The importance of precision in sampling sludges, biowastes and treated soils in a regulatory framework

As part of the European Commission (EC)'s revision of the Sewage Sludge Directive and the development of a Biowaste Directive, there was recognition of the difficulty of comparing data from Member States (MSs) because of differences in sampling and analytical procedures. The 'HORIZONTAL' initiative, funded by the EC and MSs, seeks to address these differences in approach and to produce standardised procedures in the form of CEN standards. This article is a preliminary investigation into aspects of the sampling of biosolids, composts and soils to which there is a history of biosolid application. The article provides information on the measurement uncertainty associated with sampling from heaps, large bags and pipes and soils in the landscape under a limited set of conditions, using sampling approaches in space and time and sample numbers based on procedures widely used in the relevant industries and when sampling similar materials. These preliminary results suggest that considerably more information is required before the appropriate sample design, optimum number of samples, number of samples comprising a composite, and temporal and spatial frequency of sampling might be recommended to achieve consistent results of a high level of precision and confidence. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The dangers of hanging baskets: 'Regulatory myths' and media representations of health and safety regulation

The successful enforcement of health and safety regulation is reliant upon the ability of regulatory agencies to demonstrate the legitimacy of the system of regulatory controls. While 'big cases' are central to this process, there are also significant legitimatory implications associated with 'minor' cases, including media-reported tales of pettiness and heavy-handedness in the interpretation and enforcement of the law. The popular media regularly report stories of 'regulatory unreasonableness', and they can pass quickly into mainstream public knowledge. A story's appeal becomes more important than its factual veracity; they are a form of 'regulatory myth'. This paper discusses the implications of regulatory myths for health and safety regulators, and analyses their challenges for regulators, paying particular attention to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) which has made concerted efforts to address regulatory myths attaching to its activities. It will be shown that such stories constitute sustained normative challenges to the legitimacy of the regulator, and political challenges to the burgeoning regulatory state, because they reflect some of the key concerns of late-modern society.

Personal status laws in Morocco and Tunisia: A comparative exploration of the possibilities for equality-enhancing reform in Bangladesh

This paper focuses on successful reform strategies invoked in parts of the Muslim world to address issues of gender inequality in the context of Islamic personal law. It traces the development of personal status laws in Tunisia and Morocco, exploring the models they offer in initiating equality-enhancing reforms in Bangladesh, where a secular and equality-based reform approach conflicts with Islamic-based conservatism. Recent landmark family law reforms in Morocco show the possibility of achieving ‘women-friendly’ reforms within an Islamic legal framework. Moreover, the Tunisian Personal Status Code, with its successive reforms, shows that a gender equality-based model of personal law can be successfully integrated into the Muslim way of life. This study examines the response of Muslim societies to equality-based reforms and differences in approach in initiating them. The paper maps these sometimes competing approaches, locating them within contemporary feminist debates related to gender equality in the East and West.