Contemporary China Studies in Scandinavia

1996 ◽  
Vol 147 ◽  
pp. 938-961 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kjeld Erik Brodsgaard
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Contemporary China ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Historical Phonology ◽  
The Public ◽  
Chinese Studies ◽  
Classical Studies ◽  
China Studies ◽  
And Linguistics

Thirty years ago contemporary China studies in Scandinavia was largely an unknown phenomenon. Most sinologists worked on aspects of traditional sinology such as historical phonology, classical religion, philosophy and linguistics, and contemporary studies were seen as a rather shallow preoccupation which could be left safely in the hands of journalists and diplomats. However, as the public interest in contemporary China studies in Scandinavia grew and as development economists, political scientists and sociologists began to encroach on the China field, it increasingly became difficult to limit Chinese studies to classical pursuits. Today the contemporary China field in Scandinavia has grown strong and active and consists of approximately 90 active scholars. In most Scandinavian institutes classical studies occupy a dominant position in terms of faculty staff, but new positions are increasingly established within the contemporary field, where one also finds the majority of new Ph.D. projects.

scholarly journals Penerapan Pendekatan Rule Of Reason Oleh Kppu Dalam Dugaan Pengenaan Harga Eksesif (Studi Kasus Putusan KPPU Nomor Perkara 03/Kppu-I/2017)

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Indra Sanjaya
Keyword(s):  
Market Power ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
The Public ◽  
Rule Of Reason ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Abuse Of Dominant Position ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Case Number

To assess whether a particular action of a business actor violates the provisions in Statute Number 5 of 1999, the KPPU and the Court may apply the per se illegal approach or rule of reason, depending on the formulation of the provisions allegedly violated. The rule of reason approach is an approach used by business competition authorities to make an evaluation of the consequences of certain agreements or business activities, to determine whether an agreement or activity is inhibiting or supporting competition. This paper analyzes the rule of reason approach applied by KPPU in cases with Case Number 03 / KPPU-I / 2017 to determine whether PT. Angkasa Pura II (Persero) which does not reduce the cost of shipping and taking cargo at Kualanamu Airport, even though its workload has been reduced, can be classified as a form of monopolization and constitutes a violation of the provisions of Article 17 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of Statute Number 5 of 1999. The results of the study showed that the application of the rule of reason by KPPU was carried out through 4 (four) steps, namely: (1). Market identification; (2) Identification of market power; (3) Identification of abuse of dominant position; (4) Identification of impacts on the public interest. Through the application of the rule of reason, KPPU decides that the actions of PT. Angkasa Pura II is a form of monopolization and that the action fulfills the elements in Article 17 paragraph (1) and (2) of Statute Number 5 of 1999.

scholarly journals Public Interest in Spatial Planning Systems in Poland and Portugal

Land ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 73
Author(s):  
Waldemar A. Gorzym-Wilkowski ◽  
Karolina Trykacz
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Public Management ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Planning Systems ◽  
Management Tools ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
The Public ◽  
Planning Processes ◽  
Enforcement Mechanisms

As the level of development increases, spatial planning is becoming more significant among public management tools. Although the issue of spatial planning and its mechanisms has been repeatedly investigated in the literature, the issue of clashing of interests of different actors remains to be examined. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the enforcement mechanisms of the public interest in the spatial planning systems of Poland and Portugal. The analysis was based on a comparative analysis of the legal basis of the spatial planning systems of the countries. The research confirmed the hypothesis that even with some sociocultural and economic similarities, different countries do not have to create similar mechanisms for the realisation of the public interest in spatial planning processes. The specific solutions adopted in Poland and Portugal differ so much that the enforcement of the public interest proceeds with very few similarities. The integrated Portuguese planning system, with its hierarchical elements, facilitates the achievement of the objectives of public entities. On the other hand, the Polish system, with the dominant position of the municipality, pushes great possibilities of influencing the planning by land administrators, and the poor location of spatial planning in all public tasks makes it difficult, and sometimes even impossible, to achieve public goals in space.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document