Governance challenges in the global games industry

Current governance challenges facing the global games industry are heavily dominated by online games. Whilst much academic and industry attention has been afforded to Virtual Worlds, the more pressing contemporary challenges may arise in casual games, especially when found on social networks. As authorities are faced with an increasing volume of disputes between participants and platform operators, the likelihood of external regulation increases, and the role that such regulation would have on the industry – both internationally and within specific regions – is unclear. Kelly (2010) argues that “when you strip away the graphics of these [social] games, what you are left with is simply a button [...] You push it and then the game returns a value of either Win or Lose”. He notes that while “every game developer wants their game to be played, preferably addictively, because it’s so awesome”, these mechanics lead not to “addiction of engagement through awesomeness” but “the addiction of compulsiveness”, surmising that “the reality is that they’ve actually sort-of kind-of half-intentionally built a virtual slot machine industry”. If such core elements of social game design are questioned, this gives cause to question the real-money options to circumvent them. With players able to purchase virtual currency and speed the completion of tasks, the money invested by the 20% purchasing in-game benefits (Zainwinger, 2012) may well be the result of compulsion. The decision by the Japanese Consumer Affairs agency to investigate the ‘Kompu Gacha’ mechanic (in which players are rewarded for completing a set of items obtained through purchasing virtual goods such as mystery boxes), and the resultant verdict that such mechanics should be regulated through gambling legislation, demonstrates that politicians are beginning to look at the mechanics deployed in these environments. Purewal (2012) states that “there’s a reasonable argument that complete gacha would be regulated under gambling law under at least some (if not most) Western jurisdictions”. This paper explores the governance challenged within these games and platforms, their role in the global industry, and current practice amongst developers in the Australian and United States to address such challenges.

The Global Financial Crisis : Neo-Liberalism, Social Democracy, and Criminology

This chapter begins with a discussion of the economic, political, and social context of the recent global financial crisis, which casts into relief current boundaries of criminology, permeated and made fluid in criminology's recent cultural turn. This cultural turn has reinvigorated criminology, providing new objects of analysis and rich and thick descriptions of the relationship between criminal justice and the conditions of life in ‘late modernity’. Yet in comparison with certain older traditions that sought to articulate criminal justice issues with a wider politics of contestation around political economies and social welfare policies of different polities, many of the current leading culturalist accounts tend in their globalized convergences to produce a strangely decontextualized picture in which we are all subject to the zeitgeist of a unitary ‘late modernity’ which does not differ between, for example, social democratic and neo-liberal polities, let alone allow for the widespread persistence of the pre-modern. It is argued that that contrary to this globalizing trend there are signs within criminology that life is being breathed back into social democratic and penal welfare concerns, habitus, and practices. The chapter discusses three of these signs: the emergence of neo-liberalism as a subject of criminology; a developing comparative penology which recognizes differences in the political economies of capitalist states and evinces a renewed interest in inequality; and a nascent revolt against the ‘generative grammar’, ‘pathological disciplinarities’, and ‘imaginary penalities’ of neoliberal managerialism.

What further benefit, if any, might Australia get from the ALI-III Transnational Insolvency: Global Principles for Cooperation in International Insolvency Cases?

In 2006, the American Law Institute (ALI) and the International Insolvency Institute (III) established a Transnational Insolvency Project and appointed Professor Ian Fletcher (United Kingdom) and Professor Bob Wessels (Netherlands) as Joint Reporters. The objective was to investigate whether the essential provisions of the ALI Principles of Cooperation among the NAFTA Countries (ALI-NAFTA Principles) and the annexed Guidelines Applicable to Court-to-Court Communication in Cross-border Cases (ALI-NAFTA Guidelines) may, with certain necessary modifications, be acceptable for use by jurisdictions across the world. In 2012, Professor Fletcher and Professor Wessels presented the report Transnational Insolvency: Global Principles for Cooperation in International Insolvency Cases (“ALI-III Report”) to the Annual Meetings of the American Law Institute and the International Insolvency Institute. In 2013, the Australian Academy of Law (AAL) provided support to the authors to undertake research on the possible benefits for Australia of courts and insolvency administrators of referring to the ALI-III Report when addressing international insolvency cases. This AAL project was at the request of the Council of Chief Justices of Australia and New Zealand. This research Report compares the Global Principles for Cooperation in International Insolvency Cases with the Cross-border Insolvency Act 2008 and the UNCITRAL Model Law as it has been adopted and has force of law in Australia. Further, it examines the Global Guidelines for Court-to-Court Communications in International Insolvency Cases in light of Australian cross-border insolvency and procedural law. Finally, it makes brief reference to and commentary on the Global Rules on Conflict–of-Laws Matters in International Insolvency Cases annexed to the ALI-III Report from the perspective of Australian choice of law rules.

