All of the papers focus on the use of innovative regulatory approaches that can inhibit undesirable corporate conduct without discouraging the entrepreneurial spirit or hindering economic development. There are three points of general agreement among the authors, who are leaders in business, government, and the academic world. First there is acceptance that regulation of business is and will continue to be necessary. This agreement has its foundation in a shared belief that the "excesses of the 80's" can in large part be attributed to a failure of regulation. Second, there is agreement that the state cannot, and should not, be the only or the primary regulator of business. There is general support for a multiplicity of regulators with access to various regulatory resources. Third, there is agreement that the purpose of regulation should be to shape market outcomes and that these outcomes should be the standards by which regulatory successes and failures are assessed. Rules are thus viewed as tools rather than as goals of regulation. There are also disagreements among the authors. The core of these disagreements pertains to differing understandings of the public interest and especially how it is to be identified and realized. These differences are reflected in proposals for the division of labor between the various regulatory players. Chapter references and subject and case indexes