The final chapter evaluates the social costs and benefits of the private criminal justice system. It first addresses the question of if and how a private criminal justice system can represent the interests of society as a whole. The chapter argues that a robust private criminal justice system can actually make the public criminal justice system more responsive to societal preferences, but only if it is open and transparent. A completely open private criminal justice system could be lightly monitored by actors in the public criminal justice system, who could intervene if necessary. Meanwhile, the private criminal justice system could blunt the politicization of the public criminal justice system and craft more flexible and creative responses to criminal conduct. The chapter also discusses the different levels of procedural protections for defendants, and the differences in the ways that private police are accountable in comparison with their public counterparts. It ends by exploring the ways in which a private criminal justice system could actually decrease the inequalities of the system and widen the net of social control, leading to more efficient detection and enforcement of criminal activity.

To reflect on China’s 20 years in the World Trade Organization (WTO), this chapter offers an overview and some critical analysis of China’s implementation of the rulings of the WTO’s dispute settlement system (DSS). It shows that China has maintained an impressive record of compliance, which is clear proof of the effectiveness of the DSS. Specifically, the DSS has caused not only changes to specific policy instruments but also systematic adjustments of China’s complex regulatory regime in an incremental manner. This chapter then examines three systemic challenges for the DSS – i.e. temporary breaches, repetitive breaches and post-compliance regulatory developments – while contending that they are not specific to China but apply to all WTO Members. It ends by offering some observations on the growing debate over the broader issues relating to China’s economic model and compliance with the spirit of WTO rules. While these issues remain controversial, a functional DSS is urgently needed to maintain its impact on China. Otherwise, countries that are keen to push China to further economic reforms will lose an important policy option (i.e. multilateral disciplines) while other approaches (i.e. unilateral measures) have proven less effective or even counter-productive in dealing with the rising global superpower.

Throughout our surveys and interviews, a common theme emerges: people want jobs that go to workers who live in their communities. So what happens when clean energy jobs are not local jobs? Opposition from communities, unions, and elected officials can ensue. But what can we do? This chapter tells the story of unions in Minnesota – unions that represent both fossil and clean energy workers – that tried not a strategy of darkness and denial but instead a strategy of sunlight and support. They worked with state regulators to have clean energy project proposals commit to disclose to the public how many local workers they hire. We combine this episode with internal union surveys and our surveys of elected officials and the public to show both the promises of transparency but also its limits.

Qualitative research provides an excellent opportunity to study digitalization. The purpose of this chapter is to explore the digitalization of government services by studying the longitudinal development data-sharing practices across different parts of government in the United Kingdom. This chapter reports on a unique, qualitative, interpretive field study based on the author’s role as a participant observer and his analysis of the discourse and contents of the various documents presented in relation to both the creation and running of data-sharing practices in the United Kingdom. The chapter finds that despite government addressing many of the concerns identified in the literature on data sharing, practical and perceptual issues remain – issues that tell us much about the state of digitalization of government services.

This chapter discusses the reflexive relationship between qualitative researchers and the process of selecting, forming, processing and interpreting data in algorithmic qualitative research. Drawing on Heidegger’s ideas, it argues that such research is necessarily synthetic – even creative – in that these activities inflect, and are in turn inflected by, the data itself. Thus, methodological transparency is key to understanding how different types of meanings become infused in the process of algorithmic qualitative research. While algorithmic research practices provide multiple opportunities for creating transparent meaning, researchers are urged to consider how such practices can also introduce and reinforce human and algorithmic bias in the form of unacknowledged introduction of perspectives into the data. The chapter demonstrates this reflexive dance of meaning and bias using an illustrative case of topic modelling. It closes by offering some recommendations for engaging actively with the domain, considering a multi-disciplinary approach, and adopting complementary methods that could potentially help researchers in fostering transparency and meaning.

This chapter focuses on the critical corporate governance role of outsiders providing professional advisory services in promoting corporate social responsibility (CSR). It draws on insights from responsive regulation and institutional theories to make the case for including professional advisory services such as accounting and auditing firms, management consultancies, rating agencies, external company secretaries, and public relations, advertising and marketing firms in the CSR legal infrastructure. Proposing an inclusive and limited stakeholder approach, the chapter outlines creative ways for enabling the CSR responsibility, accountability and transparency of professional advisory services.

