Bibliographie sélective OHADA

This research paper seeks to address the role that good faith plays in South African contract law by first discussing its origin and then chronologically tracing its position from pre-1994 to today. The judgements of both the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court will be unpacked, as a means to understand the development of good faith over the years. The position that good faith plays in foreign jurisdictions will also be discussed, for the sake of achieving a universal understanding of how good faith is perceived around the world. The research concludes by placing good faith in its current role and context in South Africa, and also proposing a way forward.

This subject matter of this work is the prohibition of competition with the company of members of board of directors in joint stock companies under art. 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code. The prohibition of competition is a limitation on the commercial activities and the freedom of competition of a restricted party who has access to information, means or resources due to the legal relationship between parties which grant the restricted party a leverage in competition with the other. The core idea underlying the prohibition of competition is the necessity to protect the party benefiting from this prohibition against competitive activities of the restricted party. The prohibition of competition bans the restricted party from establishing competition with the party benefiting from the prohibition through competitive actions, ultimately from becoming the competitor of the beneficiary. The said competition relationship will occur in the event the services or products serving the same or similar needs are provided to the entirety or part of the same customers or customer group. Board members in joint stock company, having the prevailing right of access to all information and resources of the company leads to the risk that it may use this power for its own or other parties' benefit instead of that of the company. Hence, the prohibition of competition on board members regulated under article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code is one of the concrete examples of the duty of loyalty of a board member towards the company aiming to prevent such usages prioritizing the benefit of the member or of a third person over that of the company. The focal point of this work is the determination of the scope of application and conditions of this prohibition as a whole. The first chapter of this thesis aims to convey the conceptual basis of the prohibition of competition. In this scope, we first assessed the economic and legal basis of competition. Economic competition is the race/competition of two or more market actors in a specific market in order to engage in a transaction with its counterparty in the market through offering better prices, conditions, goods or services in order to be superior from its competitors. However, the intention to supersede its competitors and the efforts for this purpose may result in the misuse of the right to compete or in an act limiting or eliminating the competitive environment. The Republic of Turkey provides for a constitutional protection over a person's right to engage in commercial activities and, although not expressly regulated, right to compete. However, as is the case for all rights and liberties, the right and liberty to compete cannot be exercised without any limitation. Second, the scope of the prohibition of competition is assessed. In this regard, we tried to determine the elements of the prohibition of competition, its definition, and its legal categorization. Moreover, a comparison of the prohibition of competition with the provisions governing unjust competition aiming to establish honest and undisrupted competition as well as with the rules of Competition Law aiming to prevent disruption of competition through restrictive actions is provided in order to specify the prominent characteristics of the prohibition of competition. Third, the attributes of the provisions governing the prohibition of competition are assessed. Provisions governing prohibition of competition which do not relate to the public order but to the internal relations of parties, and which serve the personal benefit of the beneficiary, are not of a peremptory nature. The prohibition of competition, which materially limits the liberty of engaging in commercial activities protected under the constitutional law, is of an exceptional nature and hence the provisions governing the prohibition of competition need to be construed in a limited manner. Fourth, the prohibition of competition can be regulated in the letter of a contract through mutual agreement thereon by its parties, or the legislator occasionally provides for a legal provision governing the prohibition of competition by attributing a special importance to this prohibition with respect to a specific relationship between the parties. Last, in this first chapter, we identify the reflections of this prohibition of competition within the scope of the Law of Obligations, and the Law of Corporations. The second chapter of this work takes into consideration the reasons of regulating a prohibition of competition on board members, and its scope of application regarding the persons concerned. In this context we first broadly assessed the position of the board of directors, board members and affiliated commercial auxiliaries in a company. Then, the legislative provisions respectively of German Law, Swiss Law and Turkish Law governing the board members' prohibition of competition are specified. While in German Law, just as is the case in Turkish law, the prohibition of competition of board members is stipulated in § 88 of the German Stock Corporation Act, the Swiss Law does not regulate this prohibition of competition of board members with a statutory provision, nonetheless, this prohibition is accepted by the scholars. Thereafter, the reason for regulating the prohibition of competition of board members is assessed. In this scope, the duty of loyalty