To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Corporate Social Responsibility Across the Globe demonstrates many ways that CSR can be applied by law to overcome regulation and governance challenges around the world. Using interdisciplinary and comparative models and perspectives, the book challenges dominant understandings of CSR, such as neoliberal voluntarism, and demonstrates the regulatory and governance implications of an interdependent relationship between CSR and the law. The book identifies substantive and procedural barriers for CSR in national, public, and private international law. By analyzing, deconstructing, and reframing CSR in these contexts, the book underlines opportunities for more effective application of CSR as a governance mechanism. Chapters investigate relevant regulation concepts, paradigms and approaches for CSR; methods for infusing CSR in corporate governance; and ways to facilitate private regulation of CSR in more developed, emerging, and developing jurisdictions.
Collaboration-based approaches to healthcare improvement attract much attention. They involve networks of people coming together to cooperate around a common interest, with shared goals of improving care and mutual learning. Longstanding examples of collaborative approaches have been associated with some success in improving outcomes and reducing harm. The evidence for their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, however, remains inconsistent and contingent on the circumstances in which they are deployed and how they are used for what purpose. Several models for collaboration have been developed, varying in structure, format, and balance between internal leadership and external control. The authors focus on two approaches: quality improvement collaboratives and communities of practice. They explore evidence of their impact on health outcomes, and evidence about how best to organise and implement collaboration-based approaches. Using examples of more and less successful collaborations, they offer guidance on the key challenges involved in using collaboration-based approaches to improve healthcare. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.
The UK's relationship with the European Union (EU) is now embodied in two principal legal instruments: the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, which formally entered into force on 1 May 2021; and the Withdrawal Agreement, with its Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, which continues to apply. Using a ‘building blocks’ framework for analysis of national health systems derived from the World Health Organisation, this article examines the likely impacts in the UK of this legal settlement on the National Health Service (NHS), health and social care. Specifically, we determine the extent to which the trade, cooperation and regulatory aspects of those legal measures support positive impacts for the NHS and social care. We show that, as there is clear support for positive health and care outcomes in only one of the 17 NHS ‘building blocks’, unless mitigating action is taken, the likely outcomes will be detrimental. However, as the legal settlement gives the UK a great deal of regulatory freedom, especially in Great Britain, we argue that it is crucial to track the effects of proposed new health and social care-related policy choices in the months and years ahead.
Surprisingly, Benjamin Graham, the acknowledged “Father of Value Investing,” considered his most important work to be the invention of the Commodity Reserve Currency Plan during the 1930s and 1940s. Previous studies of the Plan have overlooked the fact that, of its three main components (buffer stocks, price stability, and currency backing), Graham regarded the first as the most important and the other two as “secondary” or “subsidiary.” By focusing on the buffer-stock aspect, we demonstrate, first, the breadth and depth of Graham’s overall conception in terms of both micro- and macroeconomics, and, second, the considerable overlap with John Maynard Keynes’s ideas developed around the same time, which are manifested particularly in their common conclusion that the inefficiency of commodity markets could be rectified only by government intervention. We also comment on Perry Mehrling’s assessment of Graham as “not any kind of economist at all” (JHET 2011).
This chapter introduces the approach taken in the book, which is to focus on the law, not policy. It further clarifies that the book will focus on the legal aspects of the Security Council based on the UN Charter and in the Council’s practice.
This chapter considers some legal issues that arise when analyzing some of the main provisions of Chapter VII. It first considers the binding nature of provisional measures under Article 40, whether a determination under Article 39 is a prerequisite for such a determination, and the temporary nature of provisional measures and their timing. Then it considers the legal framework of measures not involving the use of force under Article 41 and possible limitations on their scope and nature.
This chapter assesses the powers of the Security Council in three stages. First, it introduces the scope of the Council’s powers. They are potentially far-reaching, although within a particular field – the maintenance of international peace and security. The chapter then examines specifically the Council’s practice and discretion with respect to determining the existence of a threat to the peace, breaches of the peace, or an act of aggression, under Article 39. Finally, it addresses whether such determinations are subject to judicial review.
Science diplomacy has been instrumental in facilitating cooperation in the Arctic region, yet through the projection of vast hydrocarbon potential in the region, it has also served to undermine the major transformation necessary in Arctic decision-making towards the goals of climate governance. This article surveys the translation of science from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) reports (i.e. the CARA study and Factsheet 2008-3049) on Arctic oil and gas and its transformation into common knowledge within Arctic discourse through repetition by the agents in between and its subsequent adoption into Arctic policy documents. In this process, we interrogate the production of the science underpinning US science diplomacy and the influence of this science on international Arctic discourse and policy use science diplomacy. This paper contributes to the literature of science diplomacy in the Arctic by examining the contributions of the USGS to Arctic policy discourses and its impact on Arctic governance at the nexus of science diplomacy on climate and energy.
After the discussion of the powers of the Security Council in the previous chapter, this chapter considers some of the limitations on these powers, real or imagined. In particular, it examines limits deriving from the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations and the norms of jus cogens. Then, it explores some checks and balances on the actions of the Council. Ultimately, our response is that states do not have the right to do this, and would be acting unlawfully if they purported to exercise such a right. But they do, of course, have the ultimate option as a matter of policy of simply disregarding binding obligations imposed by the Council, with all the consequences, political and legal, that might flow from such a course of action. That is why the Council needs to exercise self-restraint and use its undoubted powers responsibly and only where it really is necessary to do so in order to ensure prompt and effective action to maintain international peace and security. This is the most effective check on the Council’s power.
This chapter considers the interaction of the Security Council with other international organizations in relation to the use of force and the role that international organizations may play in implementing Council authorizations to use force. This is an area where the Security Council, the international organizations concerned, and member states have shown great flexibility, with the provisions of the UN Charter (both Chapter VII and Chapter VIII) and of the constituent instruments of the regional and other organizations being developed through extensive practice. A difficult question, however, arises where member states grant regional organizations the authority to carry out such interventions without the target state’s consent to the specific action and without Council authorization, in particualr in light of Article 4(h) of the Constitutive Act of the AU. The chapter concludes that it cannot be said that Article 4(h) of the AU Constitutive Act or similar provisions allow for the use of force without Security Council authorization. The Council remains the body vested by member states with the power to authorize ‘enforcement action’.
This chapter examines the history and nature of the Security Council’s relationship with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the role that this relationship may play in the exercise of the Council’s functions. It briefly recalls the drafting history pertaining to the Court, including its relationship to the Council, the UN Charter provisions governing the relationship between the two principal organs, and the relationship between them – both potentially and in practice. It concludes that a more prominent role for the Court, within the confines set by the Council itself in this context, could strengthen the effectiveness and legitimacy of the Council as an institution. Under the framework set out in the UN Charter and considering the Council’s wide discretion as to how it executes its responsibilities, the Council could and may want to consider and make use of the ICJ as a useful tool within its diverse toolbox for the maintenance of international peace and security.
This chapter looks at legal aspects of the decisions of the Security Council. It addresses certain aspects of voting in the Security Council, before then considering when Council decisions are binding, who is bound by Security Council decisions, and whether binding decisions may be included in presidential statements.