Blockchain Papers

Miguel Ballesteros, Ricardo Weder

No abstract is available for this record.

Andrew S. Moore

In October 1976, political scientist Seymour Martin Lipset studied recent polls and predicted that “if present trends continue,” the upcoming presidential election would be the first “in which Catholics have not been considerably more supportive of the Democratic nominee than Protestants.” Just a few weeks earlier, former governor of Georgia Jimmy Carter had enjoyed a comfortable lead over Republican President Gerald Ford in national public opinion surveys. But several different polls now revealed that no longer was the case. Lipset blamed the “Catholic defection” from Democratic ranks that he believed had come, at least in part, because of Carter's perceived shift to the left on a variety of issues; he appeared to many voters to be more liberal than he had been during the primary campaign. In addition, Carter's “cultural and religious style,” combined with a media fixation on abortion and his relationship with Catholics, had undermined his support among the nation's largest Christian denomination.1 This came at an inopportune time for Democrats, whose identity and relationship to the nation's religious people were in flux. As William Prendergast has written about the post–civil rights period: “Lost to the Democratic Party were millions of Catholics who would have enlisted under its banner in earlier times. Most had not become Republicans. They were adrift in a state of independence awaiting a candidate, a cause, a party more congenial to their values than the party of their fathers had become by the dawn of the decade of the seventies.”2 There were those who believed that Carter could have been that candidate. It was not to be. In short, Carter had what observers at the time labeled a “Catholic problem.” As it turned out, he also had a Protestant problem, as he represented the ways that the Democratic Party coalition was unraveling along religious lines. Both Catholic and Protestant problems resulted from the convergence of several interrelated forces. First, the civil rights movement that peaked in the mid-1960s had drawn its moral energy from a particular religious vision for America. The black freedom struggle legitimated religious activism to achieve a desirable liberal political end.3 After much internal struggle, Catholics and many Protestants accepted that vision—at least rhetorically—and reaffirmed America's Christian heritage. Protestants had long marginalized Catholics and neglected their place in that heritage. Now, however, Catholics demanded acceptance on their own terms. Carter's Catholic problem, then, came at a time when the nation's largest Christian denomination believed that they had finally been embraced as part of the nation's Christian heritage. At the same time, however, other events of the 1960s accelerated trends toward secularization. For some people, Carter—the most openly devout presidential candidate since William Jennings Bryan—represented the possibility to reclaim a moral and religious vision for America and to encourage Protestant and Catholic cooperation to achieve that vision. He symbolized a postracial, more inclusive South, the antithesis of a nation that had become increasingly secular. His religious vision for the nation, however, and his ideas about the separation of church and state meant that his candidacy threatened the avenue through which Catholics had participated in public life since the nineteenth century. In a bit of historic irony, the nation's perceived secularization had roots in Carter's Southern Baptist theology and ideas about church and state and religious liberty. In a sense, of course, Carter's Catholic problem was not new. Catholics and Protestants had long viewed each other with at least suspicion, if not outright hostility. What was different now was that Catholics' position in public life had changed since the 1960s. For the first time, Catholics qua Catholics were part of the public debate. That is, in 1960, John F. Kennedy had been elected president only after assuring American Protestants that he could govern in a secular manner, that his being Catholic in effect would not matter.4 Now, however, the civil rights movement had changed the nation's political and religious landscape and created new opportunities for religion in public life. At its best, the civil rights movement reflected Catholic inclusion and they now expected to be a part of the new religious and political dialogue. Despite Catholic misgivings, the fact that Carter was a man of faith encouraged them that a shared religious vision for America could give them common ground. Carter's problem with Catholics—or their problem with him, to be more accurate—revolved around several issues. In one way or another, all the issues touched on Carter's stance on the separation of church and state. The potentially most explosive issue was abortion and where the candidate stood on the need for a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution. Second was the possibility of state support for parochial schools. Finally, Carter's being an outspoken and active Southern Baptist layman aroused general suspicion among the nation's voting Catholics. In the 1970s, these were interwoven, a complex web of issues that were difficult to separate from each other. Together they pointed to the paradox of Catholic involvement in politics. On the one hand, Catholics now expected to be taken seriously on their own terms in public life. On the other hand, they continued to suffer (at least in their own minds) marginalization. One unnamed Milwaukee, Wisconsin, priest summed up the problem succinctly. He wrote Congressman Clement J. Zablocki about the “very real danger that Catholics are being alienated by the seeming indifference of these Democratic Leaders to the problems of American Catholics.” His parishioners were no longer solidly Democratic and were skeptical of Carter. “They seem to think that [Carter] and the Party is [sic] not concerned about a deterioration of respect for life, eg. [sic] abortion, about the deterioration of the cities, about those constitutional aids to parochial education.” Indeed, “Mr. Carter seems to favor secularization of all education.” This priest recalled “the anti-Catholic attitudes of the Baptists in Bay View,” and his and his parishioners' allegiance to the Democratic Party was shaken.5 For him and others, abortion, the separation of church and state, and secularization of society all were of a piece. Sociologist, Catholic priest, and Carter supporter Andrew Greeley was one of the most public observers of Carter's Catholic problem. The worst part of it for Greeley was that the problem was one that Carter could have addressed and alleviated, with only a little effort. In fact, “it took a lot of effort on his part to get into trouble on a number of ‘Catholic’ issues.” On abortion, according to Greeley, Carter's personal position resembled that of Catholics. Carter should have simply said nothing; however, he, was “under pressure from feminist militants who wanted another symbolic victory over Catholics.” Feminists would not suddenly favor Ford over Carter, Greeley reasoned, but Catholics might.6 The 1976 Democratic plank amounted to two sentences in a lengthy document that covered the full range of issues expected to face a president—from taxes and health care to foreign policy. Democrats acknowledged “the religious and ethical nature of the concerns which many Americans have on the subject of abortion.” Nevertheless, a constitutional amendment was “undesirable.” Roe v. Wade should be allowed to stand.7 Blaming Carter for the platform was not entirely fair, since the platform did not meet all of the standard bearer's demands. To be sure, his would not have many Catholics His would have neglected to it would have simply to health care and with their own In to abortion, and former and first pointed to Catholic in the Baptist a that had since the 1960s but was perceived Carter and its for for Catholic about Carter's President Ford an to Catholic that the Carter to the Catholic to the of but to the and of by Catholics.” Carter should his personal to abortion and the fact that he had with Catholics, to his by the to the of on the Catholic John F. Kennedy for Catholics Protestants for their and it was time to the the of religious and Jimmy Carter as a a Southern and to as as a former candidate for the Carter that the problem was not the of or Greeley or Jimmy Indeed, it was and it would Carter on election Catholics were in and most of them were For they could not be or taken for For a to he Catholics to as a when they would be more to Catholics would not a way Americans would a with and on of the would they would for in a voting and give it to the The problem could be but not by with or of Catholic it first that Carter the nature of the problem and the to which Catholics the American and the Democratic the were two Democratic one of William Jennings and the other of The former is the was Catholic two had been at since the nineteenth but each to the party that did one The party of its roots to and was for most of the of American The with and was for most of the of as and of and As and other observers Catholics had been Democratic since the nineteenth century. At the same time, as a coalition of the Democratic Party Protestants as much of the liberal or Protestant to support for the time of Carter's however, that had to liberal Protestant support for and many of them their support to Democratic That liberal Protestant toward the Democrats to be the most of the political party in the of the to Carter could not the in his own party in the same way that he the and roots of the relationship and in the The the two Catholics and their of and the those Catholic “They were the most of people, as than his was Catholic of in the and political to were This parochial symbolic what the parochial if not that they were in to public that openly for the Protestant and for and all its and There were that Carter The first and problem was the 1976 Democratic Carter the with the support of and black with no active Catholic It was of to the of American Carter had Martin to on the platform at the But it was a not a Catholic to the for what be the first time in Carter's Democratic coalition be than and black Protestants a few In to a general it Catholics. What was that Catholics believed that Carter in to liberal on after the be to get was not a of Catholics. Indeed, in his of the problem, at they as of than with the political Nevertheless, the problem was more than one of perceived and It was real for many more for it had political Catholic revealed the of in the Democratic Party in the 1960s. As liberal and had taken of the party from and the of those Catholics. that by the 1960s Catholics had enjoyed opportunities that and movement up the In fact, were than the whose was the of during Nevertheless, they the of that and the and real of of and their the of by Greeley and that They marginalized and Greeley with that Martin a of the and to on the platform with Carter. of a of the an at left from a of anti-Catholic and Catholic of their place in the public Carter's acceptance the of a who have and had to for or to suffer from the public are or by their to For Greeley, that was a that “the fact that most of those who to Catholic are who are not Catholic but a for their that Carter people who were is, who had or This would be more than It would Carter who could problems and the candidate into and from of anti-Catholic The most of what could came with Carter's of the issue of to parochial the Catholic is its to What Carter did not seem to was that of church and state is an anti-Catholic It is to to parochial because it is the of all the and Protestant that to to to parochial and to their over To to would be political to parochial was