An assessment of the business value of traceability practices in the italian fishery processing industry

Traceability is often perceived by food industry executives as an additional cost of doing business, one to be avoided if possible. However, a traceability system can in fact comply the regulatory requirements, increase food safety and recall performance, improving marketing performances and, as well as, improving supply chain management. Thus, traceability affects business performances of firms in terms of costs and benefits determined by traceability practices. Costs and benefits affect factors such as, firms’ characteristics, level of traceability and ,lastly, costs and benefits perceived prior to traceability implementation. This thesis was undertaken to understand how these factors are linked to affect the outcome of costs and benefits. Analysis of the results of a plant level survey of the Italian ichthyic processing industry revealed that processors generally adopt various level of traceability while government support appears to increase the level of traceability and the expectations and actual costs and benefits. None of the firms’ characteristics, with the exception of government support, influences costs and level of traceability. Only size of firms and level of QMS certifications are linked with benefits while precision of traceability increases benefits without affecting costs. Finally, traceability practices appear due to the request from “external“ stakeholders such as government, authority and customers rather than “internal” factors (e.g. improving the firm management) while the traceability system does not provide any added value from the market in terms of price premium or market share increase.

The abuse of intellectual property rights and regulations in China: a law and economic analysis

From the institutional point of view, the legal system of IPR (intellectual property right, hereafter, IPR) is one of incentive institutions of innovation and it plays very important role in the development of economy. According to the law, the owner of the IPR enjoy a kind of exclusive right to use his IP(intellectual property, hereafter, IP), in other words, he enjoys a kind of legal monopoly position in the market. How to well protect the IPR and at the same time to regulate the abuse of IPR is very interested topic in this knowledge-orientated market and it is the basic research question in this dissertation. In this paper, by way of comparing study and by way of law and economic analyses, and based on the Austrian Economics School’s theories, the writer claims that there is no any contradiction between the IPR and competition law. However, in this new economy (high-technology industries), there is really probability of the owner of IPR to abuse his dominant position. And with the characteristics of the new economy, such as, the high rates of innovation, “instant scalability”, network externality and lock-in effects, the IPR “will vest the dominant undertakings with the power not just to monopolize the market but to shift such power from one market to another, to create strong barriers to enter and, in so doing, granting the perpetuation of such dominance for quite a long time.”1 Therefore, in order to keep the order of market, to vitalize the competition and innovation, and to benefit the customer, in EU and US, it is common ways to apply the competition law to regulate the IPR abuse. In Austrian Economic School perspective, especially the Schumpeterian theories, the innovation/competition/monopoly and entrepreneurship are inter-correlated, therefore, we should apply the dynamic antitrust model based on the AES theories to analysis the relationship between the IPR and competition law. China is still a developing country with relative not so high ability of innovation. Therefore, at present, to protect the IPR and to make good use of the incentive mechanism of IPR legal system is the first important task for Chinese government to do. However, according to the investigation reports,2 based on their IPR advantage and capital advantage, some multinational companies really obtained the dominant or monopoly market position in some aspects of some industries, and there are some IPR abuses conducted by such multinational companies. And then, the Chinese government should be paying close attention to regulate any IPR abuse. However, how to effectively regulate the IPR abuse by way of competition law in Chinese situation, from the law and economic theories’ perspective, from the legislation perspective, and from the judicial practice perspective, there is a long way for China to go!