Climate change and financial regulation : challenges for the financial sector post the Global Financial Crisis

Regulation has played a significant role in shaping the financial services sector in Australia over the past few decades. Regulatory changes have included the establishment of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA), floating the Australian dollar, allowing foreign financial institutions to operate domestically, the introduction of the superannuation guarantee charge, and the removal of interest rate controls. As the economy emerges from the worst financial crisis since the great depression, a new force of change that is recognised as one of the most significant sources of risk and opportunity facing the business community in the foreseeable future is that of climate change. Climate change is expected to be a significant change agent in the financial services sector as extreme weather patterns, sea level rises, and atmospheric changes impact on asset values (both investment and lending), project finance, and risk products. The financial services industry will be particularly affected by these developments, both as a provider of financial products (capital, credit, investment, advice, and insurance), and also through its powerful influence on the economy in terms of capital allocation. In addition, industry constituents will be heavily impacted by government regulation in this area (reporting, emissions trading and environmental policies), with respect to their own business practices and also those of their clients. This study reports the results of interviews conducted with senior members of the finance sector working in the sustainability area to gauge their perceptions of the challenges facing the sector with respect to climate change. Our results confirm that that regulatory intervention will be critical to climate change response gaining traction and momentum. In particular, regulatory certainty will promote engagement, particularly in relation to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), with other developments needed in terms of information disclosure, performance and remuneration, and incentive programs. Accordingly, the significant potential risks and opportunities that climate change presents to the sector, and the broader economy, will in part be managed/realised only if a swift and significant regulatory response is achieved.

Law, ethics and pandemic preparedness : the importance of cross-jurisdictional and cross-cultural perspectives

OBJECTIVE To explore social equity, health planning, regulatory and ethical dilemmas in responding to a pandemic influenza (H5N1) outbreak, and the adequacy of protocols and standards such as the International Health Regulations (2005). APPROACH This paper analyses the role of legal and ethical considerations for pandemic preparedness, including an exploration of the relevance of cross-jurisdictional and cross-cultural perspectives in assessing the validity of goals for harmonisation of laws and policies both within and between nations. Australian and international experience is reviewed in various areas, including distribution of vaccines during a pandemic, the distribution of authority between national and local levels of government, and global and regional equity issues for poorer countries. CONCLUSION This paper finds that questions such as those of distributional justice (resource allocation) and regulatory frameworks raise important issues about the cultural and ethical acceptability of planning measures. Serious doubt is cast on a 'one size fits all' approach to international planning for managing a pandemic. It is concluded that a more nuanced approach than that contained in international guidelines may be required if an effective response is to be constructed internationally. IMPLICATIONS The paper commends the wisdom of reliance on 'soft law', international guidance that leaves plenty of room for each nation to construct its response in conformity with its own cultural and value requirements.

Trade, travel and disease : the role of law in pandemic preparedness

In 2009 the world experienced an influenza pandemic caused by the H1N1 virus. While the pandemic was milder then expected, it nonetheless provided the world with an opportunity to do real-time testing of pandemic preparedness. This paper examines the threats to human health posed by infectious diseases and the challenges for the global community in development of effective surveillance systems for emerging infectious diseases. In 2005 a new revised version of the International Health Regulations (IHR) was adopted. The requirements of the IHR (2005) are outlined and considered in light of the constraints facing resource-poor countries. Finally, the paper addresses the role of domestic law-making in supporting public health preparedness and articulates a number of ethical principles that should be considered when developing new public health laws.

Law, ethics and pandemic preparedness : the importance of cross-jurisdictional and cross-cultural perspectives

Objective To explore social equity, health planning, regulatory and ethical dilemmas in responding to a pandemic influenza (H5N1) outbreak, and the adequacy of protocols and standards such as the International Health Regulations (2005). Approach This paper analyses the role of legal and ethical considerations for pandemic preparedness, including an exploration of the relevance of cross-jurisdictional and cross-cultural perspectives in assessing the validity of goals for harmonisation of laws and policies both within and between nations. Australian and international experience is reviewed in various areas, including distribution of vaccines during a pandemic, the distribution of authority between national and local levels of government, and global and regional equity issues for poorer countries. Conclusion This paper finds that questions such as those of distributional justice (resource allocation) and regulatory frameworks raise important issues about the cultural and ethical acceptability of planning measures. Serious doubt is cast on a ‘one size fits all’ approach to international planning for managing a pandemic. It is concluded that a more nuanced approach than that contained in international guidelines may be required if an effective response is to be constructed internationally. Implications The paper commends the wisdom of reliance on ‘soft law’, international guidance that leaves plenty of room for each nation to construct its response in conformity with its own cultural and value requirements.