one of two issues that as abortion other was that Carter could about a that would the first to in to with to be a to the of the This would parochial which were and to Catholics that Carter had their in they did not in Carter's not as as would have the had to Catholic One revealed the difficult position Carter was as he to these political with Democratic secular to his own personal That concerned the relationship church and state in It Carter's position as being one of a in the for the separation of church and state. a position reflected the “in that religious freedom be threatened by a from in the “the public to parochial The candidate continued to however, to to public schools. to religious at the of America's and it is also a the has Nevertheless, that a some to some from public could in the of that was to all and and of the they had as a public than a to The did an of “the of to freedom of at the same time, the public or to a After the is one way Americans achieve desirable the of and in 1976, the Carter a to the Catholic The Carter's a and for for to whose It that a parochial had a long and a and in the of What was at however, was “the of millions of and Americans to a religious for their This at the of America's and It is a not by Carter a on a Georgia that would give to and schools. In Carter that as be to that the freedom of and that parochial have in the in the Carter's in the separation of church and state was in his ideas about personal and should be from to his own and about moral issues on that to and moral to were the state should The American Protestant was that Catholics, who their allegiance to the in were not to their own is no that Carter shared the that threatened religious he did his about the of to the issue of This to the that was a Catholic As Catholic and political observers it threatened the political on the of the who had long up their In October 1976, a presidential among its President Gerald Ford of the Carter with by revealed abortion as according to a was no that those to the of the the more issue was the Democratic Party which a constitutional amendment Roe v. Carter's own position on abortion was He his personal to the but was to support to Roe v. long he had been to the is He the governor of Georgia after v. was in state and he had been governor for a of when it was with Roe v. the Carter's and that Carter to the in That is not in the but was a in that that to abortion What was Carter wrote the to a in by and an of and a of all of which for the need for of and The would be the of of In his Carter his in with him now the of each and to many they would to have and when they would to have them as an for and as an for and Carter was that it was now to these issues more it was the of each to what he or to the of to wanted into on a Carter's to in a problem for him in the but that after the appeared Carter's on abortion a bit and he his to This came in to in a public and to the of As a by the time he was a presidential candidate, Carter to a personal to abortion, but an to effort that would Roe v. He did the Carter as he would support a to national and that Carter had acknowledged that “under he would support a constitutional amendment on a Georgia state Despite the fact that of Carter's position on a constitutional amendment from in and appeared on to the that was to Catholic support for Carter over the only Catholic candidate in the After the Carter that the took his of and was in fact, a of his to a constitutional After he the he and his did to up his Catholic At the of on a in he with Catholic of of of the of Catholic John of John J. of and of were of the of the Catholic The Catholic were that Carter in his support of Roe v. but they were encouraged that he, according to a with not an effort to a constitutional to to Carter, he his own it that Catholics, or have a to an would to an At least one of people, Catholics for a that Carter was on the of his position on abortion in to Catholic on the Catholics for a had in a with Carter, a fact that to the was in of recent with the of Catholic Catholics for a was that Carter continued to a constitutional amendment and the to which most Catholic were to Indeed, the that that a of Catholics that abortion should be a a and in a of the in was At least one priest, his that the Carter and the Catholic would to President Ford and Catholic support for Jimmy The wrote in The was that on abortion threatened to the to a In fact, he the Democrats had long been more in with the of the church on issues than the stance of the Republicans. Both Democrats and Catholics are by a common for the of and the people of society and Catholics to the abortion issue to become a in the from Wisconsin, where the of Catholic believed that their own could be to the Carter campaign. The had for in wanted Democrats to a Catholic on life from abortion to to As to the life issues on the with if Life is the only one that the to would have a problem To that Carter could be to a constitutional “the Catholic and the political be to to a of the problem. Democratic Catholics are to a to In his that Carter should not his own position on abortion, which was as it and be in in the What was Carter should not be concerned about the in since the are more to than to lead Carter should that the movement at the and those have their own Carter should to and he did be all was that was the and who did not in to all that the or them to But abortion was to Catholics. It could not be as as to a of in fact, as out, the were in effort. in the revealed that abortion was the issue on which was of among The same could not be said for the nation's Indeed, if was on abortion it was that it was a Catholic issue that threatened to of religious liberty. In Protestant Catholics were to the separation church and state. This was the opinion of the of the Southern Baptist Christian Life was a of the of a in the in an effort to amendment that would have Roe v. The acknowledged among the nation's religious people about The issue for them was religious which “the freedom to abortion in of his or own and religious and in with Most Southern Baptists had the issue much in 1976, and Carter's position was with most of those who Nevertheless, as a political issue was After Roe v. Wade abortion a national voters who were their own of those Carter They that abortion would not most of Carter not to on the It was more that he his position and and former candidate for the Democratic presidential a Carter that is being up by the in the on abortion.” Nevertheless, Carter's position was the that fact, the what the Carter political should be. to Carter's was to to on the abortion than two left in the and with Ford that was of the has to be on to those Carter should the of the of to to to them only a of voters who were more concerned about Carter's to with the political Democratic William the of abortion as an issue that could In he a election when his him with the issue in the of their campaign. first Carter, not Carter's personal to abortion and to the as as his that should to encourage were general and become and a of voters in an effort to an few Carter and those for him on the on the the position on position should be as of political of about the of Carter should also Ford and personal about they would for abortion in their position no more than The to Carter's was to the The that Carter's Catholic problem did not him in In fact, he of the Catholic to along with of the Protestant That of the Catholic was considerably than the that had in it also was than Carter would in when he of the Catholic in he did little to his Catholic He did to the of to for This an among his and those who had him during the campaign. In a of Carter's in the of the the to the president for public the outspoken and addressed the president in a to be for and and over Carter's about for concerned among that Carter would position and support the of for when in the of the They also that Carter's to and and in a in an Carter's of that his position potentially of of the the an most these Carter the his would in he had much on state would have in his he that his was to during campaign. is more liberal than Despite pressure from his own Carter stood his that his own stance on the relationship church and state his in he to Southern Baptist and but with other In fact, the problem had the the of the polls that Carter to have the election all but he to a of with in an to up his The was that Carter's religious faith would lead him to a new state that would the of his In a on in the face of own however, Carter that he had on a lot of with have in many of was for a Southern Baptist Carter, and particular was a of on the But it came in the at the time for Carter. were by his of the and by the fact that his came the of a of and In a sense, Carter's to his and to to his was with his The support for separation of church and state was in the that and personal would This was most in an in which most people were with the of a that was at least in In the was not and Carter was not a But events of the 1960s had drawn the into the nation and the nation into the South, a that had to its by the Carter continued to that personal and but his to new religious revealed the to which position in national society had He a relationship with several of the Southern Baptist the Jimmy president of the from to As Carter encouraged the of a by the and Baptist to the for what appeared to be The of the Georgia Baptist The Christian his in a through the Carter's with Baptist in some The president should be for a with those religious the same as he would be with that the to the into the and to of and for the President to which become in and Southern Baptists to some Carter's of what Baptists that John F. Kennedy would have he their at in during the campaign. to for other Georgia Baptist In his to Carter by the personal and The as his and he with during his Carter had from but a As governor of Georgia and as president of the Carter had and to religious of all in the separation of church and state and would not to in at Carter's of a was from where Baptists believed their primary Nevertheless, Carter and he to be in the be that Baptists have no to be concerned about Carter's relationship with other religious the that expected from the in his Carter an effort to to religious then, however, it was In fact, his own denomination in The that of the denomination that with Carter on the nature of religious and the of the in a particular moral vision on the The new of the denomination was more concerned with they believed that Carter's of religious had encouraged the nation's secularization. This the for abortion to become a political issue for Southern Baptists in the and for them and Catholics to a shared religious vision of America that had in the of the civil rights Carter's had drawn into the political if Carter turned not to be their candidate. Carter had to from to his faith for political not an active a vision that to Carter's Southern As a most Southern Baptists their way into the Republican Carter's ideas about religious and about the separation of church and state. in the they the need to abortion as a moral and religious issue than a Catholic It an issue in the nation's religious heritage. One Baptist the to abortion a Catholic issue was a which the of the millions of who are not changed and in the a of Southern Baptists for Life acknowledged that Southern Baptists have the to to the of They to and they with over the the Christian Life should abortion in the They that but only after in Most Catholics and came to on Nevertheless, many Catholics continued to however, they now did the of a party that Carter's on the of religious The among many observers was that the Democrats had become the secular the one to religious In fact, Carter's position would be the one by Catholic Democratic in the a position that them at with of the

