The biology-policy interface: Theories of pathogenesis,benefit valuation and public policy formation

This paper reviews some of the basic concepts of cost and risk-benefit analysis in the context of toxic chemical regulation and discusses several critical complexities inherent in the practical application of this methodology. The broad qualitative use of risk-benefit analysis can be an important aid to the decision-making process. It is concluded, however, that the full-scale incorporation of a rigorous form of risk-benefit analysis into the regulatory process is inappropriate at this time and could have significant and unintended consequences.The authors wish to express their gratitude to their colleagues, Professors Norm Carruthers, Denton Marks and Dean Uyeno, and an anonymous referee for their instructive comments on an earlier draft of this paper.     

The date of completion of the trade mark registration procedure and proper reasons for non-use

The 5-year period within which a trade mark must be used startsfrom the date when the registration procedure is completed,according to the legislation of the Member State; a delay inthe implementation of a corporate strategy may only be consideredproper non-use if it is a result of circumstances which areoutside of the control of the trade mark proprietor.     

Toxic chemical regulation in Canada: preliminary estimates of costs and benefits

Abstract. This paper makes an assessment of the impact of toxic chemical regulation in Canada. Ranges of costs and benefits, supplemented by survey information, analogous American data, interviews and case studies have been used to demonstrate the general usefulness of a cost-benefit framework for public sector decision-making even where information availability is constrained and complete analysis is not feasible. It is concluded that, with few exceptions, the impact of environmental regulation on chemical producers in Canada is neither excessive nor unduly onerous. Sommaire. Les auteurs de cette étude évaluent l'impact de la réglementation se rapportant aux produits chimiques toxiques au Canada. Des gammes coûtsrendements, étoffées par une enquête, des données américaines de même nature, des entrevues et des études de cas ont servi de base pour démontrer l'utilité générale d'un cadre coêts-rendements au niveau de la prise de décision dans le secteur public, même lorsque l'information est limitée et qu'une analyse complète est impossible. lls concluent qu'à quelques exceptions près, les règlements sur la protection de l'environnement ne sont, pour les fabricants de produits chimiques au Canada, ni excessifs ni trop onéreux.     

The Fisheries Act and federal-provincial environmental regulation: duplication or complementarity?

Abstract: The Neilson Task Force Report recommended a stronger commitment of the federal government to environmental issues and a more effective role at the federal level for the Department of the Environment in addressing these issues. Yet the multi-authored task force reports are somewhat ambivalent in recommendations relating to provincial-federal jurisdiction. A central question is whether the presence of both levels of government in this regulatory domain serves the goal of efficient resource allocation. Using evidence drawn from the past decade of regulation in the area of water pollution control in British Columbia, this paper provides one test of the hypothesis that the goal of environmental protection is well served by concurrent federal-provincial legislative and regulatory activity and the continuation of federal enforcement under section 33 of the Fisheries Act. It is concluded that there is both a theoretical rationale and direct empirical evidence to justify the presence of both provincial and federal levels of government in the domain of pollution control in Canada. A federal legislative and regulatory presence, as exemplified by the Fisheries Act, is especially important in this area when provincial regulatory resources or will are weak.