic and protection interests.

The article presents a comparative study which analyzes to what extent the four European Union (EU) and three U.S. chemical laws provide information on the hazardous properties of chemicals as well as their presence in consumer products. The study uses seven selected legislations on consumer product safety for analysis. Results show differences on the amount and type of information to be disseminated to consumers.

The article provides an overview on a complaint by Indonesia to the U.S. regarding the prohibitions of clove cigarettes. Indonesia argued that the move of the U.S. is a discrimination because the latter only prohibit clove cigarettes, which are consume in the U.S. by predominately of Indonesian origin. The panel tasked to investigate the complaint concluded that the U.S. violated the World Trade Organization (WTO) law and recommended that the country be asked to conform its law with WTO law.

The article discusses several pitfalls of the U.S.-Tuna II Panel Report and some provisions of the Technical Barrier to Trade (TBT) Agreement. It examines the legality of TBT when it comes to environmental labelling regimes. It mentions the possibility that the panel have relied on a test in dealing with the trade-restrictive nature of the measure. It highlights the legality of a set of the country's measures related to the dolphin-safe labelling of tuna products.

The article reports that recent calls for transparency targeted towards regulatory bodies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has prompted investigation into the indubitable adoption of such measures. It is stated that signals postings may prove counter productive in terms of increased public alarm and early or inappropriate termination of a drug appearing on the list.

The article focuses on "Clove Cigarettes," a panel report released by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in the U.S. The report addresses the complaint which was filed by Indonesia in regards to prohibition of certain flavored tobacco products in the U.S. A panel of WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) ruled that the U.S.'s prohibition is a violation of Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement.

The article focuses on the implication on the incentive problems of the originate-to-distribute model of bank finance to the existing securitisation practices. It notes on the empirical studies reviewed which manifest the market mechanisms on the onset of the financial crisis. It puts the European Union (EU) and the U.S. response in perceiving the deficiencies in securitisations in the context of regulatory solutions.

An essay is presented which reviews the article about humanizing cost benefits by administrator Cass Sunstein of the U.S. Office for Information and Regulatory Affairs. He comments that the new strategy represents a small but positive steps toward a balance effective regulatory review structure. The author believes that the new order can lay down the foundations of the 21st-Century Regulatory System with the recent findings of regulation and behavioral science studies.

The article presents case studies on the impact of public frame for the conversation on consumer behavior towards food waste. Topics discussed include raising concerns on school meal's meat quality, decision of companies to not to include filler products in foods, cooking with food waste by Dan Barber, the hotel Blue Hill's executive chef, and more expense of consumers on foods in developing countries than in the U.S.