Didik Suhardi

Education was one of the sectors that was being decentralized except 6 sectors ( Defense, Security, Foreign Affair, Justice, Finance, and Religious Affair) that are still under the management of the central government, centralized. During the decentralization of education, the mechanism of education planning has become difficult and complicated. This is due to the complexity of the procedure that the plan has to go through; a long process, starting from the preparation of supporting data until the final stage of deciding the most appropriate programs and activities for the country. Besides, this process has to involve all stakeholders of education, the approval from the parliament must be obtained so that the proposed budget can be funded.<br><br>The main objectives of this research are two fold. First, to make better or to improve the education planning mechanism at the Directorate for Development of Junior Secondary Education (DDJSE). Second, through improved planning, to expand the scope of service to the citizens of the country so that every citizen in Indonesia will have an equal access to Junior Secondary Education (JSE) and to improve the quality of JSE in Indonesia. To achieve these research objectives, practitioner research was used as an umbrella of research methodology with action research as the main research method. Data were collected by using data collection methods: questionnaires, observations, interviews, and document analysis from related sources. The research was done from 2004 until 2008.<br><br>This research involved all of the staff from the DDJSE, some staff from provincial and district education office, and other stakeholders of education. The involvement of all level of education staffs was aimed to find the most appropriate plan that suitable for all three levels of education offices. Whatever happens in one of the three levels of education offices will affect the other education offices. <br><br>During this research, the following actions were conducted as part of the education planning process: creation of current and complete data (EMIS), development of evaluation criteria for effective decentralized education planning, bottom up planning, coordination and synchronization, development of clear division of labour in education planning among the layer of education bureaucracy based on government regulation number 38/2007, capacity building, participation decision making, intensive and regular monitoring and evaluation. <br><br>At the end of the research completion, the researcher concluded that effective education planning had significantly increased the access to and the quality of JSE from year to year. The increase in access to JSE is shown by the significant improvement in Gross Enrolment Rate (GER) at JSE. The improvement of the quality of JSE is shown by the constant increase in students scores at the National Examination (UN). This research does not claim to be the only reason for the success of the DDJSE, but through this Research by Project there is clear improvement in JSE in Indonesia.<br><br>In addition, the research approach, results, and strategies have been very valuable for the DDJSE in improving the access and quality of JSE in Indonesia. <br>

Marek Jawurek, Martin Johns, Florian Kerschbaum

Traditional electricity meters are replaced by Smart Meters in customers' households. Smart Meters collects fine-grained utility consumption profiles from customers, which in turn enables the introduction of dynamic, time-of-use tariffs. However, the fine-grained usage data that is compiled in this process also allows to infer the inhabitant's personal schedules and habits. We propose a privacy-preserving protocol that enables billing with time-of-use tariffs without disclosing the actual consumption profile to the supplier. Our approach relies on a zero-knowledge proof based on Pedersen Commitments performed by a plug-in privacy component that is put into the communication link between Smart Meter and supplier's back-end system. We require no changes to the Smart Meter hardware and only small changes to the software of Smart Meter and back-end system. In this paper we describe the functional and privacy requirements, the specification and security proof of our solution and give a performance evaluation of a prototypical implementation.

Nicolae Balalia, Constantin Afanase

The research theme is important for the local economy and financial literature on local public finance. It is known that the tax base of the territories is quite uneven and providing quality public services is impossible based on their own sources. The support for less developed local public administration from the financial point of view requires fiscal decentralization and involves financial equalization procedures or other similar measures aimed at eliminating the effect of unequal distribution for potential funding sources. Financial equalization is a group of financial actions made in order to overcome economic and fiscal disparities between territories. The purpose of financial equalization is the additional funding of less developed territories in order to reduce regional disparities. Key words: financial equalization, fiscal decentralization, inter-budgetary

Uma Kelekar

The aim of this research is to better understand the effects of a decentralized health system of the Philippines on public health care expenditures by investigating determinants of local government public health spending for year 2007. Within the context of the Philippines’ decentralized health system and health externalities that arise at the individual-level and manifest at the regional level, particular emphasis is given to spatial spillovers and fiscal interactions among municipalities. The research addresses these issues in an empirical spatial econometric framework utilizing public finance local government data for the Philippines. Competition for health resources including doctors and drugs, thereby bidding up the costs of health inputs is one of the potential causes for positive fiscal spatial dependence cited in this paper. It is also anticipated that this could be an outcome of yardstick competition, where local agents strategically compete with each other by spending higher in order to be re-elected, 2007 being an election year.

Raimundas Lunevičius, Md Habibur Rahman

BACKGROUND: Injury is the number one public health problem in Lithuania in terms of disability adjusted life years lost. The trauma system plays an important role in injury statistics. The objective of this article is to describe and assess the performance of Lithuanian trauma sector. METHODS: The framework for assessing the performance of health systems proposed by Murray and Frenk (2000) was employed. RESULTS: The primary intention criterion--to reduce the number of trauma cases, injury related mortality and disability rates by 30% by 2010-is well defined. The Lithuanian whole-trauma sector does not substantially contribute to improving the health of the population. The legitimate expectations of the community--respect of persons in terms of dignity, autonomy, confidentiality, client orientation--do not correspond with the responsiveness of the trauma service. Financing of the trauma sector does not correspond with the magnitude of the injury problem. Lithuanian trauma service is decentralized. There is no trauma leadership in the country. There is no national policy for unintentional injury prevention and control, no specialized injury research institute, no system of trauma centres, and no Injury Surveillance System in Lithuania. There is no such specialty as Emergency Medicine as of 2009. A political and public will to reform the trauma sector is not sound. CONCLUSION: The performance of the decentralized Lithuanian trauma sector does not match with the primary intention criterion and does not correspond to the needs of people. Lithuanian trauma service has to be conceptualized and changed to inclusive.

