I vote and tote : moral panics, resistance and the failure of quiet regulation

The term moral panic has entered the media and popular culture lexicon, but retains a particular meaning for sociologists. This chapter expands on existing models of moral panics and outlines a case study that illustrates that folk devils have fought back in recent years, using technologies such as social media to present their arguments (in this instance, turning a local political controversy in Melbourne, the Australian state of Victoria, to their advantage). The battle began over a classice law-and-order issue, that is, the problem of  alcohol-related violence, expecially as it involves young people. However, the conflict took an unexpected turn when the fold devils successfully used the media to prosecute their case and force the state government's hand.

Ethical transnational corporate activity at home and abroad: A proposal for reforming continuous disclosure obligations in Australia and the United States

Multinational Corporations establish operations in states with lower legal and ethical standards in areas including the environment, wages, labor standards, human rights, corruption, and company taxation. Corporate law scholars cannot be indifferent to the horrific consequences of these lax standards. From contributing to rapes and violent incidents stemming from trade in conflict minerals in the Congo to the killing of workers due to poor conditions in garment manufacturing units in Bangladesh, multinational corporations exploit conditions in developing countries abroad without disclosing their actions at home. We advance a normative argument to clarify and strengthen the existing model of disclosure-based regulation to hold MNCs accountable. We argue that, since the core expectations held by shareholders of companies are the same whether they are operating within our borders or externally, a harmonization of disclosure obligations imposed by law would be a more flexible and less costly solution. We posit that a broader reading of the disclosure obligations of companies under existing legislation like the Reg. S-K in the United States, the continuous disclosure rules under * Dean and Professor of Law, University of Newcastle Law School. Sandeep Gopalan would like to thank Terrie Troxel, Jack Tatom, Professor Bill Wilhelm, and the Networks Financial Institute at Indiana State University College of Business for their valuable support in conducting research for this article. We are also grateful to Audrey Son, Bassam Khawaja, and the editorial staff of the Columbia Human Rights Law Review for their excellent editorial work. ** Solicitor and doctoral candidate, University of Newcastle Law School. 2 COLUMBIA HUMAN RIGHTS LAW REVIEW [46.2:1 the Australian Corporations Act 2001, and listing rules such as those adopted by the Australian Securities Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange would require the disclosure of material corporate practices outside our national borders.

A demandeur-centric theory of regime design in transnational commercial law

Recent scholarship on international agreement design has almost exclusively focused on the public international law area. The literature on regime design in the area of international private law lacks a solid theoretical foundation. Academic writing on public international law's state-centric approach is only amenable to crude transplantation and poses several puzzles in the international private law context. Resolving these puzzles is important because of the proliferation of transnational commercial agreements in areas that were traditionally the province of domestic law. This paper attempts to provide a starting point to address the theoretical vacuum. Part I argues that functionalist, liberal, and realist theories cannot fully explain transnational commercial law agreement design. Part II puts forth a demandeur-centric approach with the aid of examples that span the spectrum from hard law to soft law. Part III concludes that agreement design in transnational commercial law is premised on demandeur preferences and relative power.

International students in transnational mobility: intercultural connectedness with domestic and international peers, institutions and the wider community

International students’ connectedness with their peers, institutions and the broader community significantly affects their learning and wellbeing. It is important to understand their multiple desires for intercultural connectedness in order to nurture it. This paper analyses the motives and nature of international students’ intercultural connectedness. It is based on a study that includes more than 150 interviews and fieldwork with international students and staff from 25 vocational education colleges in Australia. Drawing on Blumer’s symbolic interactionism theory as a conceptual framework, the study found international students’ motivation to engage in intercultural connectedness is linked to not only their desire for respect and recognition for intellectual, cultural and linguistic capacities and diversities but also for employment aspirations. The research shows various dimensions in which intercultural engagement is seen to encompass not only empathy, sociability and equity but also employability. The findings suggest meaningful interaction is essentially bound to reciprocal learning.

Prevention of transnational transplant-related crimes—What more can be done?

Many nations are able to prosecute transplant-related crimes committed in their territory, but transplant recipients, organ sellers and brokers, and transplant professionals may escape prosecution by engaging in these practices in foreign locations where they judge the risk of criminal investigation and prosecution to be remote.Methods. The Declaration of Istanbul Custodian Group convened an international working group to evaluate the possible role of extraterritorial jurisdiction in strengthening the enforcement of existing laws governing transplant-related crimes across national boundaries. Potential practical and ethical concerns about the use of extraterritorial jurisdiction were examined, and possible responses were explored. Results. Extraterritorial jurisdiction is a legitimate tool to combat transplant-related crimes. Further, development of a global registry of transnational transplant activities in conjunction with a standardized international referral system for legitimate travel for transplantation is proposed as a mechanism to support enforcement of national and international legal tools. Conclusions. States are encouraged to include provisions on extraterritorial jurisdiction in their laws on transplant-related crimes and to collaborate with professionals and international authorities in the development of a global registry of transnational transplant activities. These actions would assist in the identification and evaluation of illicit activities and provide information that would help in developing strategies to deter and prevent them.

