This thesis focuses on the use of a child welfare principle in human assisted reproduction in the UK, as contained in section 13 (5) of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 (as amended). Given the principle is applied prior to conception, I argue that it should be distinguished from the familiarly known child welfare principle in child law and thus my focus is on the pre-conception welfare principle (PCWP). The aim of this thesis is to provide an argument for abolition of the PCWP from UK regulation. This thesis aims to add to the debate and complement the existing body of legal and philosophical literature which has critically analysed the function of the PCWP from various perspectives. It does so by highlighting the importance of terminology throughout the work and focusing on the broader implications of the PCWP in practice. I argue that the implications of the PCWP go far beyond its position in the legislation and in order to substantiate that central argument, I separate the function of the PCWP assessment into distinct categories of harm based regulation. Before doing so, however, I critically analyse the development of the PCWP; I consider its function as a regulatory method and I challenge whether it has a defendable ethical position in the current framework. Overall, I argue against the PCWP and the harm threshold rationale underpinning it in practice. In Part I, I first set out the background to this type of research and explain why this work is important for challenging unjustified state intervention on reproductive choice. Second, I set the scene by outlining the development of the welfare principle in child law; the legislative chronology of the PCWP and the function of Principles Based Regulation (PBR) in the current regulatory framework. This entails setting out a number of assumptions, arguments and debates surrounding the concepts of welfare and harm and how these have been framed in regulation; in addition to setting out a central theme of this thesis, which is an argument that the regulation of the PCWP does not meet requisite standards of consistent, transparent, objective, proportionate and contextually-sensitive regulation. These assumptions and vii arguments are vital for understanding the basis on which this work challenges the suitability of the PCWP in the current regulatory framework. Part II of the thesis contains the papers and delivers the arguments against the PCWP in sequence. The overall aim of Part II is to present the central argument of the thesis and answer the research questions set out in the introduction. To accomplish this, the thesis first explores how the borders of child welfare have been defined by child law and judge-made law in wrongful life cases or cases involving the withdrawal or withholding of treatment from sick children. This is followed by a chronological and comparative legislative assessment of the development of the regulation of child welfare in the context of the PCWP. This develops into the main argument of the thesis which demonstrates the application of PCWP in practice departs from benchmark standards of better regulation. The thesis moves on to provoke a fresh debate on the relationship between pre-conception child welfare and the familial and genetic harm thresholds which are mandated by the PCWP assessment. The concept of harm is explored in a philosophical sense and the arguments culminate in a contention that no single philosophy underpins the PCWP, and that there is therefore no good reason to retain a principle which is problematic in both a functional and substantive sense. The thesis concludes with an overview of the progression of the main themes in this thesis, as well as identifying some promising opportunities for future research which have arisen as a result of this work.

Syftet med studien är att undersöka vad de redovisningsansvariga i mindre fastighetsbolag har för uppfattning om det kommande K3-regelverket. Studien har en kvantitativ och deduktiv ansats. Empiri har samlats in via webbenkäter som skickats ut till företag. Empirin har sedan analyserats och jämfört med tidigare forskning och teorier. Resultatet från studien visar framförallt att kunskapen om K3-regelverket är låg hos respondenterna. Det beror troligtvis på att K3-regelverket ännu inte har införts och börjat tillämpats av företagen. Resultatet visar även att detta regelverk har mestadels negativa associationer. Förslag till framtida forskning är att undersöka hur de mindre företagen uppfattar K3-regelverket efter införandet. Ytterligare förslag är att undersöka vad revisorerna anser om K3-regelverket,  att undersöka i hur stor utsträckning de mindre företagen faktiskt väljer K3 samt undersöka vilka faktorer som väger tyngst vid valet att använda K3. / The aim of this study is to find out what the accountants in smaller real estate companies think about the upcoming K3 framework. The study has a quantitative and deductive approach. Empirical data were collected through online questionnaires sent to companies. The empirical data were then analyzed and compared to previous researchs and theories. The results from the study indicate that the knowledge about the K3-framework is low among the respondents. It is probably due to that the K3-regulations haven't been applied by companies yet. The results also show that the companies have mostly negative opinions about the framework. Proposals for future research are to examine how the smaller companies perceive the K3 framework after the introduction. Further proposals are to examine what the accountants think about K3 regulations, to examine the extent to which smaller firms actually choose K3 and examine the underlying factors when companies choose to apply K3.