Tim Miller

Occasionally investigations by state boards1 take longer than desired. Sometimes complainants take months or even years to file a complaint with a medical board. Cases may be complex and finding witnesses and obtaining expert opinions can lengthen the time it takes to complete a case. Sometimes the medical board must wait for another entity to complete its criminal investigations before the board can begin an investigation or bring charges. A delay, however, may prejudice a physician's ability to defend against the charges. This installment of Legal Briefs looks at the doctrine of laches (pronounced “latches”) and its applicability to state boards, as well as alternatives to laches.First, what exactly is laches? In legal terms, it is the concept of unreasonable delay in pursuing a right or claim — in a way that prejudices the opposing party. When asserted in litigation, it is in the category of “an equitable defense” or “doctrine.” The person invoking laches asserts that an opposing party has “slept on its rights,” and that during the elapsed time period, circumstances have changed and a plaintiff's original claim should not be granted.The courts have five methods for handling cases that have become stale in this way. The first is to apply any applicable statute of limitation. The second is to apply the Due Process clause in the U.S. Constitution. The third is to distinguish precatory suggestions from mandatory requirements. The fourth is to use the equitable remedy of estoppel. The fifth is to use the doctrine of laches. After reviewing the first four, this article will focus on the doctrine of laches. While reviewing laches, it must be remembered that the purpose of a medical board's administrative proceeding is not disciplinary but public protection.2Brown v. State Personnel Board established that statutes of limitation, “like the equitable doctrine of laches, in their conclusive effects are designed to promote justice by preventing surprises through the revival of claims that have been allowed to slumber until evidence has been lost, memories have faded, and witnesses have disappeared.”3Nevertheless, Lindsey v. Miller's Lessee concluded that “[i]t is a well settled principle that the statute of limitations does not run against a state.”4 Specifically, “It has been held that there are no statutes of limitation applicable to [professional] disciplinary proceedings.”5Courts, however, may apply a statute of limitation to administrative proceedings.6 Sahu v. Iowa Board of Medical Examiners concluded that “if an administrative proceeding is in the public interest, such as disciplinary proceedings against a medical professional, courts will not apply the general statute of limitations.”7 Therefore, “courts have held without exception that in the absence of a statute which applies specifically to medical license revocation proceedings, statutes of limitations do not apply to such disciplinary proceedings.”8It is a well-established proposition that procedural due process requires notice and the opportunity to be heard in a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.9 Due process applies when the government seeks to deny a person of a property or liberty interest.10 Physicians have a property interest in their license. Therefore, due process applies to disciplinary proceedings. As one court stated, “[i]t is fundamentally unfair to make a physician defend a nine-year-old complaint when the complaint was not delayed by fraud or the lack of ability to discover the misconduct. To hold otherwise would be to hold that there is no constitutional outer time limit, and we will not do that. Due process is the New Hampshire Constitution's version of the principles of equity, and application of a laches-type doctrine is deemed a part of the process due a person whose economic life and professional career are on the line.”11Precatory language in statutes and regulations is merely a set of recommendations. Precatory language does not create an imperative obligation. Mandatory language in a statute or regulation establishes a duty that the agency must follow. Generally, if the statute does not contain a consequence for the agency's failure to act, then the statute is precatory. If the statute does contain a repercussion for failure to act, then the statute is mandatory.12One court concluded that a legislature, in implementing timeframes, could not have meant for the state to lose jurisdiction.13 Here as elsewhere the public policy of public protection predominates over an individual's desire for a quick resolution.Lake Havasu City v. Arizona Dept. of Health Services established that “uses of the word ‘shall’ in statutes and rules does not mean the language is mandatory because such a construction would undermine the authority of the government.”14 In holding that the secretary of labor, who failed to investigate a claim within a statutory timeframe, did not bar him from continuing with the case, the Supreme Court provided several factors for determining when timeframes divest agencies from acting outside a legislative timeframe. These are legislative history, the statutory consequences for failure to act within the period and the availability of less drastic remedy.15Thus, as established in Sierra Pacific Industries v. Lyng, “[a] statutory time limit is not mandatory unless it both expressly requires an agency or public official to act within a particular period and specifies a consequence for failure to comply with the provision.”16 Nonetheless, even if the language is precatory, laches may still apply.Equitable estoppel is used when a party seeks to enforce a right or perform a duty after the other party has relied upon the inaction. Equitable estoppel requires proof of reliance upon another's conduct to one's detriment.17 Brown v. State Personnel Board found that “The policy to expedite justice underlying the rule exists where the proceeding is before a local administrative agency exercising quasi-judicial functions such as the board… Thus, the administrative agency must diligently pursue the disciplinary action as if it were seeking equitable relief. In measuring diligence the courts will apply notions of laches borrowed from the civil law.”18 Estoppel is very similar to laches; however, laches is the better method for analyzing stale claims. Equitable estoppel focuses on detrimental reliance, while laches focuses on delay and prejudice.Laches is an “equitable doctrine premised on unreasonable delay in asserting a right, which causes disadvantage or prejudice to another.”19 Laches cannot be inferred by the passage of time alone. It must be determined from all of the circumstances of the case, one of which must be the existence of harm caused by the delay. According to Bash v. Board of Medical Practice, “The party asserting laches bears the burden of proving both that the delay was unreasonable and that prejudice resulted from the delay.”20In the administrative law arena, statutes of limitation do not apply, and it is not clear if the doctrine of laches applies. On the one hand, “[laches] has been made applicable to quasi-adjudicative proceedings as a common law policy pursuant to the inherent power of the courts.”21 On the other hand, as in State v. Josefsberg, “the contrary has been held, by the weight of authority, the defense of laches is not available against the government, state or national, in a suit by it to enforce a public right or to protect a public interest…”22If laches applies, the public may be exposed to harm because the board would be stopped from proceeding with the case. If laches does not apply, however, a physician may have to defend against charges that are many years old. In calculating the time to apply to laches, the party must look at both the time it took for the complainant to complain and the time it took for the agency to act upon the complaint.23The first element in demonstrating laches applies is unreasonable delay. What makes the delay unreasonable in the case of laches is that it results in prejudice.24 As noted in Brown v. State Personnel Board: “It is said, ‘[t]here is no fixed rule as to the circumstances that must exist or as to the period of time which must elapse before the doctrine of laches can be appropriately applied.’”25 Ordinarily delay alone does not constitute laches. “Thus ‘[d]elay is not a bar unless it works to the disadvantage or prejudice of other parties.’”26In Stebbins, the court rejected an insurance salesman's argument that he was denied a “speedy trial” because of a 10-month delay while the State Insurance Commission investigated a complaint against him before filing a charge.27 The court agreed that the investigation could have been conducted more expeditiously. As noted in Caldwell v. State Bar: “However, petitioner has cited no cases, nor have we found any, which invalidate an administrative decision solely on the ground that there was a period of unreasonable delay during an agency investigation that preceded the initiation of formal proceedings.”28However, the courts, using their inherent authority, have applied laches to quasi-judicial administrative actions.29 Therefore, the delay must be unreasonable, but delay by itself is not sufficient to apply laches to an agency action or inaction.The second element in demonstrating that laches applies is prejudice because of the delay. Prejudice “cannot be inferred merely from the passage of time.”30 As established in Brown v. State Personnel Board: “Because of the relationship between prejudice and delay, the circumstances which give rise to laches vary widely depending upon their interplay in the specific case.”31 Miller v. Eisenhower Medical Center viewed it this way: “Prejudice is never presumed; rather it must be affirmatively demonstrated by the defendant in order to sustain his burdens of proof and the production of evidence on the issue.”32Excuse is a defense against a laches claim. Occasionally a state agency may have a compelling excuse as to why a significant amount of time elapsed between receiving the complaint and filing charges. Brown v. State Personnel Board found that “In order to excuse delay, [the responsible party] must show exceptional circumstances prevented earlier action.”33 In Sahu, “the Board properly delayed filing the complaint during the pendency of the federal criminal charges, the disciplinary proceeding was commenced within a reasonable time after the conclusion of the criminal trial.”34 Therefore, excuse provides a valid response to a laches claim.Agency mistake may excuse delay. Fahmy v. Medical Board of California noted: “It is matter of common knowledge that statutes of limitation do not run against the State. That no laches can be imputed to the king, and that no time can bar his rights, was the maxim of the common law, and was founded on the principle of public policy, that as he was occupied with the cares of government he ought not to suffer from the negligence of his officers and servants.”35The principle applies to state and national governments, which necessarily act through its agents to preserve the public's interests.36 U.S. v. Nashville stated: “It is settled beyond doubt or controversy, upon the foundation of the great principle of public policy…which forbids that the public interests should be prejudiced by the negligence of the officers or agents to whose care they are confided…”37Lake Havasu City v. Arizona Department of Health Services established that “The United States Supreme Court [held] that there is and must be a strong public policy against allowing the mistakes of an agency or employee to limit the government's ability to enforce its laws.”38 And Brock v. Pierce County noted “We would be most reluctant to conclude that every failure of an agency to observe a procedural requirement voids subsequent agency action, especially when important public rights are at stake.”39The government acts within its sovereign authority when it acts to protect the public. Galang v. State Medical Examining Board concluded: “It is well established that the objectives of professional discipline include the rehabilitation of the licensee, the protection of the public, and deterrence to other licensees from engaging in similar conduct.”40 Thus, when the state regulates the medical profession, it is acting in its sovereign capacity and for the public good.41When acting in its sovereign capacity, laches is not a defense. The court has noted the general principle of laches on the part of the government in bringing suit is not to be a defense in the case of a claim which is founded on a sovereign right and held that since this action was brought by the state in its sovereign capacity to protect a public right, the doctrine of laches was not available.42 These are all within the states' sovereign authority to protect the public. Thus, a medical board's disciplinary proceeding should not be barred by laches.Even when, as noted in Webb v. West Virginia Board of Medicine, “there [are] circumstances in a physician discipline proceeding when…a substantial degree of prejudice to a physician that is caused by an unreasonable delay not of the physician's making might nevertheless be outweighed by the strong interests of the state, the public and the profession in fully addressing allegations of serious professional misconduct — so as to tip the equitable balance in favor of continuing with a proceeding.”43Fahmy v. Medical Board of California concluded: “There is without a doubt a realization on the part of the Legislature that administrative agencies such as the Medical Board take action for the public welfare rather than for their own financial gain, and should not be hampered by time limits in the execution of their duty to take protective remedial action. That is particularly true in the case of the Medical Board, which is charged with protecting the lives and health of the citizenry from incompetent or grossly negligent medical practitioners. It is apparent that the Legislature wishes to have the Board protect California patients from physicians who are incapable of providing appropriate services in life or death situations, regardless of how long it takes the Board to act.”44Although its application is rare, occasionally laches is successfully applied in administrative cases. There can be no doubt that time does not bar a sovereign entity when it is acting to protect the public. State government protects the public through medical and osteopathic boards. Therefore, the state boards are just one means for the government to exercise its sovereign authority. Thus, laches should not apply to state board administrative proceedings. The centuries-old axiom Nullum Tempus Occurrit Regi — No Time Runs Against the King — should continue to be the rule.