This chapter discusses the role of interest groups and lobbying in the EU. It starts by giving an overview of the number and types of interest groups active at the EU level and the different channels through which they try to exert influence. The system of interest representation in the EU is then analysed in terms of corporatism and pluralism, arguing that overall it is best characterized as a form of ’designed pluralism’. The strategies that interest groups use to influence policy-making are discussed in terms of inside and outside lobbying. Because of the way the EU’s political system works, inside lobbying is a much more common strategy at the EU level than outside lobbying. Although it is difficult to make an overall assessment of interest group influence, the impact that specific groups have depends crucially on the resources they command, the way the decision-making process is organized and the type of issue at stake. The chapter ends with a discussion of the relationship between lobbying and democracy, arguing that whether or not lobbying helps or is a threat to democracy depends on the balance between interest groups and the way in which lobbying takes place.

Standard approaches to transparency emphasise transparency in data: the principle that data about government activity should be accessible and accurate. This chapter draws on in-depth fieldwork in southwest Nigeria to show how standard data-focused efforts are insufficient to meet popular demands for a government that is knowable and visible. Transparency in data is only one conception of the core concept of transparency. Transparency in things involves demonstrating transparency through the delivery of tangible, concrete outputs, whereas transparency in people demands that the social networks, relations and obligations in which their leaders are embedded should be made legible. Political competition in twenty-first century southwest Nigeria exemplifies the tensions between these rival conceptions of transparency. Whilst the technocratic reforms of the ‘Lagos model’ meant that more government data were in the public domain, there was widespread popular suspicion that official documents may be hiding as much as they reveal. Two examples from Oyo State in the 2010s show how sensitivity to these alternative conceptions of transparency helps explain otherwise counter-intuitive popular responses to government efforts at ‘good governance’. A final section explores the possible consequences of failing to attend to transparency in people, drawing on examples of populist politics in Nigeria and elsewhere.

In this second chapter dealing with the IIAs’ impact on lawmaking, we analyse and categorise other identified instances in which an IIA argument was used in the lawmaking processes. Here, we discuss invocations of IIA arguments in the lawmaking that appeared in a similar shape or form across the studied countries. We also documented cases that, while politically less significant, demonstrate curious intersections between IIAs and national lawmaking. First, we centre on four specific subject-matter areas in which the IIA argument has featured. Those relate to potentially discriminatory regulations, transparency of the public administration, fundamental rights, and expropriation and nationalisation measures. Then, we close with a section highlighting a miscellany of somewhat unexpected uses of the IIA argument. We bring attention to the attempts at influencing IIA obligations through national legislation, ambiguous examples of regulatory chill, and instances of vague and complementary uses of IIA arguments in lawmaking. The chapter presents general conclusions and broader insights on the IIAs’ impact on lawmaking, especially regarding the regulatory chill and positive spill-over theses.

In policy debates about the design of digital platforms, privacy has long been an issue of central importance. Understanding the antecedents and elements of privacy is particularly important in the context of sharing economy platforms that may manage highly sensitive information. This chapter proposes a comprehensive framework for addressing privacy concerns arising on sharing economy platforms. Our framework is divided into two parts. The first part focuses on information exchange and aims to classify all possible information exchanges that take place on sharing economy platforms. In the second part, we examine how platform users may use privacy calculus to make decisions about which information exchanges (i.e., accepted information exchanges) they wish to participate in. We conclude by highlighting the role of information transparency and privacy literacy and suggesting directions for future research.

This chapter provides an introduction to the concept of corruption, presents an overview of the major stakeholders and strategies involved in the business response to the corruption challenge and explains how this all relates to corporate sustainability.

More specifically, the chapter starts out by proposing a workable definition for corruption and explains what different forms corruption can take and what its consequences are for business and society at large. In a second step, we map the key actors, rule frameworks and initiatives that shape anti-corruption governance relevant to the business environment. We then zoom in on the company perspective and review the common approaches deployed by businesses to tackle corruption and their evolution over time, as well as some of their weaknesses and challenges ahead. The concluding section shows how the business response to corruption is linked to broader concerns about corporate sustainability, highlighting that corporate anti-corruption efforts can be considered as part and parcel of a comprehensive corporate sustainability agenda.

This chapter presents and discusses key developments in corporate sustainability reporting (CSRep). It shows that the nature of CSRep and its governance have been subject to fundamental changes over the last decades. The chapter introduces students to the rationales for and challenges to companies’ engagement in CSRep. At its core, the chapter explores different alternatives for governing CSRep, distinguishing between voluntary standards and legally binding measures such as disclosure requirements by governments and stock exchanges in European and other countries. Particular attention is given to the most widely used standard for CSRep, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Standards, and the concept of materiality. Finally, countries and industries in which reporting has become a more institutionalised practice are described in more detail.