Is all cartel activity evil?

The new Australian cartel laws prohibit a provision of a contract, arrangement or understanding that inter alia, results in price fixing and output restriction between competitors in the relevant market. This is subject to a recognition that sometimes such conduct can be in the public interest, in which case the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) may grant an authorisation. One such instance may be an activity characterised by substantial externalised cost. An authorisation application would need to provide suitable evidence in support of the underlying case being argued. Traditionally in Australia, such evidence has been qualitative in nature; however, where possible, the ACCC and its counterparts in the EU and New Zealand encourage quantitative estimates. This is a case study of the welfare impact of output restrictions in the Australian beer industry, which is a source of substantial negative externalities. A standard simulation exercise is utilised as an example of how applicants and the competition regulator might combine theoretical and quantitative concepts to better achieve the objectives of the new legislation.

Habitats regulations for stage 3 assessments radioactive substance authorisations

This is the Habitats regulations for stage 3 assessments: radioactive substances authorisations report from the Environment Agency, published on October 2003. The report focuses on the stage 3 assessments of radioactive substances authorisations in UK (to take place over the next five years, starting in 2003), which may have a potential impact on European designated Natura 2000 sites such Special Protection Areas (SPA), Special Areas of Conservation (SAC); and thus require further detailed assessment. This Environment Agency R&D project was commissioned to ERC, University o f Liverpool, in conjunction with Westlakes Scientific Consulting and the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, as part o f the agency's preparation for the Stage 3 Assessments o f radioactive substances authorisations. The aim was to prepare site information sheets containing all data relevant for individual Natura 2000 sites needing Stage 3 Assessment and to stylise and represent species that require protection under the Habitats Regulations by the reference organism geometries listed in R&D Publication 128 (Copplestone et al., 2001).

A normative approach to the criminalisation of cartel activity

Although cartel behaviour is almost universally (and rightly) condemned, it is not clear why cartel participants deserve the full wrath of the criminal law and its associated punishment. To fill this void, I develop a normative (or principled) justification for the criminalisation of conduct characteristic of ‘hard core’ cartels. The paper opens with a brief consideration of the rhetoric commonly used to denounce cartel activity, eg that it ‘steals from’ or ‘robs’ consumers. To put the discussion in context, a brief definition of ‘hard core’ cartel behaviour is provided and the harms associated with this activity are identified. These are: welfare losses in the form of appropriation (from consumer to producer) of consumer surplus, the creation of deadweight loss to the economy, the creation of productive inefficiency (hindering innovation of both products and processes), and the creation of so-called X-inefficiency. As not all activities which cause harm ought to be criminalised, a theory as to why certain harms in a liberal society can be criminalised is developed. It is based on JS Mill's harm to others principle (as refined by Feinberg) and on a choice of social institutions using Rawls's ‘veil of ignorance.’ The theory is centred on the value of individual choice in securing one's own well-being, with the market as an indispensable instrument for this. But as applied to the harm associated with cartel conduct, this theory shows that none of the earlier mentioned problems associated with this activity provide sufficient justification for criminalisation. However, as the harm from hard core cartel activity strikes at an important institution which permits an individual's ability to secure their own well-being in a liberal society, criminalisation of hard core cartel behaviour can have its normative justification on this basis.

How high (and far) can you go? On setting fines in cartel cases involving vertically-integrated undertakings and foreign sales

Le Cartel burlesque entre deux amis, envoyé de Paris à Ruel, et refusé pendant la conférance

[Mazarinade. 1649]

Aspectos didácticos del collage y del cartel publicitario a través de la educación multicultural.

Obtuvo Primer Premio Antonio Domínguez Ortiz resuelto por el XVI Concurso para el Fomento de la Investigación e Innovación Educativa