Our field has reached a critical juncture. Authentic leadership, which once promised to illuminate how leaders inspire and influence through genuine actions, has become mired in conceptual ambiguity and ideological bias. Much of the research is based on evaluations of behaviour conflated with antecedents and outcomes, presuming an oversimplified, positive view of authenticity. To advance, we must refocus on what authentic leaders actually do – their discrete behaviours – as signals of leadership. In this editorial, we redefine authentic leadership through signalling theory to address unresolved critiques and provide a platform for meaningful progress. We then summarise and synthesise the articles in this special issue, which systematically review the literature, present dynamic models of authenticity, introduce ‘bounded authenticity’ in leadership roles, advocate for rigorous experimental methods, and offer empirical support. Collectively, these papers advance authentic leadership theory with greater theoretical precision and a conceptual nuance that reflects the modern organisational leadership landscape.

David Neely was an internationally recognised scientist who formed collaborations and friendships across the world. His passion for his work always shone through. He always made time for early-career scientists and became a mentor and supervisor to many. He was an active Editorial Board Member of the international journal High Power Laser Science and Engineering. Sadly, David was taken from us much too early. In this Editorial we pay tribute to his work through his publications in the journal.

This editorial summarizes the key observations from a special issue of Animal Health Research Reviews comprising 14 articles related to the efficacy of antimicrobial and non-antimicrobial approaches to reduce disease in beef, dairy cattle, swine, and broiler chickens. The articles used evidence-based methods, including scoping reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and network meta-analyses. Despite finding evidence of efficacy for some of the interventions examined, across the body of research, there was a lack of replication and inconsistency in outcomes among the included trials, and concerns related to completeness of reporting and trial design and execution. There is an urgent need for more and better data to inform antimicrobial stewardship practices in animal agriculture.

The financial crisis has reignited the debate on how to best strike a balance between private ordering and regulatory intervention. As a matter of legislative technique this requires a policy decision whether a ‘rules’ or a ‘principles’ approach should be pursued. It is therefore with considerable foresight that Professors Lord Eatwell and Kern Alexander of the Judge Business School at the University of Cambridge organised a conference on ‘Principles v. Rules in Financial Regulation’, which took place in Cambridge from 11 to 12 April 2008. This issue carries a conference report by Kern Alexander and major contributions by Steven L. Schwarcz, Edward J. Kane and David G. Mayes.

This issue of EBOR presents to a wider audience the papers and proceedings of a symposium on ‘Efficient Creditor Protection in European Company Law’, which took place from 1 to 3 December 2005 at the premises of the Max Planck Institute in Munich, as a joint venture of Munich’s Ludwig Maximilians University and the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law. As the organisers of this conference, we were proud and delighted that so many outstanding scholars from Europe and the United States agreed to participate, give presentations, make comments and contribute to the discussions, although we had nothing to offer but a lot of preparatory work, uncomfortable winter travel and the prospect of exchanging some views on questions of corporate law reform in our conference room. We would also like to express our gratitude to the Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Sciences for its generous financial support of the conference and this publication.