of a board member arises from the legal relationship between the member and the corporation being based on the principle of trust. The member must refrain from conflicting its interests with the interests of the corporation, in other words, from conflict of interests, due to its duty of loyalty. When the member engages in competition with the company, the interests of the company and the board member conflict with each other. The member is in a considerably advantageous position in this conflict compared to the company, due to the information and resources to which it has access thanks to its position within the company. For this reason, the duty of loyalty aiming to prevent the conflict of interest between the company and the member lies at the basis of the board member's prohibition of competition. Lastly, in this chapter, the persons subject to the prohibition of competition pursuant to article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code are identified. In this respect, the members of the board of directors as well as persons to whom management authorities are delegated fall within the scope of the ratione personae of article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code. The commercial representatives and commercial proxies of a company are prohibited from competition pursuant to the prohibition of competition regarding commercial auxiliaries pursuant to article 553 of the Turkish Code of Obligations. Whereas a shareholder is not subject to the prohibition of competition with the company; this prohibition may only be regulated by a contract subject to the Law of Obligations. Furthermore, when evaluating the prohibition of competition of shareholders, whether the shareholder has a duty of loyalty to the company has been assessed under German Law, Swiss Law and Turkish Law. The third chapter of this work sets forth the scope of application of the prohibition of competition of board members with respect to its subject matter, place, and time. In order for a board member to violate the prohibition of competition with the company, the member must engage in an activity competing with the company. Pursuant to the first paragraph of article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code, two types of competitive actions of board members are banned. The first type is the member engaging in an action which is a commercial transaction that falls within the scope of the field of activity of the company, on behalf of itself or a third party. Accordingly, all kinds of acts and actions of the member realized on behalf of itself or third parties which fall within the scope of activity of the corporation would constitute the breach of the prohibition. The scope of this prohibition also encompasses joining the managing body of another corporation. Furthermore, depending on the specifics of a concrete case, the same member being an employee of a competitor corporation under a service contract, or providing consultancy services or extending facilities to a competitor, or benefiting from a job opportunity which belonged to the company may also be construed to be within the scope of the prohibition of competition. The second type is the member being engaged as a partner with unlimited liability in a corporation engaging in the same types of commercial activities. In this regard, if a member becomes a partner of an ordinary partnership or a collective corporation, or a partner with unlimited liability of a commandite corporation, which engages in activities that fall within the scope of activities of the joint stock company, the prohibition will be breached. The prohibition of competition of the board member with the company may be lifted by an authorization granted by the general assembly pursuant to article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code. This permission to compete to be granted to a board member may be in the form of a prior approval or a later acknowledgement (ratification), in an expressed or implied manner. As a result of the member being permitted to compete, article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code will no longer apply even if the member engages in activities in competition with the company. The prohibition to compete of the board member lasts for the duration of the board membership. Once the membership ends, the parties must conclude an agreement in order to continue the prohibition of competition. The said agreement regarding the prohibition of competition will be subject to form requirements to be valid. Pursuant to the liberty of contract inherent in the Law of Obligations, the parties may freely execute an agreement regarding the prohibition of competition, provided they comply with the provisions in paragraph 2 of article 23 of the Civil Code or article 26 and first paragraph of article 27 of the Turkish Commercial Code. The prohibition to compete of board members is valid as long as they execute the activities of the company, and within the geography where the clientele of the corporation is located. The fourth and last chapter of this work is devoted to the consequences of breach of the prohibition to compete by a board member. If a member of the board of directors violates this prohibition, the consequence of this breach is regulated in the first paragraph of art. 