Conservation and sustainable use of wild species as sources of new ornamentals

While only about 1-200 species are used intensively in commercial floriculture (e.g. carnations, chrysanthemums, gerbera, narcissus, orchids, tulips, lilies, roses, pansies and violas, saintpaulias, etc.) and 4-500 as house plants, several thousand species of herbs, shrubs and trees are traded commercially by nurseries and garden centres as ornamentals or amenity species. Most of these have been introduced from the wild with little selection or breeding. In Europe alone, 12 000 species are found in cultivation in general garden collections (i.e. excluding specialist collections and botanic gardens). In addition, specialist collections (often very large) of many other species and/or cultivars of groups such as orchids, bromeliads, cacti and succulents, primulas, rhododendrons, conifers and cycads are maintained in several centres such as botanic gardens and specialist nurseries, as are 'national collections' of cultivated species and cultivars in some countries. Specialist growers, both professional and amateur, also maintain collections of plants for cultivation, including, increasingly, native plants. The trade in ornamental and amenity horticulture cannot be fully estimated but runs into many billions of dollars annually and there is considerable potential for further development and the introduction of many new species into the trade. Despite this, most of the collections are ad hoc and no co-ordinated efforts have been made to ensure that adequate germplasm samples of these species are maintained for conservation purposes and few of them are represented at all adequately in seed banks. Few countries have paid much attention to germplasm needs of ornamentals and the Ornamental Plant Germplasm Center in conjunction with the USDA National Plant Germplasm System at The Ohio State University is an exception. Generally there is a serious gap in national and international germplasm strategies, which have tended to focus primarily on food plants and some forage and industrial crops. Adequate arrangements need to be put in place to ensure the long- and medium-term conservation of representative samples of the genetic diversity of ornamental species. The problems of achieving this will be discussed. In addition, a policy for the conservation of old cultivars or 'heritage' varieties of ornamentals needs to be formulated. The considerable potential for introduction of new ornamental species needs to be assessed. Consideration needs to be given to setting up a co-ordinating structure with overall responsibility for the conservation of germplasm of ornamental and amenity plants.

Redefining the outer boundaries of EU Law: the Zambrano, McCarthy and Dereci trilogy

In its three recent rulings in the cases of Zambrano, McCarthy, and Dereci, the Court appears to have been determined to redefine the external boundaries of EU law, in cases involving the family reunification rights of Union citizens.These three judgments can be read as an indication that for Article 20 TFEU to apply, there is no longer a requirement of a cross-border element on the facts of the case, and that it is sufficient if the contested national measure has the effect of ‘depriving citizens of the Union of the genuine enjoyment of the substance’ of their rights (the ‘Zambrano principle’).The cases can, at the same time, also be read as a confirmation that the free movement provisions do – still – require a cross-border element and, in particular, the exercise of inter-State movement, in order to apply. Though the result in these cases has not been entirely unexpected, especially in the aftermath of the Rottmann ruling, it is rather problematic in that, although it is obvious that the Court wishes to redraw the line dividing the national and EU spheres of competence, it does not make it entirely clear where this line now lies and leaves many essential questions unanswered, which will obviously require some time to be resolved. EU lawyers are consequently, once more, left with having to decipher as best as they can the real intentions of the Court in this new line of case-law, which has been further complicated by the fact that what the Court seems to have given with one hand in Zambrano (and before that in Rottmann), has taken it back to a large extent through its rulings in McCarthy and Dereci, which appear to confine the former two cases to their own exceptional facts.6 Moreover, the ‘reverse discrimination Pandora’s box’, the opening of which appears to have been the real target of these references, remains untouched: instead of providing a direct solution to this problem, the Court has chosen to – once again – broaden the scope of the Treaty provisions in order to include within it as many situations as possible and, thus, prevent the emergence of this type of differential treatment on a case-by-case basis.As will be explained, nonetheless, this is by no means an appropriate solution to the reverse discrimination conundrum.

The vulnerable subject of negligence law

The approach taken by English courts to the duty of care question in negligence has been subject to harsh criticism in recent years. This article examines this fundamental issue in tort law, drawing upon Canadian and Australian jurisprudence by way of comparison. From this analysis, the concept of vulnerability is developed as a productive means of understanding the duty of care. Vulnerability is of increasing interest in legal and political theory and it is of particular relevance to the law of negligence. In addition to aiding doctrinal coherence, vulnerability – with its focus on relationships and care – has the potential to broaden the way in which the subject of tort law is conceived because it challenges dominant assumptions about autonomy as being prior to the relationships on which it is dependent.

Disentangling sources of incomplete acquisition: an explanation for competence divergence across heritage grammars.

This article brings to light an important variable involved in explaining a type of competence divergence in an instance of bilingual acquisition: heritage speaker (HS) bilingualism. We present results of experiments with European Portuguese (EP) heritage speakers (HSs), showing that they have full morpho-syntactic and semantic competence of inflected infinitives, similar to EP monolinguals. We show this constitutes clear evidence of competence mismatches between heritage speakers of European and Brazilian Portuguese, comparing our results to Rothman’s (2007) experimental evidence that Brazilian Portuguese (BP) heritage speakers lack knowledge of inflected infinitives. These comparative results are especially relevant because inflected infinitives were argued (Pires, 2002, 2006) to have been lost in colloquial BP dialects, although educated monolinguals demonstrate target competence.

Game-theoretic aspects of international mergers: Theory and case studies

This paper studies the exclusion of potential competition as a motivating factor for international mergers. We propose a simple game-theoretic framework in order to discuss the conditions under which mergers that prevent reciprocal domestic competition will occur. Our analysis highlights the shortcomings of antitrust policies based on pre-merger/post-merger concentration comparisons. A review of several recent European cases suggests that actual merger policy often fails to consider potential competition.

Military targeting in the context of self-defence actions

In order to bring conceptual clarity to a particular dimension of the relationship between the jus ad bellum and the jus in bello regimes, this article explores the independent sources of a military targeting rule in both branches of international law. The aim is not to displace the jus in bello as the ‘lead’ regime on how targeting decisions must be made, or to undermine the traditional separation between these regimes. Rather, conceptual light is shed on a sometimes assumed but generally neglected dimension of the jus ad bellum’s necessity and proportionality criteria that may, in limited circumstances, have significance for our understanding of human protection during war, by covering possible gaps in the jus in bello targeting rules.

Remote law-making? American drone strikes and the development of jus ad bellum

There is growing concern amongst international lawyers that the United States’ use of unmanned armed vehicles to conduct lethal targeting operations against non-state actors is setting a dangerous precedent for the future and might lead to an erosion of important rules under international law. Taking seriously these concerns, this article examines in more detail the potential precedent created by the US through its lethal drone strikes and the provided justifications, for the purpose of the development of jus ad bellum. In identifying the claims made by the US under different theories of customary international law as qualified practice or expressions of opinio juris that can lead to an alteration of the law should they be accepted by the international community, this article takes a first step towards a more extensive debate on the potential effects of the US drone strikes on the development of international law.