State-based Regulation Research Articles

Regulating the Australian Water Market

This article examines Australia’s implementation of a national regulatory framework to support the development of robust and mature water markets. To date, competition in water markets and water trading have been inhibited by disparate State-based regulation as well as State-based limitations on trading outside of regions. State-based monopolisation of water infrastructure has also been a significant impediment. The transfer of sovereignty over water to the central Commonwealth government has enhanced the capacity of the regulatory framework to better contribute to building efficient water markets.

Genome-wide Analysis of Histone Methylation Reveals Chromatin State-Based Regulation of Gene Transcription and Function of Memory CD8+ T Cells

Memory lymphocytes are characterized by their ability to exhibit a rapid response to the recall antigen, in which differential transcription is important, yet the underlying mechanism is not understood. We report here a genome-wide analysis of histone methylation on two histone H3 lysine residues (H3K4me3 and H3K27me3) and gene expression profiles in naive and memory CD8(+) T cells. We found that specific correlation exists between gene expression and the amounts of H3K4me3 (positive correlation) and H3K27me3 (negative correlation) across the gene body. These correlations displayed four distinct modes (repressive, active, poised, and bivalent), reflecting different functions of these genes in CD8(+) T cells. Furthermore, a permissive chromatin state of each gene was established by a combination of different histone modifications. Our findings reveal a complex regulation by histone methylation in differential gene expression and suggest that histone methylation may be responsible for memory CD8(+) T cell function.

'Governing' nanotechnology without government?

The increasing commercialisation of products containing nanomaterials has been accompanied by growing societal concerns. These concerns have underpinned a debate over the degree to which governments should specifically ‘govern’ or regulate nanotechnology. This paper examines the way in which the private sector is developing innovative regulatory arrangements for nanotechnology. It commences with a theoretical review of potential regulatory tools, and then discusses how two multinational companies are developing their own regulatory mechanisms to guide the responsible development of nanotechnology. It concludes that whilst governments will no doubt play a crucial role in the regulation of the technology, nano-specific state-based regulation will probably only constitute part of an evolving regulatory web. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Illegal GMO releases and corporate responsibility: Questioning the effectiveness of voluntary measures

Recent years have seen a number of cases of ‘accidental’ or ‘unintentional’ releases of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that were not approved for human consumption or in some cases even for commercial planting. The environmental, economic, and social implications of the release of unapproved varieties of GMOs are potentially significant. The agricultural input industry has recently embraced Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reporting and some of its major players are participants in the UN's Global Compact. While CSR and the Global Compact encourage internalization of environmental costs and application of the precautionary principle amongst firms, in the case of illegal GMO releases these measures have proven extremely weak. In the case of illegal GMO releases, external, state-based regulation which places liability squarely on firms is likely to be much more successful as a means to prevent future occurrences of this problem.

Regulation, Governance and Regulatory Collibration: achieving an “holistic” approach

This paper examines the development of the regulation of corporate governance in the UK. It seeks to identify why the boundaries of law and self‐regulation exist and whether the regulation of corporate governance should now be viewed as a process of collibration rather than a “homeostatic” process of setting unattainable standards. This paper suggests that regulatory developments in the area of corporate governance have taken a substantial new direction; that the boundaries of regulation are no longer determined by the choice between market‐based or state‐based regulation, but determined by a process of collibration.

Private Actors and Public Policy: A Requiem for the New Basel Capital Accord

After the Asian crisis of 1997-98, policy-makers invested much energy in designing a new international financial architecture. However, many of the policy proposals that have emerged from think tanks and the multilateral agencies have proven unworkable or politically unpalatable. The debate focuses on state-led initiatives. But the assumption that public policy is by definition an output of public institutions is difficult to sustain in an era of global change. This article considers specialized forms of intelligence gathering and judgment determination which seem increasingly important as sources of governance in this era of financial market volatility: Moody's Investors Service and Standard & Poor's, the major bond rating agencies. More specifically, we examine a proposal of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision to reform the existing capital adequacy framework by incorporating banks' own internal ratings and external bond ratings from the rating agencies, in order to calculate bank risk-weighted capital requirements. The article identifies a series of negative implications from the use of private rating agencies as a substitute for state-based regulation, premised on the organizational incentives that shape the ratings industry. Cementing these organizational incentives into the emerging financial architecture will, we argue, lead to negative social and economic consequences.

Regulatory Separation as a Mechanism to Curb Capture: A Study of the Decision to Act against Distressed Insurers

Because of state-based regulation, single-state insurers are subject to oversight by a unique, domiciliary regulator (i.e., regulatory integration), whereas in the case of multi-state insurers, regulatory responsibilities are spread across several regulators (i.e., regulatory separation). In this study, the author draws upon recent theoretical literature pertaining to incentive problems and governmental organization to motivate an empirical study of the regulatory closure decision in insurance. Specifically, the author investigates whether there is evidence of the effect of regulatory separation and, if so, whether it appears to mitigate certain capture problems in the U.S. property-liability business. For a population of distressed companies, the author finds that the likelihood of solvency-related regulatory action is significantly-positively related to the number of states in which the insurer operates, whereas there is no evidence of a negative relation between closure and size. In contrast, for distressed single-state insurers the author finds evidence of a significant-inverse relation between closure and size. For companies subject to regulatory separation, as proxied by whether they write business in more than one state, these results do not support regulatory capture in the form of leniency towards larger distressed insurers (i.e., too-big-to-fail).