The Paradox of Regulation is a tour de force of regulatory scholarship that successfully contextualizes the regulatory project as an effort to reduce multiple forms of risk. Three case studies of regulatory reforms, fascinating in their own right, when read together forcefully demonstrate why context matters to the actuarial assessments, political realities, and possibilities for insuring safety, security and integrity. Haines, penetrating analysis presents no simple answers to what works and why. The Paradox of Regulation nimbly demonstrates that the strengths and limits of a particular regulatory reform must be understood as a complicated response to a dynamic constellation of actuarial, political, and socio-cultural risks.,- Nancy Reichman, University of Denver, US , This new book by Fiona Haines is an elegant but sophisticated analysis of the three risks (technical, social and political) that regulation must address if it is to be effective. This analysis is original and fresh bringing together critiques of risk based regulation with empirical literature on compliance and effectiveness evaluation. This is exactly the sort of book we need more of to develop and deepen empirical and theoretical research in regulatory scholarship: - it helpfully melds together different literatures and theoretical approaches with her own empirical work on regulatory reforms to build a multi-layered theoretical analysis that really pushes forward our understanding of regulation, why it happens and how it fails and succeeds., - Christine Parker, Monash University, Australia ,This is an insightful and nuanced analysis of the strengths and limitations of regulation. Through a close grained analysis of three recent disasters, Haines demonstrates that regulation is not just a technical but also a political and a social project and how a failure to recognise its multiple dimensions can lead to regulatory failure. This book is a major contribution that enriches our understanding of the challenges of risk management and of how best to address them.'- Neil Gunningham, Australian National University, Canberra , Fiona Haines shows us that regulatory policy is complex and paradoxical in ways that should require us to attend to the substance and the politics of specific regulatory regimes. This book is a major contribution to the reconceptualisation of risk and regulation. It is a perceptive treatment of the role of crisis by one of the best scholars of regulation we have., - John Braithwaite, Australian National University, Canberra

How the conflict between federal and state power has shaped American history American governance is burdened by a paradox. On the one hand, Americans don't want "big government" meddling in their lives; on the other hand, they have repeatedly enlisted governmental help to impose their views regarding marriage, abortion, religion, and schooling on their neighbors. These contradictory stances on the role of public power have paralyzed policymaking and generated rancorous disputes about government’s legitimate scope. How did we reach this political impasse? Historian Gary Gerstle, looking at two hundred years of U.S. history, argues that the roots of the current crisis lie in two contrasting theories of power that the Framers inscribed in the Constitution. One theory shaped the federal government, setting limits on its power in order to protect personal liberty. Another theory molded the states, authorizing them to go to extraordinary lengths, even to the point of violating individual rights, to advance the "good and welfare of the commonwealth." The Framers believed these theories could coexist comfortably, but conflict between the two has largely defined American history. Gerstle shows how national political leaders improvised brilliantly to stretch the power of the federal government beyond where it was meant to go—but at the cost of giving private interests and state governments too much sway over public policy. The states could be innovative, too. More impressive was their staying power. Only in the 1960s did the federal government, impelled by the Cold War and civil rights movement, definitively assert its primacy. But as the power of the central state expanded, its constitutional authority did not keep pace. Conservatives rebelled, making the battle over government’s proper dominion the defining issue of our time. From the Revolution to the Tea Party, and the Bill of Rights to the national security state, Liberty and Coercion is a revelatory account of the making and unmaking of government in America.

Over the past fifteen years, the United States, Western Europe, and Japan have transformed the relationship between governments and corporations. The changes are complex and the terms used to describe them often obscure the reality. In Freer Markets, More Rules, Steven K. Vogel dispenses with euphemisms and makes sense of this recent transformation. In defiance of conventional wisdom, Vogel contends that the deregulation revolution of the 1980s and 1990s never happened. The advanced industrial countries moved toward liberalization or freer markets at the same time that they imposed reregulation or more rules. Moreover, the countries involved did not converge in regulatory practice but combined liberalization and reregulation in markedly different ways. The state itself, far more than private interest groups, drove the process of regulatory reform. Thus, the story of deregulation is one rich in paradox: a movement aimed at reducing regulation increased it; a movement propelled by global forces reinforced national differences; and a movement that purported to reduce state power was led by the state itself. Vogel's astute and far-reaching analysis compares deregulation in Britain and Japan, with special attention to the telecommunication and financial services industries. He also considers such important sectors as broadcasting, transportation, and utilities in the United States, France, and Germany.

The most important book on antitrust ever written. It shows how antitrust suits adversely affect the consumer by encouraging a costly form of protection for inefficient and uncompetitive small businesses.

A detailed analysis of the ethical, legal, and regulatory landscape of medical devices in the US and EU.

Why are small and culturally homogeneous nation-states in the advanced capitalist world so prosperous? Examining how Denmark, Ireland, and Switzerland managed the 2008 financial crisis, The Paradox of Vulnerability shows that this is not an accident. John Campbell and John Hall argue that a prolonged sense of vulnerability within both the state and the nation encourages the development of institutions that enable decision makers to act together quickly in order to survive, especially during a crisis. Blending insights from studies of comparative political economy and nationalism and drawing on both extensive interviews and secondary data, Campbell and Hall support their claim by focusing on the three states historically and, more important, in their different responses to the 2008 crisis. The authors also devote attention to the difficulties faced by Greece and Iceland. The implications of their argument are profound. First, they show that there is a positive side to nationalism: social solidarity can enhance national prosperity. Second, because globalization now requires all states to become more adaptable, there are lessons here for other states, large and small. Lastly, the formula for prosperity presented here is under threat: highly homogeneous societies face challenges in dealing with immigration, with some responding in ways that threaten their success. The Paradox of Vulnerability demonstrates how the size and culture of a nation contribute in significant ways to its ability to handle political and economic pressures and challenges.