Pierre‐Michel Menger

Cultural policy in Europe is deeply rooted in the Welfare State doctrine that has been prevailing during the last half century. Its implementation has gone along with the invention and rise of educational policy, social policy and health policy. This paper sketches its evolution as a four phase move towards what has been emerging as the central dual content of the current public cultural policy: preserving and promoting heritage, and bringing the creative industries at the core of the so-called knowledge society. The general evolutionary trend shows four distinct phases: 1) the creation of a systematic cultural supply policy based on a limited definition of culture suitable for public financing and based on a vertical concept of democratization by conversion; 2) the gradual decentralization of public action, which leads to an increasing disparity in its aims and functions, and which challenges the initial universalist, top-down egalitarian model; 3) a revision of the legitimate scope of public action, which declares symbolically obsolete the founding hierarchy of cultural politics, that which would oppose high culture, protected from market forces and entertainment culture and governed by the laws of the industrial economy; 4) an increasing tendency to justify cultural policy on the basis of its contribution to economic growth and to the balance of national social diversity, which legitimises the regulatory power of public action as well encouraging the expansion of the creative industries and the demands for the evaluation of procedures and results. The last section of this paper moves away from the state centered perspective and focuses on the city as the incubator of cultural generativity, in order to suggest how a city-centered approach to cultural development challenges the state-centered doctrine of cultural policy.