This thesis compares and contrasts rules-based and principles-based approaches to the regulation of derivative securities and examines these approaches in the context of derivative securities regulation in Thailand and Québec. It highlights the importance of derivatives regulation by briefly noting the role of derivatives in the 2007-2008 financial crisis. Context is provided by briefly noting the complexity and riskiness of derivatives, and the function of intermediaries in derivatives markets. With this context in mind, literature on rules-based regulation and principles-based regulation is examined. The two approaches are described and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach are highlighted. The thesis posits that the approach in Thailand is predominantly rules-based while the approach in Québec is predominantly principles-based. The thesis then argues that Québec may have been better positioned than Thailand to adopt a principles-based approach, given its longer experience with trading in public securities markets, its greater degree of specialization in derivatives markets, and the significantly higher volume of derivatives trading in Québec. These factors may have promoted a greater degree of regulatory expertise and self-regulatory organization experience. It is then argued that even though Thailand, and countries at a similar stage of derivatives market development, may not be in as good a position as Québec to adopt a principles-based regulatory approach, once the derivatives market has been established, a shift to principles-based regulation is, nonetheless, likely to better serve the regulatory goals of risk management and innovation.

This thesis considers the applicability of 'new governance' techniques within the field of emerging biotechnologies. Through three contrasting case studies I construct an argument in favour of new governance, contending that the qualities of this regulatory trend (flexibility, reflexivity, nuance, open discourse, and participation - 'regulatory desirables' ) have much to offer the regulation of emerging biotechnologies. The first case study examines the existing European and international regulatory frameworks for genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This case study explores the role of (bio)ethics within the regulatory process through each progressive stage: design, operation, and assessment. The regime's failure to provide adequate space for ethical reflection, and the limited role of ethics throughout the regulatory process prompts a proposal for an alternative approach that recognizes the multiple contexts in which regulation operates, and is able to accommodate the socio-ethical nuances of the GMO products being assessed. This case study analyses a traditionally structured regulatory framework. It exemplifies a number of qualities that I consider undesirable in the context of regulating biotechnologies: inflexibility, lack of reflexivity, lack of nuance within the regime, absence of ethical discussion, absence of participation from all interested/affected parties. In the second and third case studies I show how these 'regulatory undesirables' can be addressed through new governance techniques. The second case study focuses on the international regulation of stem cell research; I propose developing a polycentric, principles-based regulation (PBR) regime. The third case study centres on the international governance of the gene synthesis industry; here I recommend adopting a risk-based regulation (RBR) approach. In both these fields, voluntary, interdisciplinary, international organisations have collaborated to produce guidelines, codes, protocols, standards, and statements addressing matters of practice. I argue that these 'soft law' documents form the ideal starting point for the development of more sophisticated regulatory regimes in both fields. Furthermore, I argue that the informal organisations producing these documents are, in certain instances, best placed to step into the role of 'regulator' due to their in-depth, inside knowledge of the field, and network. Thus, I collapse the regulator-regulatee distinction held in traditional, 'command and control' style systems, as these organisations typically include those who would traditionally be seen as the 'regulatee'. Each case study considers the nuances of context vis-à-vis the regulatory approach advocated. I conclude by engaging in a comparative analysis of these three case studies, drawing out the qualities, characteristics and considerations that I regard as essential to the construction of responsible, facilitative governance frameworks across the field of emerging biotechnologies. I conclude that new governance is best suited to achieving these (aforementioned) 'regulatory desirables'.