New Economics Papers
on Law and Economics
Issue of 2009‒12‒05
two papers chosen by
Jeong-Joon Lee, Towson University

  1. Infrastructure and project financing in Italy: the (possible) role of the regulation By Cristina Giorgiantonio; Valentina Giovanniello
  2. An Empirical Analysis of Health and Safety in Employment Sentencing in New Zealand By Andrea Menclova; Alan Woodfield

  1. By: Cristina Giorgiantonio (Bank of Italy); Valentina Giovanniello (Bank of Italy)
    Abstract: There has been a significant increase in project financing in the public sector in Europe in the past decade, benefiting the implementation of infrastructure projects. In Italy, project financing is still much more limited than in such countries as Spain and the UK: the projects funded are smaller and the sectors involved are less appropriate. Based on the economic literature, European initiatives and international comparisons, the paper examines the aspects of the regulations that could encourage the appropriate use of project financing and considers the problems with the Italian regulations, proposing some corrective measures. The main limitations involve: i) uncertainties over the allocation of administrative and regulatory risks; ii) poor procedures for selecting the private contractors; iii) relative lack of attention to the contract terms; and iv) inadequate safeguards to ensure the bankability of the projects.
    Keywords: infrastructure financing, project financing, regulation, risk allocation
    JEL: K23 L51 L90
    Date: 2009–11
  2. By: Andrea Menclova (University of Canterbury); Alan Woodfield (University of Canterbury)
    Abstract: Apparent inconsistency in criminal sentencing at District Court level in New Zealand (NZ) might also be expected for health and safety in employment (HSE) offences. We review relevant legislation and the guidelines established in the de Spa appeal case, and estimate a model of HSE sentencing variability distinguishing the de Spa criteria (and a subset similar to those used in the formal U.S. criminal sentencing guidelines) from a more comprehensive list of sentencing factors routinely used. When the de Spa case-mix variables are controlled for, a weak increase in inter-district sentencing variability is observed but with a reduction in intra-district variability, while both inter and intra-judge variability is mitigated. We show that a number of the de Spa (and other) criteria are significant determinants of sentencing variation, although some results (e.g., for the presence of remorse) are puzzling. The results seem quite robust to the choice between a dataset including the common s 6 offences only and a dataset of cases as a whole as well as to several other sensitivity checks. We also show that the model retrospectively predicts the sentence in the de Spa appeal case well, and suggest how the model might be used as a basis for more consistent future sentencing decisions.
    Keywords: Health & Safety Offences; Judicial Guidelines; Sentencing Determinants
    JEL: K32
    Date: 2009–11–11

This issue is ©2009 by Jeong-Joon Lee. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.