Suchergebnisse

Assume the following interrelated situations which, while hypothetical for present purposes, could well be a reality in several mixed public– private telecommunications companies of public significance: Until 2016, a telecommunications company was 100% state-owned. In 2016, the government partially privatized the company by selling 40% of the state's shares in the company to private investors. Accordingly, the share-ownership of the company is now 60% state/ public and 40% private.

"Fundamentals of Government Structure: Alignments of Organizations at and Beyond the Center of Power" published on by Oxford University Press.

Ownership in the public sphere has policy and analytical significance in the exercise of public power. The last 30 years have witnessed several notable trends involving ownership and regulation, public and private law, financial outlays and returns, shareholders and stakeholders, and principals and agents. The trends are identified and addressed, leading to suggested lines of ownership-based research on power, leadership and organisational maturity in and beyond government.

Ownership in the public sphere has policy and analytical significance in the exercise of public power. The last 30 years have witnessed several notable trends involving ownership and regulation, public and private law, financial outlays and returns, shareholders and stakeholders, and principals and agents. The trends are identified and addressed, leading to suggested lines of ownership-based research on power, leadership and organisational maturity in and beyond government.

AbstractWhile the science and economics of climate change have been examined extensively, this has not been so with institutions, governance and service activity which are essential response mechanisms. This Symposium seeks to address this situation in theory and practice. Here, three broad institutional perspectives are provided, comprising issues and challenges for institutions within and across state‐market‐civil society boundaries. This material leads into subsequent discussions of significant developments in Brazil, China, India, Vietnam, Australia and the European Union. The result is an array of insights and lessons on which further research and analyses could valuably build. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

AbstractThis article addresses the review of statutory bodies in Hong Kong by the Home Affairs Bureau of the Hong Kong SAR Government. It examines the focus and scope of the review and, thereafter, discusses the work, power and responsibility arrangements which the review should now embrace. The classification scheme, principles and related factors canvassed by the Bureau constitute the beginnings of what ought to be a detailed and thorough study. The analytical challenge facing the Bureau is to make sense of statutory bodies as dynamic entities in a complex system of governance. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.