Women's health in the global village

As we stand at the beginning of the 21st century and behold the world before us, it seems that we are living in a time of profound change. Everywhere we look change seems afoot, demolishing our traditional securities and hastily building new ones in their place. Modern medical science has been an integral part of this change. It is not possible to ignore the advances of modern medicine nor the realities of scientific uncertainties for they are part of the shared context of our lives today. I In the past 50 years we have witnessed the discovery of DNA and more recently the mapping of the human genome, the birth of the world's first in-vitro fertilisation baby, followed by thousands worldwide in the period since, the discovery of human stem cells and the birth of Dolly the cloned sheep in Scotland. Furthermore, the processes of globalisation have ensured that an event that occurs on one side of the globe becomes an item on the evening news on the other side, creating the impression that all change takes place on our doorstep. Some of these events have provoked deep angst in the community, sparking public debate over the ethics of science and the boundaries to be imposed by law. All of these developments have changed the realm of the possible. While these advances in medical science spark debate in the developed countries, in less developed countries high rates of infectious diseases and infant and maternal mortality and the challenges of access to adequate food and clean water are priorities, highlighting international differences in health care. This article explores these differences through an analysis of globalisation and reproduction. It seeks to analyse both the meaning of globalisation and the impact of globalising trends on health laws and policies as regulators of women's health within the global village.

Health governance : law, regulation and policy

This special issue of Public Health is devoted to health governance, examining the role of law, regulation and policy in safeguarding the public's health. Each of us has devoted a career to thinking carefully about the role of law as a tool to prevent injury and disease and to promote the population's health and wellbeing. 1, 2, 3 and 4 In this Guest Editorial we first explain what we mean by the term ‘governance’, as well as the role of law in a well-regulated society. Next, we explore the increasingly important, and challenging, concept of what we call national and global federalism—the inter-relationships among the various levels of governance (local, national, supranational and transnational) and among various actors in national and global health. Third, we explain the origins of this journal symposium, which arises from three conferences on the topic in Hong Kong and Sydney. Finally, we offer a brief introduction to the articles that follow.

Registration of clinical trials: Challenges for global regulation

In 2004 the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) issued a statement indicating that from 1 July 2005 registration in a publicly accessible trials registry would be a condition of publication in an ICMJE member journal. The World Health Organisation is coordinating the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) as a means of providing a standardised framework for registration. This article considers the practical challenges and opportunities that arise from these developments and considers the relevance of trial registration for women and minorities and for developing countries.

Globalisation and Health : Challenges for Health Law and Bioethics

This timely collection explores ethical and legal dilemmas in healthcare arising from globalization. Conflicts between public interests and individual rights, the challenge of regulating professionals and access to health services, and the effects of a global market all feature prominently in contemporary debates in this area. As a result of globalization, issues in health law and bioethics can no longer be understood solely within political boundaries that define traditional notions of individuals and communities. Rather, solutions for emerging problems require a global conception of rights and obligations, including the re-evaluation of ethical frameworks and legal regimes that currently govern exchanges in healthcare. Leading scholars in bioethics, law, medicine and philosophy from various jurisdictions engage these themes in this volume, and demonstrate the need for transnational solutions in a global age of healthcare.

The IHR (2005), disease surveillance, and the individual in global health politics

Since the revisions to the International Health Regulations (IHR) in 2005, much attention has turned to two concerns relating to infectious disease control. The first is how to assist states to strengthen their capacity to identify and verify public health emergencies of international concern (PHEIC). The second is the question of how the World Health Organization (WHO) will operate its expanded mandate under the revised IHR. Very little attention has been paid to the potential individual power that has been afforded under the IHR revisions – primarily through the first inclusion of human rights principles into the instrument and the allowance for the WHO to receive non-state surveillance intelligence and informal reports of health emergencies. These inclusions mark the individual as a powerful actor, but also recognise the vulnerability of the individual to the whim of the state in outbreak response and containment. In this paper we examine why these changes to the IHR occurred and explore the consequence of expanding the sovereignty-as-responsibility concept to disease outbreak response. To this end our paper considers both the strengths and weaknesses of incorporating reports from non-official sources and including human rights principles in the IHR framework.

What contribution can International Relations make to the evolving global health agenda?

This article presents two approaches that have dominated International Relations in their approach to the international politics of health. The statist approach, which is primarily security-focused, seeks to link health initiatives to a foreign or defence policy remit. The globalist approach, in contrast, seeks to advance health not because of its intrinsic security value but because it advances the well-being and rights of individuals. This article charts the evolution of these approaches and demonstrates why both have the potential to shape our understanding of the evolving global health agenda. It examines how the statist and globalist perspectives have helped shape contemporary initiatives in global health governance and suggests that there is evidence of an emerging convergence between the two perspectives. This convergence is particularly clear in the articulation of a number of UN initiatives in this area—especially the One World, One Health Strategic Framework and the Oslo Ministerial Declaration (2007) which inspired the first UN General Assembly resolution on global health and foreign policy in 2009 and the UN Secretary-General's note ‘Global health and foreign policy: strategic opportunities and challenges'. What remains to be seen is whether this convergence will deliver on securing states’ interest long enough to promote the interests of the individuals who require global efforts to deliver local health improvements.

Book reviews : "Biosecurity interventions: global health and security in question"

International Relations’ engagement with global health governance has proliferated in the last decade. There are a number of excellent works that seek to understand how the relationship between politics and health shapes and informs people’s lives and governments’ policies. However, the overt securitization of health by the IR field has, Biosecurity interventions argues, remained relatively unproblematized...