Law, innovation and technology: fast forward to 2021

Abstract

This article, introducing a new extended form of the journal, offers some reflections on the changing context in which we now research law, innovation, and technology. Three major changes are highlighted: the evolving landscape of Law 3.0, potentially de-centring both rules and humans from the legal enterprise; the new 'normal' of life with pandemics, underlining the vulnerability of humans; and, threading through all of this, the Anthropocene, destabilising a host of baseline distinctions, and a constant warning about the fragility of the global commons and the human condition. In this changing context, the question is whether technology can provide the solutions to our global challenges without involving an irreversible erosion of human agency. With this, we open the floor to our contributors.

Systematic Literature Review: The Urgency and Effectiveness of Implementing Restorative Justice in the Settlement of Banking Crimes

“…The relationship between law and technology that continues to develop in this study is referred to as Law 3.0 or technology-driven regulation. The effectiveness of regulations on technological developments, the problem of legal basis authority that was born in a stable period is not the same as the reality at this time so that it requires re-evaluation so that the court is not only the relative weight of the law and the interests revealed in court [10].…”

Economic and Legal Regulation of the Activities of Public Administration Entities in the Innovation Sector

“…The most advanced ones have attracted hundreds of industrial, research and commercial companies and have become a consolidating force that unites the interests of many partners. Foreign universities, which have become centres of innovative development, are enjoying enormous success (Brownsword, 2021).…”

“…The instruments for implementing state policy aimed at stimulating innovation and high-tech production in industrialised countries are various national programmes, which usually formulate tasks and specific ways of solving them with clear quantitative benchmarks. Examples of such programmes are the UK government's national long-term Science and Innovation Strategy and the Innovation Nation White Paper, the French Innovation Development Plan and the National Action Programme for Science and Technology Development, the US National Competitiveness Initiative: Global Leadership in Innovation, the Japanese Science and Technology Development Plan, and more (Brownsword, 2021).…”

“…When improving the regulatory framework of economic and legal regulation in the field of innovation, it is necessary to start from the fact that innovative projects are attractive for investment not because of the special significance of the technologies and scientific achievements used (implemented) in them, but because of the high market potential (public demand) of their final product. Accordingly, the main focus of legislative activity should be on stimulating innovation processes in the real sector, including the introduction of the results of innovation activities into economic turnover, as well as ensuring the organic "embedding" of the innovation system in the market environment (Brownsword, 2021). First of all, this implies: -Market formation (demand, competitive environment, government orders); -market regulation (creating competitive advantages for certain producers in priority areas); -formation of the external environment, rules and regulations ("rules of the game"), which are a condition for the development of innovative entrepreneurship, as well as set and regulate the activities of innovation entities.…”

Meu corpo, minha escolha... a saúde de todos: batalhas sobre vacinação em tempo de pandemia

“…In extraordinary times, even in a community of rights-the natural ethical home for consent-consent is not everything. Alongside ordinary times conversations and contestation, there are new priorities and a sense that we are now operating beyond both biolaw and bioethics as we ordinarily know them (77). https://doi.org/10.17566/ciads.v10iSuplemento.843 A pandemia não aniquila o estado de direito, mas permite restrições adicionais aos direitos individuais, desde que ainda justificadas pela rule of law.…”