Randall M. Livingstone

Although I'm a rich white guy, I'm also a feminist anti-racism activist who fights for the rights of the poor and oppressed. (Carl Kenner)Systemic bias is a scourge to the pillar of neutrality. (Cerejota)Count me in. Let's leave the bias to the mainstream media. (Orcar967)Because this is so important. (CuttingEdge)These are a handful of comments posted by online editors who have banded together in a virtual coalition to combat Western bias on the world’s largest digital encyclopedia, Wikipedia. This collective action by Wikipedians both acknowledges the inherent inequalities of a user-controlled information project like Wikpedia and highlights the potential for progressive change within that same project. These community members are taking the responsibility of social change into their own hands (or more aptly, their own keyboards).In recent years much research has emerged on Wikipedia from varying fields, ranging from computer science, to business and information systems, to the social sciences. While critical at times of Wikipedia’s growth, governance, and influence, most of this work observes with optimism that barriers to improvement are not firmly structural, but rather they are socially constructed, leaving open the possibility of important and lasting change for the better.WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias (WP:CSB) considers one such collective effort. Close to 350 editors have signed on to the project, which began in 2004 and itself emerged from a similar project named CROSSBOW, or the “Committee Regarding Overcoming Serious Systemic Bias on Wikipedia.” As a WikiProject, the term used for a loose group of editors who collaborate around a particular topic, these editors work within the Wikipedia site and collectively create a social network that is unified around one central aim—representing the un- and underrepresented—and yet they are bound by no particular unified set of interests. The first stage of a multi-method study, this paper looks at a snapshot of WP:CSB’s activity from both content analysis and social network perspectives to discover “who” geographically this coalition of the unrepresented is inserting into the digital annals of Wikipedia.Wikipedia and WikipediansDeveloped in 2001 by Internet entrepreneur Jimmy Wales and academic Larry Sanger, Wikipedia is an online collaborative encyclopedia hosting articles in nearly 250 languages (Cohen). The English-language Wikipedia contains over 3.2 million articles, each of which is created, edited, and updated solely by users (Wikipedia “Welcome”). At the time of this study, Alexa, a website tracking organisation, ranked Wikipedia as the 6th most accessed site on the Internet. Unlike the five sites ahead of it though—Google, Facebook, Yahoo, YouTube (owned by Google), and live.com (owned by Microsoft)—all of which are multibillion-dollar businesses that deal more with information aggregation than information production, Wikipedia is a non-profit that operates on less than $500,000 a year and staffs only a dozen paid employees (Lih). Wikipedia is financed and supported by the WikiMedia Foundation, a charitable umbrella organisation with an annual budget of $4.6 million, mainly funded by donations (Middleton).Wikipedia editors and contributors have the option of creating a user profile and participating via a username, or they may participate anonymously, with only an IP address representing their actions. Despite the option for total anonymity, many Wikipedians have chosen to visibly engage in this online community (Ayers, Matthews, and Yates; Bruns; Lih), and researchers across disciplines are studying the motivations of these new online collectives (Kane, Majchrzak, Johnson, and Chenisern; Oreg and Nov). The motivations of open source software contributors, such as UNIX programmers and programming groups, have been shown to be complex and tied to both extrinsic and intrinsic rewards, including online reputation, self-satisfaction and enjoyment, and obligation to a greater common good (Hertel, Niedner, and Herrmann; Osterloh and Rota). Investigation into why Wikipedians edit has indicated multiple motivations as well, with community engagement, task enjoyment, and information sharing among the most significant (Schroer and Hertel). Additionally, Wikipedians seem to be taking up the cause of generativity (a concern for the ongoing health and openness of the Internet’s infrastructures) that Jonathan Zittrain notably called for in The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It. Governance and ControlAlthough the technical infrastructure of Wikipedia is built to support and perhaps encourage an equal distribution of power on the site, Wikipedia is not a land of “anything goes.” The popular press has covered recent efforts by the site to reduce vandalism through a layer of editorial review (Cohen), a tightening of control cited as a possible reason for the recent dip in the number of active editors (Edwards). A number of regulations are already in place that prevent the open editing of certain articles and pages, such as the site’s disclaimers and pages that have suffered large amounts of vandalism. Editing wars can also cause temporary restrictions to editing, and Ayers, Matthews, and Yates point out that these wars can happen anywhere, even to Burt Reynold’s page.Academic studies have begun to explore the governance and control that has developed in the Wikipedia community, generally highlighting how order is maintained not through particular actors, but through established procedures and norms. Konieczny tested whether Wikipedia’s evolution can be defined by Michels’ Iron Law of Oligopoly, which predicts that the everyday operations of any organisation cannot be run by a mass of members, and ultimately control falls into the hands of the few. Through exploring a particular WikiProject on information validation, he concludes:There are few indicators of an oligarchy having power on Wikipedia, and few trends of a change in this situation. The high level of empowerment of individual Wikipedia editors with regard to policy making, the ease of communication, and the high dedication to ideals of contributors succeed in making Wikipedia an atypical organization, quite resilient to the Iron Law. (189)Butler, Joyce, and Pike support this assertion, though they emphasise that instead of oligarchy, control becomes encapsulated in a wide variety of structures, policies, and procedures that guide involvement with the site. A virtual “bureaucracy” emerges, but one that should not be viewed with the negative connotation often associated with the term.Other work considers control on Wikipedia through the framework of commons governance, where “peer production depends on individual action that is self-selected and decentralized rather than hierarchically assigned. Individuals make their own choices with regard to resources managed as a commons” (Viegas, Wattenberg and McKeon). The need for quality standards and quality control largely dictate this commons governance, though interviewing Wikipedians with various levels of responsibility revealed that policies and procedures are only as good as those who maintain them. Forte, Larco, and Bruckman argue “the Wikipedia community has remained healthy in large part due to the continued presence of ‘old-timers’ who carry a set of social norms and organizational ideals with them into every WikiProject, committee, and local process in which they take part” (71). Thus governance on Wikipedia is a strong representation of a democratic ideal, where actors and policies are closely tied in their evolution. Transparency, Content, and BiasThe issue of transparency has proved to be a double-edged sword for Wikipedia and Wikipedians. The goal of a collective body of knowledge created by all—the “expert” and the “amateur”—can only be upheld if equal access to page creation and development is allotted to everyone, including those who prefer anonymity. And yet this very option for anonymity, or even worse, false identities, has been a sore subject for some in the Wikipedia community as well as a source of concern for some scholars (Santana and Wood). The case of a 24-year old college dropout who represented himself as a multiple Ph.D.-holding theology scholar and edited over 16,000 articles brought these issues into the public spotlight in 2007 (Doran; Elsworth). Wikipedia itself has set up standards for content that include expectations of a neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and the publishing of no original research, but Santana and Wood argue that self-policing of these policies is not adequate:The principle of managerial discretion requires that every actor act from a sense of duty to exercise moral autonomy and choice in responsible ways. When Wikipedia’s editors and administrators remain anonymous, this criterion is simply not met. It is assumed that everyone is behaving responsibly within the Wikipedia system, but there are no monitoring or control mechanisms to make sure that this is so, and there is ample evidence that it is not so. (141) At the theoretical level, some downplay these concerns of transparency and autonomy as logistical issues in lieu of the potential for information systems to support rational discourse and emancipatory forms of communication (Hansen, Berente, and Lyytinen), but others worry that the questionable “realities” created on Wikipedia will become truths once circulated to all areas of the Web (Langlois and Elmer). With the number of articles on the English-language version of Wikipedia reaching well into the millions, the task of mapping and assessing content has become a tremendous endeavour, one mostly taken on by information systems experts. Kittur, Chi, and Suh have used Wikipedia’s existing hierarchical categorisation structure to map change in the site’s content over the past few years. Their work revealed that in early 2008 “Culture and the arts” was the most domin

Caroline Ayres Teichner

The Federal Circuit's liberal treatment of the patent false-marking statute, 35 U.S.C. § 292, has created a climate in which opportunistic qui tam plaintiffs facing a low burden of proof can recover potentially enormous sums of money under the statute with no showing of competitive injury. This note argues that the Federal Circuit erred by ruling that plaintiffs must prove the key element of false-marking claims—namely, intent to deceive the public—by a mere preponderance of the evidence, and further contends that the court should have adopted the clear and convincing standard instead. Support for this elevated burden of proof can be found in courts' historical treatment of the false-marking statute, the legislative history and policy rationales underlying § 292, and analogous legal contexts. More crucially, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment mandates a higher burden of proof to protect the important interests at stake for false-marking defendants.

Héctor Pastén, Thanases Pheidas, Xavier Vidaux

No abstract is available for this record.

