Search

A summary presenting the challenges for soil carbon sequestration research, hypotheis to be further tested and key research (and innvation) products.

While the multilateral trading system views human and labour rights issues as outside of its remit, states increasingly incorporate regulation in these areas into their bilateral reciprocal preferential trade agreements, "HR-PTAs. This dissertation investigates the emergence of HR-PTAs, testing alternative explanations derived from conventional “public interest" and “private interest” theories of regulation against a new theory of "symbolic regulation." According to the public interest theory of regulation, regulation is motivated by benevolent legislators’ commitment to correcting market or social problems. The private interest theory of regulation instead views regulation as the result of private interest groups capturing the regulatory apparatus in order to regulate in their own self-interest. Unlike its counterparts, the symbolic theory of regulation suggests that regulation may also be created for the primary purpose of reassuring regulatory advocates that their demands have been heard, rather than to regulate a given issue area. This dissertation argues that for the states behind them, HR-PTAs are primarily a symbolic form of regulation. Legislators create HR-PTAs to appease domestic human and labour rights organizations, while defending their trade interests through the non-enforcement of their provisions. Using longitudinal network analysis to analyse original data from 415 preferential trade agreements in force from 1989 to 2009, paired with case study evidence from the EU, US, and Canada, this dissertation finds support for the symbolic regulation explanation of HR-PTAs. It shows that a state’s commitment to HR-PTAs depends less on the public interest or the desires of private interest groups than on its need to accommodate human and labour rights advocates. Symbolic regulation however should not be dismissed. It sets precedents, creates policy space, facilitates softer forms of cooperation, and can fuel political accountability politics. When this occurs, states may use HR-PTAs or other forms of symbolic regulation to achieve their seeming purpose.

Summary Hepatitis C virus (HCV)‐infected patients are at risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Individuals at heightened risk could be targeted by intensive follow‐up surveillance. We have conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify host genetic predisposition to HCC in HCV‐infected patients. A comprehensive search of Medline and Embase databases was performed, and the strength of evidence of associations for each gene on development of HCC was evaluated. We identified 166 relevant studies, relating to 137 different genes, or combinations thereof. Seventeen genes were classified as having “good” evidence of an association, a significant association was observed for 37 genes but this finding had not yet been replicated, 56 genes had mixed or limited evidence of an association, and 27 genes showed no association. IFNL3 /4, TNF‐α and PNPLA3 genes had the most evidence of an association. There was, however, considerable heterogeneity in study design and data quality. In conclusion, we identified a number of genes with evidence of association with HCC, but also a need for more standardized approaches to address this clinically critical question. It is important to consider the underlying mechanism of these relationships and which are confounded by the presence of other HCC risk factors and response to therapy. We also identified many genes where the evidence of association is contradictory or requires replication, as well as a number where associations have been studied but no evidence found. These findings should help to direct future studies on host genetic predisposition to HCC in HCV‐infected patients.