LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Dorota Galeza (2013)
Publisher: University of London
Journal: IALS Student Law Review
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: K1-7720, Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence

Over the last two decades, regulatory thought in the UK has not fitted the strict deregulatory and regulatory dichotomy and has taken a more mature approach that is apparent in the adoption of recommendations by the Better Regulation Task Force. Therefore, we can talk here about a certain evolution. However, certain path dependence elements have still been present. Regulation has not been free from populist initiatives that occurred before this period, especially in the area of enforcement, nor from overreliance on previously successful solutions. An interesting aspect of regulatory initiatives adopted over this period is that they are both of an ‘integrative’ and ‘diffusive’ in character. It is difficult to speculate which theme has dominated. There are certain specific characteristics of regulation in the UK that have been preserved, but in general, regulation has often been consistent with regulatory themes in other countries, but not with academic thought. This has particular dynamics. Interestingly enough, whereas in the area of the environment, the UK could be considered as a pioneer, in terms of initiatives taken by organisations to which the UK is a party, regulatory steps have been rather reactive and minimal in scope. 

  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 11 Ibid.
    • IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 27 27 Ibid.
    • 33 Ibid.
    • 30 Ibid.
    • 35 David Osborne and Ted Gaebler, Reinventing Government, (Addison-Wesley 1992) cited in Neil Gunningham, Darren Sinclair and Peter Grabosky, Smart Regulation: Designing Environmental Policy (Clarendon Press1992) 10.
    • IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 31 51 Ibid17.
    • 52 Ibid 9.
    • 54 Ibid 4.
    • 53 Tim Amber, Francis Chittenden and Stefano Iancich, The British Regulatory System: Six Annual Impact Assessment report (British Chambers of Commerce 2008) 17.
    • 57 Cass R Sustein, 'Cost Benefit Analysis and the Separation of Powers' (1981)23 Arizona Law Review 1267.
    • IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 33 65 Ibid.
    • 67 Ibid.
    • IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 34 IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 35 84 Ibid.
    • 85 Alex Mehta and Keith Hawkins, 'Integrated Pollution Control and its Impact: Perspectives From Industry' (1998) 10(1) Journal of Environmental Law 61, 75.
    • 86 Mikael Skou Anderson and Duncan Liefferink, 'Introduction: the impact of the pioneers on EU environmental policy' in Mikeal Skou Andersen and Duncan Liefferink (eds), European environmental policy: the pioneers (Manchester University Press 1997) 5-6.
    • 87 Weale, Pridham, Cini, Konstandakopulous, Porter and Flynn (n 5) 183.
    • IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 36 IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 37 IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 39 IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 40 IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 41 135 Department of Trade and Industry, Company Law Review Report, 2001, Doreen McBarnet, 'Corporate social responsibility beyond law, through law, for law: the new corporate accountability' in Doreen McBarnet, Aurora Voiculescu and Tom Campbell (eds), The New Corporate Accountability: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Law (Cambridge University Press 2007) 11.
    • 136 Ethical Corporation, September 2004, 13, Doreen McBarnet, 'Corporate social responsibility beyond law, through law, for law: the new corporate accountability' in Doreen McBarnet, Aurora Voiculescu and Tom Campbell (eds), The New Corporate Accountability: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Law (Cambridge University Press 2007) 11.
    • IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 42 IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 44 IALS Student Law Review | Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2013 | Page 45
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article