Helga Varden

Kant's example of lying to the murderer at the door has been a cherished source of scorn for thinkers with little sympathy for Kant's philosophy and a source of deep puzzlement for those more favorably inclined. The problem is that Kant seems to say that it is always wrong to lie—even to a murderer asking for the whereabouts of his victim—and that if one does lie and despite one's good intentions the lie leads to the murderer's capture of the victim, then the liar is partially responsible for the killing of the victim. If this is correct, then Kant's account seems not only to require us to respect the murderer more than the victim, but also that somehow we can be responsible for the consequences of another's wrongdoing. After World War II our spontaneous, negative reaction to this apparently absurd line of argument is made even starker by replacing the murderer at the door with a Nazi officer looking for Jews hidden in people's homes. Does Kant really mean to say that people hiding Jews in their homes should have told the truth to the Nazis, and that if they did lie, they became co-responsible for the heinous acts committed against those Jews who, like Anne Frank, were caught anyway? Because this is clearly what Kant argues, the critics continue, his discussion of lying to the murderer brings out the true, dark side not only of Kant's universalistic moral theory but also of Kant himself. We get the gloomy picture of a stubborn, old academic who refuses to see the inhumane consequences of his theory, and instead grotesquely defends the inhumane by turning it into an a priori, moral command. In this paper, I argue that Kant's discussion of lying to the murderer at the door has been seriously misinterpreted. My suggestion is that this is primarily a result of the fact that the Doctrine of Right with its conception of rightful, external freedom has been given insufficient attention in Kant interpretation. It is in the Doctrine of Right that Kant discusses rightful interaction in the empirical world. Hence it is in this work we find many of the arguments needed not only to understand his analysis of lying to the murderer in “On a Supposed Right to Lie from Philanthropy,” but also to analyze the added complexity the Nazi officer brings to the example. When we interpret lying to the murderer in light of Kant's discussion in the Doctrine of Right, we can make sense of why lying to the murderer, although a wrong, is not to wrong the murderer, why we become responsible for the bad consequences of the lie, and finally why lying is to do wrong in general. The account of rightful freedom provided in the Doctrine of Right also makes it possible to see why replacing the murderer with a Nazi officer adds philosophical complexity rather than just one more reason to reject Kant's view. The introduction of the Nazi officer requires us to consider the role of a public authority in ensuring rightful relations in general and what happens to the analysis of lying when rightful interactions as a matter of fact are no longer possible. We will see that the only time doing wrong in general by lying is legally punishable is when we lie to or as a representative of the public authority. The Nazis, however, did not represent a public authority on Kant's view and consequently there is no duty to abstain from lying to Nazis. Two further strengths of Kant's account, I propose in the final sections of the paper, lie in its ability to critique how European legal systems aimed to deal with the Nazis after the and in its to our of the of Kant's “On a Supposed Right to Lie from Right to is a to a by in Kant by to The moral is a duty to the if and make We have of this in the consequences from this by a who as to that it be a to lie to a murderer who us a of is has in our It is a duty to the The of duty is from the of duty is that on the of one to the of there are no there are no the truth is a but only to one who has a to the no one has a to a truth that against Kant that if it is always wrong to lie, then is by I that it be to against In or not lying is wrong on the that to we are do not have a to the truth and no one has the duty to the against lying to should not be a The of Kant in the introduction is in line with general on In of it Kant's to in the Right to as more for the if one were to a of Kant's that to the one is to the if have by a lie just on from the then are legally for the consequences that from if have to the then public can against the consequences It is possible after have to the murderer's as to his is at the has out that not the murderer and the not be but if and that is not at and has out are not of that the murderer and his on then can by be as the of his if told the truth to the of then have and the murderer the for his and the have been one who a lie, be responsible for its consequences even a and the for they have for is a duty that be as the of to be on the of is made and if even the to it is be in is a of reason one not to be by to the we should view Kant's to the provided for his account of the moral in In this we that moral be on a that can be and that we do the it is the to from When this the Right to like the one is as it how one to lie as the of lying be and it out the of this moral with to people's and against one Because lying is not a Kant is as lying to the murderer is a of it is this mean not only that one lie to a of the murderer at the but also not to the of as the Nazis. to Nazis is also a are no to the truth be make even in the Kant can be as that if lie despite the of doing are also legally responsible for the bad consequences of the for if the hiding in out are lying to the and as the Nazi from the then are partially responsible for what happens to the even if it not this analysis is clearly absurd and If this is Kant has to say the the critics then the with of reason is the of the of Kant's argument in the Right to and despite the of I it be it seems that an that on of general is wrong, Kant the that is the argument to a discussion of or what Kant in the in the Kant discusses only how lying to the murderer should be from the of view of how public should to Kant discusses and from in this In the only Kant to and to that is not with but only with or in The of Kant of and of and the that is an of general in the and the Kant as with people's of and of their in the people's of on from is to what can in be of external and in the is to what in be of what is one to do although external freedom and freedom freedom as for the view that is an of our or a of our one example of example I to the of lying is not Kant the that not lying or truth as is an duty of the reason is that do in have the fact that and the make Kant as an also a if Kant is wrong, it is that of philosophy that the as a of his theory as The will be to Kant an interpretation. is there an more of Kant on the of turning to what I is the and also and more of Kant's on why of Kant's account of the problem of lying to the murderer are by the one that on Kant's account have to people's just they is to from the the murderer to as it is of his who is in his The is that Kant's account of truth that one has a duty to to just to and that one has no to it is to to the problem by that on Kant's account we can is in the but are not into The then by that if the murderer has with the and the matter of in a public of it is that do not us to that we can lie to the murderer at the are out by the in Kant the example. Kant the at when an of or has the to be The is is to be in a is to make by an in to a to or to Kant that is in is into to to or and in the the door does not have the of asking the murderer to also of to get out of the problem to the that one does not the is in the After one be the is in the and one argue that one can say that one does not Kant also out this in the of the Kant that at is not a to the as this is to that it is a matter of one's will a given is to be or is what is at is or truth to the of if to the of the is in then the is that the is in We that Kant's analysis of lying to the murderer at the door in the Right to is an analysis of the problem from the of view of or and not from that of or and in sense does Kant mean that lying is wrong and punishable from the of view of see us attention to the in lying is and is not a wrong to Kant's Doctrine of In this Kant that is with a to or a to from by another's as it of external can with the freedom of in with a Kant's theory of to is to and one's in and with to do the on Kant's account, to lie as is not to wrong from the of view of do not have a against that the if they they have an to what is and this is with to in to what Kant the that a has a against that the against Kant that with to the of or not a has a against that the it is or not the truth does not have a against that the In the to the Doctrine of Kant the by that the to freedom is to be to do to that does not in what is as they do not to as his to or what is and or and for it is to they to or in general do not have on Kant's view. we will to the general is that I to by I can say I a lie, by I of what is they after what I a and the of view of do not wrong by to of or by lying to it is to what to with and in what say is or as in the of the murderer at the if into a from this not the is why Kant in the Right to as that the of the murderer at the door one to It is an the murderer at the door does not have a to and to get it lie as is not to wrong from the of view of lying as is not a as a of external freedom ability to and of with In lying does not that to and it does not of external is also from the of view of the only lying as is a wrong against are when the lie of rightful and when it is of a In the lie to of that to or that not be to in are acts of as they of the that is to the external In a of a is of rightful by public for the has are to or has are the the or as if it were in the of instead of a or the liar it as of is to and not only the but also is a punishable In light of the we can in the Right to Kant does not argue that lying to the murderer at the door is a it the of Kant's Kant that lying to the murderer is to a against the the murderer does not have a to by into the of the murderer and the the murderer is the one the not the Kant's account does not for the liar does do wrong, even it is not against the Kant that the liar when The duty not to lie is not a duty of we against say the murderer, but a duty one of us has Kant this also by that by lying in fact wrong no I the of with respect to in general do wrong not I do not wrong in but I wrong by a of rightful interaction in than this lying from the of view of however, Kant it as it more by lying one does not wrong but by in a with rightful interactions as makes it to in a with rightful and and also it the even interaction or people and on are with rightful interactions on truth lying is wrong in general as it is with a of rightful even is the is not a wrong of against this it is to one more of Kant's analysis of the murderer at the is to how a public of should consider in the truth or lie to a The is not to as those Nazis and but on how a just legal should an of a to a is that if a to out of the interaction the murderer and his by the truth to the murderer, then a public of for In only the murderer can be the is only to In when a to with to his of the empirical and in this a of the The is punishable for the bad consequences of the the of Kant's us consider a of lying not to a murderer, but to to if for and lying into an is then are partially responsible for the despite no or of the have to with to the of the in and this in what the to are responsible for the bad consequences of as this example to the of lying to the murderer at the it is to not to what Kant is we should that Kant's analysis as on the that a in The in to be a legal to lie to who has in even into have a legal against the that they be in their truth on the of the out of be If this