Melbourne Law School - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 75
-
ItemThe Legalisation of Economic Social and Cultural Rights(Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission, 2010)
-
ItemToward a Legal Framework for Regime Interaction: Lessons from Fisheries, Trade and Environmental Regimes(Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Society of International Law, 2011)
-
ItemNo Preview Available
-
ItemFrom single biobanks to international networks: developing e-governance(SPRINGER, 2011-09)The future holds the possibility to link and network biobanks, existing biorepositories and reference databases for research purposes in ways that have not been possible before. There is the potential to develop 'research portals' that will enable researchers to access these research resources that are located around the globe with the click of a mouse. In this paper, I will argue that our current governance system for research is unable to provide all of the oversight and accountability mechanisms that are required for this new way of doing research that is based upon flows of data across international borders. For example, our current governance framework for research is nationally based, with a complex system of laws, policies and practice that can be unique to a jurisdiction. It is also evident that many of the nationally based governance bodies in this field do not have the legal powers or expertise to adjudicate on the complex issues, such as privacy and disclosure risks that are raised by cross-border data sharing. In addition, the conceptual underpinning of this research governance structure is based on the "one researcher, one project, one jurisdiction" model. In the conclusion of this paper, I lay out some preliminary ideas as to how this system has to change to accommodate research that is based on networks. I suggest that a move to digital governance mechanisms might be a start to making research governance systems more appropriate for the 21st century.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableTowards a data sharing Code of Conduct for international genomic research(BMC, 2011)Data sharing is increasingly regarded as an ethical and scientific imperative that advances knowledge and thereby respects the contributions of the participants. Because of this and the ever-increasing amount of data access requests currently filed around the world, three groups have decided to develop data sharing principles specific to the context of collaborative international genomics research. These groups are: the international Public Population Project in Genomics (P3G), an international consortium of projects partaking in large-scale genetic epidemiological studies and biobanks; the European Network for Genetic and Genomic Epidemiology (ENGAGE), a research project aiming to translate data from large-scale epidemiological research initiatives into relevant clinical information; and the Centre for Health, Law and Emerging Technologies (HeLEX). We propose seven different principles and a preliminary international data sharing Code of Conduct for ongoing discussion.
-
ItemSham arrangements and the use of labour hire in the building and construction industry: Discussion paper prepared by the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner(The Centre for Employment and Labour Relations Law, Melbourne Law School, 2011)Submission by the Centre for Employment and Labour Relations Law to the Australian Building and Construction Commission Inquiry into Sham Contracting
-
ItemAccountability and the Fair Work Ombudsman(Thomson Reuters, 2011)The importance of accountability has long been sheeted home to the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO), the federal statutory agency responsible for enforcement of minimum employment standards under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). In the immediate aftermath of Work Choices, the activities of the regulator were mired in controversy. In particular, the agency’s involvement in a number of high profile and hotly contested cases led to accusations that one of its predecessor agencies, the Office of Workplace Services (OWS), was politically motivated and acting as the Howard Coalition Government’s “secret police”. In light of the agency’s rather harrowing experiences in the wake of Work Choices, it is not surprising that the FWO now places a heavy emphasis on the importance of independence, transparency and accountability. Drawing on an extended concept of accountability, this article will undertake a preliminary assessment of the various accountability mechanisms which currently apply to the FWO and question whether these checks are adequate to guard against the criticisms previously levelled at the organisation.
-
ItemEnrolling Non-State Actors to Improve Compliance with Minimum Employment Standards(Sage Publications, 2011)While the extent of employer non-compliance with minimum employment standards has yet to be decisively determined in Australia, there is evidence to suggest that it is both prevalent and persistent. This article draws on the scholarship emerging from the regulatory studies field to explore the underlying impulses and issues that may have led to this compliance gap. It considers how a more pluralistic and decentred understanding of regulation may improve compliance. This understanding is then applied to examine the various ways in which the federal labour inspectorate — the Fair Work Ombudsman — has sought to supplement and strengthen its existing compliance and enforcement mechanisms by harnessing or ‘enrolling’ non-state stakeholders, such as employer associations, trade unions, top-level firms and key individuals.
-
ItemAssessing the Privacy Risks of Data Sharing in Genomics(KARGER, 2011)The protection of identity of participants in medical research has traditionally been guaranteed by the maintenance of the confidentiality of health information through mechanisms such as only releasing data in an aggregated form or after identifying variables have been removed. This protection of privacy is regarded as a fundamental principle of research ethics, through which the support of research participants and the public is maintained. Whilst this traditional model was adopted for genetics and genomics research, and was generally considered broadly fit for purpose, we argue that this approach is increasingly untenable in genomics. Privacy risk assessments need to have regard to the whole data environment, not merely the quality of the dataset to be released in isolation. As sources of data proliferate, issues of privacy protection are increasingly problematic in relation to the release of genomic data. However, we conclude that, by paying careful attention to potential pitfalls, scientific funders and researchers can take an important part in attempts to safeguard the public and ensure the continuation of potentially important scientific research.
-
ItemTheoretical Disagreement and the Semantic Sting(Oxford University Press (OUP), 2010)Scott Shapiro recently suggested that Ronald Dworkin's critique in Chapter 1 of Law's Empire represents the greatest threat currently facing legal positivism. Shapiro had in mind, not the semantic sting argument ('the SSA'), but rather what I call 'the argument from theoretical disagreement' (or 'the ATD'). I contend that Shapiro was right to focus on the ATD, but that even he underestimated just how serious a challenge it poses to positivism (and perhaps to other theories of law as well). The ATD, I argue, is an objection to any theory of law that denies that legal officials can engage in theoretical disagreement-that is, disagreement about the grounds of law. The SSA then seeks to explain why so many legal philosophers adopt such theories. I argue that the SSA is an implausible explanation of why many legal philosophers deny that theoretical disagreement exists, but that this does not undermine the ATD's contention that they are wrong to do so. Indeed, given the variety of forms that theoretical disagreement can take, Dworkin's positivist critics face a very significant challenge in seeking either to explain away the appearance of theoretical disagreement or to develop forms of positivism that can allow for such disagreement.