Policy interventions to promote healthy eating: a review of what works, what does not and what is promising

Unhealthy diets can lead to various diseases, which in turn can translate into a bigger burden for the state in the form of health services and lost production. Obesity alone has enormous costs and claims thousands of lives every year. Although diet quality in the European Union has improved across countries, it still falls well short of conformity with the World Health Organization dietary guidelines. In this review, we classify types of policy interventions addressing healthy eating and identify through a literature review what specific policy interventions are better suited to improve diets. Policy interventions are classified into two broad categories: information measures and measures targeting the market environment. Using this classification, we summarize a number of previous systematic reviews, academic papers, and institutional reports and draw some conclusions about their effectiveness. Of the information measures, policy interventions aimed at reducing or banning unhealthy food advertisements generally have had a weak positive effect on improving diets, while public information campaigns have been successful in raising awareness of unhealthy eating but have failed to translate the message into action. Nutritional labeling allows for informed choice. However, informed choice is not necessarily healthier; knowing or being able to read and interpret nutritional labeling on food purchased does not necessarily result in consumption of healthier foods. Interventions targeting the market environment, such as fiscal measures and nutrient, food, and diet standards, are rarer and generally more effective, though more intrusive. Overall, we conclude that measures to support informed choice have a mixed and limited record of success. On the other hand, measures to target the market environment are more intrusive but may be more effective.

Non-display uses of digital works: Google Books and beyond

With the advent of mass digitization projects, such as the Google Book Search, a peculiar shift has occurred in the way that copyright works are dealt with. Contrary to what has so far been the case, works are turned into machine-readable data to be automatically processed for various purposes without the expression of works being displayed to the public. In the Google Book Settlement Agreement, this new kind of usage is referred to as ‘non-display uses’ of digital works. The legitimacy of these uses has not yet been tested by Courts and does not comfortably fit in the current copyright doctrine, plainly because the works are not used as works but as something else, namely as data. Since non-display uses may prove to be a very lucrative market in the near future, with the potential to affect the way people use copyright works, we examine non-display uses under the prism of copyright principles to determine the boundaries of their legitimacy. Through this examination, we provide a categorization of the activities carried out under the heading of ‘non-display uses’, we examine their lawfulness under the current copyright doctrine and approach the phenomenon from the spectrum of data protection law that could apply, by analogy, to the use of copyright works as processable data.

To what extent are EU steel companies susceptible to competitive loss due to climate policy?

In recognition of their competitive vulnerability, a set of special rules have been devised for managing sectors such as steel and cement within the EU ETS. These rules basically seek to set sector specific performance benchmarks and reward top performers. However, the steel sector as a whole will receive the vast majority of its allowances for free in Phase III. Perceptions of competitive vulnerability have been largely based on inherently hypothetical analyses which rely heavily on counterfactual scenario and abatement cost estimates often provided by firms themselves. This paper diverges from these approaches by providing a qualitative assessment of the two key reasons underpinning the competitive vulnerability argument of the EU Steel Companies based on interviews and case study involving the three largest producers of steel within the EU – AcerlorMittal, Corus, and ThyssenKrupp. We find that these arguments provide only partial and weak justifications for competitive loss and discriminatory treatment in the EUETS. This strategy is difficult to counter by governments due to information asymmetry; and it appears to have proved very successful insofar as it has helped the industry to achieve free allocation in Phases I-III of EU ETS by playing up the risk of carbon leakage.

Parallel editing, multi-positionality and maximalism: cosmopolitan effects as explored in some art works by Melanie Jackson and Vivienne Dick

Garfield produces a critique of neo-minimalist art practice by demonstrating how the artist Melanie Jackson’s Some things you are not allowed to send around the world (2003 and 2006) and the experimental film-maker Vivienne Dick’s Liberty’s booty (1980) – neither of which can be said to be about feeling ‘at home’ in the world, be it as a resident or as a nomad – examine global humanity through multi-positionality, excess and contingency, and thereby begin to articulate a new cosmopolitan relationship with the local – or, rather, with many different localities – in one and the same maximalist sweep of the work. ‘Maximalism’ in Garfield’s coinage signifies an excessive overloading (through editing, collage, and the sheer density of the range of the material) that enables the viewer to insert themselves into the narrative of the work. In the art of both Jackson and Dick Garfield detects a refusal to know or to judge the world; instead, there is an attempt to incorporate the complexities of its full range into the singular vision of the work, challenging the viewer to identify what is at stake.

Whatever works: proportionality as a constitutional doctrine

In The Global Model of Constitutional Rights Kai Möller claims that the proportionality test is underlain by an expansive moral right to autonomy. This putative right protects everything that advances one’s self-conception. It may of course be limited when balanced against other considerations such as the rights of others. But it always creates a duty on the state to justify the limitation. Möller further contends that the practice of proportionality can best be understood as protecting the right to autonomy. This review article summarizes the main tenets of Möller’s theory and criticizes them on two counts. First, it disputes the existence of a general right to autonomy; such a right places an unacceptably heavy burden on others. Second, it argues that we do not need to invoke a right to autonomy to explain and justify the main features of the practice of proportionality. Like other constitutional doctrines, proportionality is defensible, if it is grounded in pragmatic –mainly epistemic and institutional- considerations about how to increase overall rights compliance. These considerations are independent of any substantive theory of rights.

And the night was kind. 'Ruskin's Ponds' book works by John Woodman

A journal article published in the Blue Notebook: Journal for artists' books. Vol 8 No 2, April 2014 exploring the work of video and book artist John Woodman and his relationship with John Ruskin's life and landscapes.