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code. Accordingly, the joint stock company is granted with certain elective rights. Such that, primarily the company may request compensation from the member in breach of the prohibition of competition. Second, it may be requested that the transaction is deemed concluded on behalf of the joint stock company, third, that the benefits arising from the agreement the member concludes on behalf of third parties belong to the joint stock company. In its request for compensation, the joint stock company must prove the action of the board member violating the prohibition of competition, that the corporation suffered losses from this activity, and the causal link between this activity and the loss of the company. In its request for the transaction to be deemed concluded on its behalf, the company requests for the economic consequences of the transactions the member concluded in violation of the prohibition of competition on its behalf. In its request for the benefits arising from the agreement, the company requests that benefits arising from the agreement the member concluded on behalf of third parties are left to itself. At this point, we materially benefited from the German doctrine and jurisprudence in explaining the claims requesting that a transaction is deemed concluded on behalf of the company and that the benefits from the transactions are left to the company. These rights granted in the first paragraph of article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code are not cumulative but elective. Pursuant to the second paragraph of article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code, the authority to chose one of the elective rights granted to the company belongs to the members of the board of directors, excluding the member having violated the prohibition of competition. The third paragraph of article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code regulates a dual prescription period of three months and one year. These periods are with respect to the exercise by the company of its elective right to make a claim. The first is the period of three months whose commencement will be determined based on the knowledge by other members that an action subject to the prohibition of competition is realized or that a board member joined another corporation. The second period is the period of one year commencing from the realization of the action violating the prohibition to compete. This one-year period is independent from other members' knowledge that the prohibition to compete has been breached. The corporation may raise other claims against the member violating the prohibition of competition which are not stipulated under article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code. Accordingly, the corporation may request that the member violating the prohibition of competition through joining a competing corporation as a partner with unlimited liability or joining the managing body of a competitive corporation resigns from this corporation or managing body. Further, the company may dismiss the member violating the prohibition of competition from board membership. Again, the company may initiate a lawsuit to cease the ongoing violation of the prohibition of competition by a board member, or a lawsuit of preclusion prior to probable breaches which have not yet occurred. In this chapter, lastly, the fourth paragraph of article 396 of the Turkish Commercial Code is assessed. This paragraph regulates that provisions governing liability of the members of the board of directors are reserved. This is a new provision which was not present in the abrogated Turkish Commercial Code no. 6762, newly introduced under the Turkish Commercial Code. In this context, we tried to determine the purpose and characteristics of this provision and concluded this work.

La propriété industrielle a pour objet principal la protection des créations de l’esprit liées à l’industrie et au commerce. Elle concerne des actifs créés principalement pour le progrès de la technologie, de l’industrie et du commerce, comme les brevets, les dessins et les modèles industriels, les marques de produits ou de services, les appellations d’origine et les circuits intégrés. Comme tous les objets de propriété, ces droits ont un propriétaire et sont susceptibles de produire un revenu. C’est pourquoi ils sont considérés comme un actif. De plus, comme tous les objets de propriété, ils résultent souvent d’un investissement et doivent donc être rentables, d’une façon ou d’une autre. The main purpose of industrial property is to protect intellectual creations related to industry and trade. It relates to assets created primarily for the advancement of technology, industry and commerce, such as patents, industrial designs and models, product or service trademarks, appellations of origin and integrated circuits. Like all property objects, these rights have an owner and are capable of generating income. Therefore, they are considered an asset. In addition, like all property objects, they often result from an investment and must therefore be profitable in some way.

Depuis quelque temps, nous recevons constamment des actualités et des commentaires sur les « Non-fungible Tokens » (jetons non fongibles), la croissance exponentielle du marché des « crypto-arts » , l’utilisation de ces NFT dans les secteurs de la musique, de l’audiovisuel, de l’édition et de la mode et, bien sûr, leur projection non seulement dans les réseaux sociaux, mais aussi dans le métavers. L’avalanche d’informations, que ces nouveaux « actifs » ont générée, a suscité des opinions mitigées, allant du scepticisme total à l’enthousiasme le plus radical. Cet article vise à aborder cette question d’un point de vue concret et clair, en analysant le contexte actuel, en mettant en évidence les défis juridiques et économiques posés par l’utilisation des NFT et en discutant des questions clés pour comprendre ce que sont ces nouveaux actifs virtuels, à quoi ils servent, comment nous pouvons les utiliser, leurs risques et les opportunités qu’ils offrent. Recently, we have been receiving constant news and comments about NFTs (non-fungible tokens), the exponential growth of the “crypto-arts” market, the use of these NFTs in the music, audiovisual, publishing and fashion sectors… and, of course, their projection not only in social networks but also in the metaverse. The avalanche of information that these new ‘assets’ have generated has provoked mixed opinions, ranging from total scepticism to the most radical enthusiasm. This article aims to approach this issue from a realistic and clear perspective, analysing the current context, highlighting the legal and economic challenges posed by the use of NFTs and discussing the key questions for understanding what NFTs are, what they are used for, how we can use them, their risks and the opportunities they offer.

