The Swiss Federal Council (FC, the Swiss government) published a report on reducing administrative burdens on business in August 2011, in which it addressed also the performance of Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) at the federal level. The report reviews the measures undertaken by the FC since 2007 and sketches initiatives to be launched throughout the next four years. Administrative simplification and the reduction of regulatory costs have gained on relevance in the Swiss policy and political debate in the past few months – not least as a part of the campaign for the national political elections held in October 2011, with the economic crisis as a background. A national political party has launched a popular initiative against over-bureaucratisation, and the issue is brought forward by a number of stakeholders too.

The August 2011 report also fits into a wider debate about the legitimacy of RIA systems and the right balance between their effectiveness and efficiency. This brief note draws from a comprehensive evaluation of the system of in-depth RIAs in Switzerland, which supported the government's report and developed some avenues for further investigating those dimensions.

Towards the end of 2011, the (then) Responsible Gambling Fund published a report which, inter alia, offers an overview of the research gaps in relation to the impact of advertising on disordered gambling. In this article, the authors of the report summarise their main findings. They conclude that evaluating the impact of gambling advertising is highly complex. Nonetheless, advertising forms an important component of the broader environment in which behaviour and attitudes are shaped. The empirical evidence base is weak and therefore conclusions about whether gambling advertising is associated with increased levels of disordered gambling cannot be drawn. However, there is some evidence that advertising alters perceptions and attitudes towards gambling. Yet, evidence demonstrating translation of this into behavioural change is weak. Particular attention should be given to vulnerable population groups such as adolescents and disordered gamblers. In view of further research, a set of recommendations is provided.

The purpose of the paper is to discuss how to regulate the access to and use of biochemical and human genetic material currently considered as part of the market framework. Looking beyond the protection of traditional public goods (such as land or water), the paper emphasizes the debate around the progressive commodification of human genetic resources facilitated by an improper use of intellectual property rights. The discourse around commons is used to evaluate alternative tools and strategies to the issue of private appropriation of human genetic resources and natural compounds