National self-sufficiency in reproductive resources: an innovative response to transnational reproductive travel

Transnational reproductive travel is symptomatic of insufficient supplies ofreproductive resources, including donor gametes and gestational surrogacy services,and inequities in access to these within domestic health-care jurisdictions.Here, we argue that an innovative approach to domestic policy makingusing the framework of the National Self-Sufficiency paradigm represents thebest solution to domestic challenges and the ethical hazards of the global marketplacein reproductive resources.

Building G20 outreach: The role of transnational policy networks in sustaining effective and legitimate summitry

G20 outreach processes, in the form of the Think 20, Labour 20, Business 20, and Civil 20, Youth 20, and Women 20, are a formal attempt by G20 leaders to engage various social sectors with G20 policymaking. This essay contends that G20 outreach processes are best understood as transnational policy networks, which are involved in widening the field of policy communication and deliberation. The importance of these transnational policy networks rest upon their role in developing and disseminating G20 policy priorities and principles; and are an attempt to enhance the legitimacy and influence of the G20 and its policy proposals.

"We agree that, in order to strengthen its ability to build and sustain the political consensus needed to respond to challenges, the G20 must remain efficient, transparent and accountable. To achieve this, we decide to … pursue consistent and effective engagement with non-members, regional and international organisations, including the United Nations, and other actors, and we welcome their contribution to our work as appropriate. We also encourage engagement with civil society.G20 Cannes Summit Final Declaration 2011 (G20 2011)"

The difficulty in balancing the effectiveness and representativeness of the Group of Twenty (G20) has led to sustained questions about its legitimacy (Cooper 2010; Rudd 2011; Cooper and Pouliot 2015). Consequently, while leaders have long sought external advice about the agendas of Group of Seven (G7) summits since 1975, and about the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors’ meetings (G20 FM/CBG) since 1999, there has been intensification, elaboration, and institutionalization of transnational networks of policymakers with respect to the G20 in recent years. These networks are especially evident in the form of the G20 working groups and G20 outreach processes involved in the G20 FM/CBG and the G20 leaders’ forum created in 2008.

G20 working groups include transgovernmental groups of government officials and outside experts within a specific policy area who are charged with preparing material for G20 deliberations. G20 outreach processes are a recent and more formal attempt by G20 leaders to engage various social sectors with the policymaking activity of the G20 and were first considered by the G20 membership in 2010 with a more formal engagement with business interests. This led to the formal development of G20 outreach groups in 2013 in the form of the Think 20 (think tanks), Labour 20, Business 20, Civil 20 and Youth 20, which include representatives from these sectors. In 2015, a Women 20 outreach group was also added. These outreach processes are best understood as transnational policy networks which have been built to support the G20’s capacity to be effective and legitimate.

This essay focuses on G20 outreach processes and examines why and how the G20 has sought to augment its intergovernmental summitry and transgovernmental working groups with transnational policy networks, purposely involving a range of societal interests. Transnational policy networks demonstrate the existence of policymaking practices which include the policy influence of experts and advocates outside government. These networks also indicate the ways in which governments, International Governmental Organizations (IGOs) and summits like the G20 engage society, or where elements of society engage themselves with the policymaking process (Stone 2008). These networks intersect with the intergovernmental activities of leaders and key diplomats, and overlap with the transgovernmental relationships of various levels of government bureaucrats (Baker 2009). One of the principle features of transnational policy networks is the way they create and channel the communication of political ideas and priorities. However, it is important to keep in the mind the purpose and power of actors involved in the network and consider who has the discretion and motivation to create the network in the first instance. As the G20 members stated in 2012, the aspiration for outreach is founded upon an intent to strengthen the G20’s capacity “to build and sustain the political consensus”. Consequently, it is important to consider how the development of transnational policy networks in the form of G20 outreach processes are able to sustain the effectiveness and legitimacy of the G20.

This essay contends that G20 outreach processes are best understood as transnational policy networks. These networks have been built to widen the field of policy communication and deliberation. Furthermore, these outreach processes and networks are an attempt to enhance the legitimacy and influence of the G20 and its policy proposals. While there is no doubt that outreach practices are “ad hoc responses to the widespread charge that the G20 reproduces the politics of exclusion in global governance” (Cooper and Pouliot 2015, 347), these practices have the potential to improve both the effectiveness and legitimacy of the G20. The G20 possesses uncertain legitimacy and members of the G20 demonstrate an awareness of this and a corresponding willingness to actively develop various political practices to support the capacity and legitimacy of the G20.

However, G20 outreach also enables the G20 to place some limit upon the policy narratives and ideas that develop within these policy networks. The G20 is liable to be misunderstood without examining the activity of these transnational networks because the G20 is fundamentally a deliberative policy forum rather than a negotiating forum of binding regulations. Transnational policy networks have the potential to scrutinize and amplify relevant policy ideas and thereby enhance the legitimacy of the G20 and strengthen the capacity of the G20 to address an array of global economic and social problems. However, while some narrative control is important to amplify the G20 agenda, too much narrative control will undermine its legitimacy and capacity to develop broad-based responses to global problems. This essay explores the formation of these transnational policy networks by first outlining the evolution of the purpose and configuration of the G20, then it considers the ways G20 outreach processes constitute transnational policy networks and why they have been established, and lastly, analyses how these networks operate to enhance the legitimacy and effectiveness of the G20.