Compliance with the GDPR while using blockchain technology for data processing results in compliance issues, due to the fact that the blockchain and the GDPR employ different methods to ensure privacy-by-design and privacy-by-default. The blockchain is built on disintermediation and relative decentralization, whereas the GDPR aims for re-intermediation and relative centralization of the data protection process. This paper provides an overview of and suggestions on how to secure compliance with the GDPR while processing data using the blockchain. A focus is placed on the data protection impact assessment on the blockchain network, issues in identifying and determining the role(s) of sole and joint data controllers and data processors, obstacles to exercising the right to rectification and right to be forgotten when the data is recorded on the blockchain, GDPR data transfer requirements as applied to the blockchain, and the protection of privacy in the process of creating blockchain-based smart contracts.

There is a growing concern over the qualifications and social interactions of investment treaty arbitrators. The characteristics of this class of international adjudicators have significantly evolved over the past few decades. The contemporary arbitration panelist interacts within a broad and complex network of arbitration participants. Their patterns of social behavior both within the community of panelists and within the broader network of actors in arbitration proceedings have fundamentally reshaped the composition, dynamics and culture of the arbitration community. These new forms of relationships and patterns of conduct are new in the context of public international law. These have created unprecedented challenges to the investment treaty arbitration system. New manifestations of attributes and social behavior of panelists demonstrate inadequacies of the existing standards, rules and procedures that govern panelists. This study surveys problematic patterns of social behavior of investment treaty adjudicators and shows how certain instances of social behavior inevitably or potentially jeopardize the very foundations of the system. This research empirically examines the voting behavior of two distinct groups of party-appointed panelists, and the results reveal a relationship between appointments and the decision-making attitude of adjudicators. It further methodically maps the pool of ICSID panelists and answers the question ‘who are ICSID panelists?’ It reviews the evolution of the attributes of ICSID adjudicators, assesses the composition of the ICSID pool, and evaluates the social interactions of this group of investment treaty adjudicators. To address the challenges that investment treaty arbitration faces, a radical and multidimensional shift is occurring in the system. This transformation is directed towards greater control over the qualifications and conduct of adjudicators. These developments reconstruct the composition of the pool of adjudicators and influence how they interact with other actors in investment treaty arbitration proceedings. The ongoing reform progress indicates that the attributes and behavior of future investment treaty adjudicators would likely be different from the characteristics and conduct of the contemporary generation of panelists.

Secoué par le vent de la démocratie et de la libéralisation économique qui a soufflé sur le continent africain au cours des années 90, l’État du Cameroun s’était davantage préoccupé d’encadrer les échanges commerciaux. La problématique de la protection du consommateur était secondaire. Il a fallu attendre les années 2010 pour que soient enfin adoptés une loi relative à la protection du consommateur et d’autres textes qui ont transformé le visage du droit camerounais de la consommation. La présente étude met en lumière, dans une approche comparée, les avancées réalisées dans la protection des droits aussi bien substantiels que processuels des consommateurs. Elle souligne également l’apport des institutions et des mouvements consuméristes à la défense, encore émergente, des intérêts non matériels des populations et leur influence sur cette dernière.

