Despite the plethora of empirical studies conducted to date, debate continues about whether and to what extent results should be returned to participants of genomic research. We aimed to systematically review the empirical literature exploring stakeholders' perspectives on return of individual research results (IRR) from genomic research. We examined preferences for receiving or willingness to return IRR, and experiences with either receiving or returning them. The systematic searches were conducted across five major databases in August 2018 and repeated in April 2020, and included studies reporting findings from primary research regardless of method (quantitative, qualitative, mixed). Articles that related to the clinical setting were excluded. Our search identified 221 articles that met our search criteria. This included 118 quantitative, 69 qualitative and 34 mixed methods studies. These articles included a total number of 118,874 stakeholders with research participants (85,270/72%) and members of the general public (40,967/35%) being the largest groups represented. The articles spanned at least 22 different countries with most (144/65%) being from the USA. Most (76%) discussed clinical research projects, rather than biobanks. More than half (58%) gauged views that were hypothetical. We found overwhelming evidence of high interest in return of IRR from potential and actual genomic research participants. There is also a general willingness to provide such results by researchers and health professionals, although they tend to adopt a more cautious stance. While all results are desired to some degree, those that have the potential to change clinical management are generally prioritized by all stakeholders. Professional stakeholders appear more willing to return results that are reliable and clinically relevant than those that are less reliable and lack clinical relevance. The lack of evidence for significant enduring psychological harm and the clear benefits to some research participants suggest that researchers should be returning actionable IRRs to participants.

Contemporary society faces multiple and interacting environmental challenges that require transformational change in the conduct of business. We take one of these challenges, the need to combat anthropogenic climate change, to interrogate what is required in transforming business regulation towards what we term ‘ecological regulation’. This transition requires us to grapple with how business regulation is currently framed and how change will effect such regulation. Regulation is largely premised both on the benefits of economic competition and for the control of particular harms to take place in an discrete case-by-case manner. Current moral and legal strategies used by activists in attempting to engender a dramatic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by business interact with current forms of regulation in distinct ways. The former involves activists staking a moral case for criminalisation of ecological damage through naming and shaming strategies. This may shift the moral boundaries of acceptable business behaviour. The latter is achieved by ‘bracing’ greenhouse gas reduction with existing business regulation that can bring some legal accountability to bear. We show how these strategies begin to reframe regulatory regimes as well as what ecological regulation might look like if full legal authority in enshrining a respect for ecological limits were added the contemporary framing of business regulation.

Regulatory studies has been mainly occupied with addressing the social and economic crises of contemporary capitalism through instrumentally and responsively rational approaches. This article asks how regulatory scholarship can better respond to the ecological crisis now facing our world and our governance systems alongside social and economic crises. There are both possibilities and problems with instrumentally rational regulatory approaches that see human ecological impact as an externality or market failure and socio-legal approaches to regulatory studies that emphasize the need to attend to the social and political aspects of regulation using a responsively rational approach. A third big shift towards an ecologically rational approach to regulatory studies is needed to comprehend our embeddedness within ecological systems. An ecologically rational approach also calls for an understanding of how multiple, diverse ways of sustainable being can intersect with and challenge current regulatory regimes dominated by an instrumentally rational approach.

This project aimed to research the effectiveness of Australian age discrimination laws. While demographic ageing necessitates extending working lives, few question the effectiveness of Australian age discrimination laws in supporting this ambition. This project drew on mixed methods and comparative UK experiences to offer empirical and theoretical insights into Australian age discrimination law. It sought to create a normative model for legal reform in Australia, to inform public policy and debate and improve responses to demographic ageing, providing economic, health and social benefits.

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Flight Centre Travel Group Ltd (Flight Centre) was decided by the High Court in December 2016. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission alleged that Flight Centre had engaged or attempted to engage in price fixing with the airlines by seeking agreement to a Most Favoured Nation provision. A central issue in the case was whether or not Flight Centre was acting as agent for the airlines. This article discusses how changes in business models involving agency arrangements have caused confusion about the relationship between the parties when assessing alleged anti-competitive conduct. It explains the approach adopted in the United States and in the European Union to determine whether a party is an agent. Following from this, the basis for the various court rulings in Flight Centre are discussed – the finding that Flight Centre attempted to fix prices, despite being found to be an agent for the airlines. The findings in Flight Centre are then compared to the cases involving online booking portals in Europe and whether these cases may have informed the approach in Flight Centre is considered. Some conclusions are then drawn concerning the treatment of agency arrangements in the final section.

This chapter compares the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) with the Australia -- United States Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA), reflecting on relevant developments in the Australia -- United States relationship, including with respect to agriculture and biologic medicines. The chapter focuses on the Chapters on services and investment, addressing areas such as electronic commerce, investor--state dispute settlement (ISDS), and the "carve-out" of tobacco control measures from ISDS in the TPP. The comparison of investment in the two treaties is particularly of interest given the exclusion of ISDS in the AUSFTA and its inclusion (except as between Australia and New Zealand) in the TPP. We conclude that the TPP is a more modern agreement than the AUSFTA with several improvements that provide greater regulatory policy space. However, the inclusion of ISDS as between Australia and the United States in the TPP is questionable.

This article examines the development of the Kinchela Boys Home Aboriginal Corporation’s (KBHAC) Mobile Education Centre as a mobile ‘site of conscience’ as well as a place of active resistance. The KBHAC mobile educational centre is a whole of community experiential learning facility and aims to educate children, young people and communities (Aboriginal and non-Indigenous) through three levels of engagement drawing on a range of resources: oral testimony, archival footage and artefacts, animated film, visual images as well as interactive materials including an online portal. The mobile education centre represents one example of decades of advocacy of survivors to raise awareness about Kinchela Boys Home and the experiences of Stolen Generations survivors. This postcard tells the story of KBHAC mobile education centre and situates it within the context of ongoing efforts to reclaim the former Kinchela Boys Home site, located on Dunghutti Country, mid-north coast New South Wales. In doing so, this article seeks to document the story of a mobile site of conscience which seeks to educate about past harms and the intergenerational impacts of genocidal laws and policies while creating a space for truth telling that supports the process of post traumatic growth and intergenerational healing.

The language of democracy has become common in international law, the legal system that regulates relations between nation states. This interest in democracy has however largely ignored democracy at the international level and focused instead on national democratic standards. In this paper, I start by sketching the threadbare debates about democracy beyond political borders in international law and then turn to the way that international institutions have developed this concept, particularly in the peace and state-building boom associated with the end of the Cold War. The two contexts for democracy have taken different directions. In the case of democracy at the international level, the discussion has become polarised between global North and South, with democracy being promoted by the South as an omnibus agenda to remedy economic and political inequalities. In the case of democracies within states, international lawyers have taken democracy to have a fixed form, associ-ated with specific institutional practices and structures, limiting its capacity for transformation.