Poverty elimination,North-South research collaboration,and the politics of participatory development

This paper reflects critically on issues of North-South collaboration and participatory research arising from a project on participatory and sustainable local-level environmental management in the peri-urban area surrounding Kumasi, Ghana. Rapid immigration, uncoordinated conversion of farmland to housing, intensified resource exploitation, and declining water quality and availability are particularly pressing problems there. Collaborative research arrangements with local partners as well as sustained participatory relations with selected village communities were central to this project. More generally, the paper reflects on institutional issues relating to the dichotomy between research and development assistance projects, and their implications for project evaluations.     

Redistributing the EU-China economic relationship: the role of domestic change in China

Asia Europe Journal - As the importance of China in the global economy has grown, changes in its domestic economy have increasing impact in the EU. However, a key factor is no longer the simple...     

Prototypical analysis of antisocial personality disorder

The diagnostic criteria for antisocial personality disorder (APD) have gone through successive modifications with DSM-II, DSM-III, DSM-III-R, and DSM-IV. We asked 331 forensic psychiatrists to make prototypic ratings of the DSM versions, PCL-R (Hare, 1991), and the ICD-10 dyssocial personality disorder. Four distinct factors emerged that encompassed the following dimensions: (a)unstable self image, unstable relationships and irresponsibility, (b)manipulation and lack of guilt, (c)aggressive behavior, and (d)nonviolent delinquency. These dimensions are discussed in light of an earlier prototypical analysis (Rogers et al., 1992) and raise questions concerning the DSM-IV criteria.Clarke Institute of Psychiatry.     

The Role of the State and International Organizations inReconciling Sustainable Development and Globalization

The concepts of sustainable development and globalization have developed separately, with little recognition that there is significant overlap between them. This article seeks to argue that there is a need to try to reconcile these concepts and that, in particular, it is a fundamental mistake to consider globalization as inevitable whilst seeing sustainable development as an optional policy choice. In seeking to achieve this reconciliation, the role of the State and international organizations in maintaining public governance is reaffirmed.     

Rethinking Product Liability: A Missing Element in the European Commission's Third Review of the European Product Liability Directive

The paper uses the opportunity afforded by the European Commission's Third Report of the Product Liability Directive to assess the present state of product liability in Europe. It notes that despite the maximal harmonisation character of the Directive there is a risk of divergence between Member States on key issues including the core concept of defectiveness. The Commission seems at times confused (for example, as regards the relationship between defect and fault liability) and more often complacent about the risks of divergence; but this sits uneasily with the espousal of maximal harmonisation. Ultimately there may be a need for a rethinking of product liability to ensure greater clarity as regards the underlying rationale supporting strict liability. This seems unlikely to materialise in the near future and so at the very least the Commission should act to clarify some core concepts that are proving difficult to interpret for the courts.     

Autonomy,paternalism, and institutional interest: why some conflicts can't be waived

This paper asks the question of why, in some cases, a client is precluded from demanding of their lawyer that they act for them and their adversary simultaneously. We accept that in numerous instances a lawyer can act for clients whose interests may diverge (or in some cases do in fact diverge) providing informed consent has been obtained. This paper enquires as to why the line between waivable and non-waivable conflicts is drawn where it is, and examines the theoretical underpinning of the waiver rule and its boundaries. It does so by first looking at the client autonomy argument for allowing waivers. It then turns to explore the paternalistic justifications for rendering a consensual waiver of a conflict inoperative. Finally it looks at those cases where a waiver is not permitted that are left unexplained by paternalism. It argues that paternalism, properly understood, is a legitimate justification for most refusals to accept a waiver of conflict. However, a residual body of cases remain unexplained by paternalism. Those cases are best explained by the propensity of the law and the legal profession to protect its institutional values and interest.