Klasik anlamdaki şirketten çıkarma düzenlemeleri, "haklı sebep" temeline dayanmaktadır. Bu düzenlemelerin en tipik özelliği, düzenlemiş oldukları çıkarma hakkı ile şirketin feshi kurumu arasında bir bağlantıya yer vermiş olmalarıdır. Bu bağlantı, haklı sebebe dayalı çıkarma düzenlemelerinin hizmet ettiği birincil amacı da ortaya koymaktadır: Şirketin devamlılığını sağlamak suretiyle ortaklar arasındaki menfaatler dengesi korumak. Türk hukukuna 6102 sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunu ve 6362 sayılı Sermaye Piyasası Kanunu ile kazandırılan "squeeze-out" müessesesi ise daha farklı bir kuramsal temele dayanmaktadır. Bu müessese ile, şirkette genellikle %90-95 arasında nitelikli bir pay ve/veya oy oranına ulaşmış olan hâkim pay sahibine, azınlığın paylarını herhangi bir sebep göstermeden iktisap edip, onu şirketten çıkarma hakkı tanınmıştır. Böylece çıkarmanın ekseni, "haklı sebep" olgusundan "hâkimiyet" olgusuna kaymıştır. Kanun koyucuların bu şekilde bir çıkarma hakkını öngörmelerindeki temel sebep ise kurumsal nitelikte bazı amaçları gerçekleştirmek isteyen hâkim konumdaki pay sahiplerine bir imkân sunmaktır. Tezimizde, klasik anlamdaki çıkarma müesseselerinin dayanmış olduğu kuramsal temelden ayrılan "squeeze-out" kurumunun kuramsal temeli, düzenlemenin hangi amaçlarla öngörüldüğü meseleleri ele alınmakta; bu bağlamda, kurumun karşılaştırmalı hukuktaki ne şekilde düzenlendiği, kurumun ortaya çıkardığı sorunlar ve bu sorunların çözümüne yönelik önerilere yer verilmektedir. The classic rules designed for exclusion of a partner has a simple theoretical basis: A/an justified/objective reason (or in other words "good cause"). The most typical feature of these rules is they build a bridge between the exclusion right and the dissolution of the company. This bridge also shows the the primary purpose served by these rules which is to maintain the balance of interests among the partners by ensuring the continuity of the company. In comparison with the classical rules, the "squeeze-out" rules which have been introduced into Turkish law with the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 and the Capital Markets Law No. 6362, have a different theoretical basis. The controlling shareholder who has reached a qualified percentage of capital and/or voting rights (usually %90-95), has been granted the right to acquire the minority's shares without asserting any justified reason and exclude him from the company. Thus the idea behind the exclusion has been changed from "good cause" to the "dominance/control". The main reason for designing such an exclusion right is to provide an opportunity to the controlling shareholders trying to achieve institutional objectives in the company. In our thesis, the theoretical basis of the "squeeze-out" rules and the reasons for designing such a new exclusion right will be examined within the framework of other squeeze-out rules in comparative law. Within this context, the most common problems in squeeze-outs and suggestions for solving these problems are analyzed.

Tez çalışmasının amacı, kripto varlıkların ödeme aracı olarak kullanımını dış ticaretin bileşenleri kapsamında değerlendirmek ve kripto varlıkların yurtdışı ödemelerde ve bireysel yatırımlarda kullanılmaları bağlamında, bireylerin tutumlarını etkileyen faktörleri incelemektir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda öncelikli olarak, kripto varlıkların para işlev ve özelliklerine ne ölçüde uyum sağladıkları hususunda tespitlerde bulunulmuştur. Ulusal paralara eşdeğer kılınan stabil fiyatlı kripto varlıkların geleneksel ve modern para işlevlerine uyumlu oldukları yönünde görüş bildirilmiştir. Para özellikleri açısından ele alındığında da "kabul edilebilirlik" ve "sıradanlık" dışındaki para özelliklerine, tüm kripto varlıkların uyum sağladıkları değerlendirilmiştir. Ayrıca kripto varlık birimleri parasal niteliklerine göre tasnif edilerek, değişken fiyatlı, stabil fiyatlı ve finansal ürünlere bağlanan kripto varlıklar olmak üzere, üç kategoriden oluşan bir sınıflandırma geliştirilmiştir. Para işlev ve özellikleri kapsamındaki tespitlerin ardından, önceden belirlenen dış ticaret bileşenlerinin özelinde kripto varlıkların mevcut ve muhtemel kullanım alanları incelenmiştir. Belirlenmiş olan dış ticaret bileşenleri, uluslararası para birimleri, uluslararası bankacılık, uluslararası lojistik, dış ticaret hukuku ve gümrük işlemleridir. Dış ticaret bileşenlerine yönelik değerlendirmelerde kripto varlıkların ödeme aracı olarak kullanımları esas alınmıştır ve değerlendirme sürecinde çalışma kapsamında oluşturulmuş olan kripto varlık sınıflandırmasının kategorileri için de görüşler oluşturulmuştur. Çalışma kapsamında kripto varlıklara yönelik bireysel tutumları irdelemek amacıyla ampirik bir araştırma gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında UTAUT-2 modelini temel alan bir araştırma modeli oluşturulmuş ve yurtdışı ödemelerde kullanım niyeti ile yatırımda bulunma niyeti olmak üzere, iki farklı bağımlı yapıyı etkileyen unsurlar irdelenmiştir. Yol katsayısı değerine (β) göre yurtdışı ödemelerde kullanım niyetini anlamlı ölçüde etkileyen yapıların önem sırasına göre, "performans beklentisi", "sosyal etki" ve "algılanan risk" adlı boyutlar olduğu bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır. Yatırımda bulunma niyetini anlamlı düzeyde etkileyen bileşenler ise sırasıyla; "performans beklentisi", "sosyal etki", "farkındalık" ve "algılanan risktir". Araştırma kapsamında bağımlı ve bağımsız yapılar arasındaki etkileşimi incelemek amacıyla etki büyüklüğü (f²) ve tahmin gücü (q²) değerleri de hesaplanmıştır. Yol katsayısı değerlerine göre modelin bağımlı yapılarını anlamlı düzeyde ve negatif yönde etkileyen "algılanan risk" boyutunun, f² değeri açısından anlamlı bir katkısının olmadığı görülmüştür. Ayrıca yol katsayılarına göre "performans beklentisi" bağımlı yapılar üzerinde en çok etkiye sahipken, etki büyüklüğüne göre en önemli yapı "sosyal etkidir". Bağımsız yapıların tahmin gücü (q²) değerleri de etki büyüklüğü (f²) değerleri ile paralel sonuçlar ortaya koymuştur. Ortaya koyulan ampirik araştırmanın sonucunda, örneklemin yurtdışı ödemelerde ve yatırım kararlarında kripto varlıkları kullanma eğilimleri açısından en önemli etmenlerin "performans beklentisi" ve "sosyal etki" olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. The aim of the thesis study is to evaluate the use of crypto assets as a payment instrument within the scope of the components of foreign trade and to examine the factors affecting the attitudes of individuals in the context of the use of crypto assets in foreign payments and individual investments. For this purpose, first, it was evaluated that to what extent crypto assets are compatible with money functions and features. It was stated that stable priced crypto assets, which are equivalent to national currencies, are compatible with traditional and modern money functions. When considered in terms of money features, it was evaluated that all crypto assets are compatible with money features other than "acceptability" and "ordinariness". In addition, crypto assets were classified according to their monetary characteristics, and a classification was developed consisting of three categories: variable priced, stable priced and crypto assets linked to financial products. After the evaluations within the scope of money functions and features, the current and possible usage areas of crypto assets were examined specifically for the previously determined foreign trade components. The determined foreign trade components are international currencies, international banking, international logistics, foreign trade law and customs procedures. Evaluations for foreign trade components were based on the use of crypto assets as a payment instrument and arguments were formed for the categories of the crypto asset classification created within the scope of the study during the evaluation process. Within the scope of the study, an empirical research was carried out to examine individual attitudes towards crypto assets. A research model based on the UTAUT-2 model was formed and the factors affecting two different dependent structures, namely "intention to use in foreign payments" and "intention to invest", were examined. According to the value of the path coefficient (β), it was found that the structures that significantly affect the intention to use in foreign payments are the dimensions called "performance expectancy", "social impact" and "perceived risk", in order of importance. The components that significantly affect the intention to invest are "performance expectancy", "social impact", "awareness", and "perceived risk", respectively. Effect size (f²) and predictive relevance (q²) values were also calculated to examine the interaction between dependent and independent structures within the scope of the research. It was seen that the "perceived risk" dimension, which affects the dependent structures of the model significantly and negatively according to the path coefficient values, does not have a significant contribution in terms of f² value. In addition, according to the path coefficients, "performance expectancy" has the largest impact on the dependent structures, while the most important structure according to the effect size is "social impact". The predictive relevance (q²) values of the independent structures also showed similar results with the effect size (f²) values. As a result of the empirical research, it was concluded that the most significant factors in terms of the tendency of the participants to use crypto assets in foreign payments and investment decisions are "performance expectancy " and "social impact".