were the then be as the to to into they lie to rather than the to out of it by the Kant that have an to a public can of its a against to be in this can to respect people's to interactions by the a be as a against a hiding in if refuses to in the lying interaction with the In and this is the by to in the by lying the of the victim, the also responsible for the bad consequences of the The reason is that by lying to in a of by a in is to when lie to the murderer, it is not to the murderer capture the the if makes it possible for the murderer to get to his victim, then are legally responsible can by be for bad It after be the that the who into is on to the and the murderer is the to make to to a for the murderer and his victim, even the of the of by that for the bad see more clearly Kant is we the of the who has in from to lie is not a of the consider the in the can in and will lie for to but in fact have do not to lie for In this become an in the when the murderer lie to one's that one will lie to the the truth to the murderer the and then that one told the truth to the murderer, one is not legally responsible for the bad consequences of the lie to one's is not a in one's to out of a be for there be truth the in to out of as that the that will lie, but as a matter of it out to with the murderer, are that the I that Kant say that are not to be also in this to lie on of a be as legal have the against that that are wrong in as even if not be to with the lie is a that by asking even if to do not legal and final the that and and with the by lying to the despite to the to out of the and is caught by the In this the reason why is is not lie, but to to what the of to do or to despite by to the the and the of The reason I attention to is to that in the Kant is only how a public should analyze a in into to and are what to do as the murderer is on the Kant that if to in what by the fact that do it from a good does as for bad consequences from the in do not in the but it what will the the and to or the murderer as is or the in time to the In if to lie be to the legal consequences if is and lie the murderer capture the victim. I Kant's discussion in Right to is primarily aimed at how a public authority should deal with who have from I do not it the analysis of of In it does not the in the murderer at the door is a Nazi In to deal with this we to arguments in the Doctrine of In the on Kant that to in the of is not to wrong but it always in the In light of this account, we will see on Kant's account, the only general by lying can be legally punishable when we lie or public In the on public Kant that the public although is not Kant's conception of the why we the Nazi officer into the the it is one in rightful interaction is no longer possible at The Nazis did not represent the public but its no one an to the truth and the Nazis did not have the to The of rightful did not the European were to and I will argue that Kant's account seems for their the of those who in the Nazi us with the argument the of in the of In the of the Doctrine of Right, Kant an account of the of the of as the Kant that we are the to freedom us a to our In however, that we an account of how we can of as our to and have empirical as our it is to and of our in the to be Kant of external of of and The general in the of the Doctrine of Right how to an account of the and of external of that is with to Kant's rather is that it is to of the of the of we Kant that to and the and of the of in be in the of by the of a public or is it possible to an account of rightful and the of external of Kant the account of by that we have an duty to and that as one to in the of one does wrong in the Because in the of and the of a public authority is of rightful interaction in the empirical world. by a public we we rightful interactions in the world. for our analysis of the Nazi is that just is in the of is no public authority with to and consequently no rightful can there is why Kant does not as of his of just is in the of is also why Kant's analysis in the Right to the of how an public should the problem of lying when the added complexity when the murderer is a it is also to Kant's that to in the of is to do wrong in the Because rightful is as in the of the of is a of wrongdoing. to in this is to reject the of rightful interaction and is why can be to the of it is to that if of the to then they do not wrong one by to in this Because no to with the they to in that are at of is to if happens to on and is then their interactions are of if they do on and to their with then there is of or not there are and by to in rightful by to a public they the of to do the of rightful to do wrong in the if but one to and the one is to the to do then those who to wrong the one and do wrong in the the the to be and to in the of is not as the one does not have the to be or to in this The one to but In this the one does not have for one is to against who with The final of needed we can to the of the Nazi officer Kant's account of public The in the public of the Doctrine of Right is to the of and the in Kant's account of does not result in an conception of Kant that the public authority be as the of public for on the do the is as a authority and the the of on the and finally there be a to the rightful on with the of by public on their public the for its and it and systems that can systems as and It is to how this account of the of a public authority has for when lying legal that in Right to Kant is how public should who lie to is not how a public should deal with lie to public in to the or to in as a public is also not how public should deal with the from people in their as public are the we should from Kant's account of the public authority with respect to of if one is lying to a representative of the public one is not lying to a but to a public The public authority of us and no one in it is not a but a that we have we a to if one to a public officer or one in then one to and not to in or one a rather than if a in as a public in that then a wrong in doing to represent and no one in lying and the people with respect to the of public the public by and to how the public authority should a can no longer be with a public and can be for the public of the in the fact that no longer does the public represent but only the the on this account lying that that is a in is punishable when the lie from the public authority or when the is to the public authority. the lie one a public against the rather than a against I it that the analysis of the Nazi officer is from that of the general of the murderer in that the Nazi officer to be the public authority or the we are legally to abstain from lying to public if the Nazi the public authority on Kant's then one be to abstain from lying to the Nazi even one is to lie to the is not for the Nazi not as a public authority. see why the Nazi be to represent the public authority on Kant's we by Kant's the and the to Kant the of the the and the the of the public of and the in the is by the of public The is a public authority on a to of its to the in of their to their their and their In the of the public authority as a is made with the of The Nazi not a on it and public to of the the it to a legal that not only the of but also the of to their The Nazi did not represent but no one in by on the the and as it not a public authority. is to Nazi not but at Kant in the from a of the or is with freedom and in is and Nazi at its this in to be to the Nazi Kant further from an even is freedom and that the Nazi after the not only not a but is than the the Nazi but aimed at the of rightful for the is not a of one a against as those who in the Nazi in an to rightful relations as It an to a in there is no to freedom at on the is at its as the Nazis were in the of and the European not only in a of but in a of the lying or not to wrong is in fact than the of rightful in by the Nazis in fact of or like the Nazis The analysis does not however, as it is to be that from the of view of the Doctrine of Right the rightful of the of European by the Nazis the that the even the of the of the the were the that interactions the of that the European their rightful in the the of the European legal systems to the of by those who the The and to the were the as those that been and the of the analysis is that it the for a critique of what the European legal systems aimed to the to the of by the committed this by Nazis or as those who in the Nazi and committed public against the the one a Nazi or be legally for committed against the in line with Kant's account the European legal systems did not the Nazis as the and consequently the of against were as of one against the those in the Nazis were punishable for in a against the is to say that they were also to be with their public against the Because the public of in a to the rightful is the of public Kant it for the is no European legal after of its responsible for not in the against the Nazis, for not lying to Nazis. who to out of it by the truth when were and to Kant should not have The reason those who to by were not is that people be legally to to or for to do that are wrong in as lying and I like to by out what I to be further of Kant's our of It is to that there is no to by moral is an of and a duty of and not a duty of to the of however, of acts against a the of as a The people in the in were their by against the Nazis in an to the that rightful were possible in the this is a duty of a duty of to a is not can be legally or to is why many of those who in the were of of after the Kant's account makes sense of why we see as or and that this analysis brings to light an of that more to make good sense to more to are and to capture the moral or those who against it is a fact that of with and and on in the more this is at the After did what they by the on the more it seems that or even to good what one has a of people as good as they or In the view I have can make sense of this to the a of reason why of find their to deal with from their of committed against the Nazis, the did not wrong the Nazis, but they did wrong in the by against rightful interaction and rightful as by a public authority and public they were in their only to with a rightful although they no or for their as they were into their by the Nazis the is at a in the sense of we can be into from there are no even if we to by the there is a moral as it in with rightful many of the their to with is not a of their of but rather a of their to and in rightful interaction I like to and the at the for for their on the and of this also to the at the and to the and at the for their to of this

Honoratha Mushi, K. Mullei, J. Macha, Francis Wafula · 7 authors

Health worker training is a key component of the integrated management of childhood illness (IMCI). However, training coverage remains low in many countries. We conducted in-depth case studies in two East African countries to examine the factors underlying low training coverage 10 years after IMCI had been adopted as policy. A document review and in-depth semi-structured interviews with stakeholders at facility, district, regional/provincial and national levels in two districts in Kenya (Homa Bay and Malindi) and Tanzania (Bunda and Tarime) were carried out in 2007-08. Bunda and Malindi achieved higher levels of training coverage (44% and 25%) compared with Tarime and Homa Bay (5% and 13%). Key factors allowing the first two districts to perform better were: strong district leadership and personal commitment to IMCI, which facilitated access to external funding and encouraged local-level policy adaptation; sensitization and training of district health managers; and lower staff turnover. However, IMCI training coverage remained well below target levels across all sites. The main barrier to expanding coverage was the cost of training due to its duration, the number of facilitators and its residential nature. Mechanisms for financing IMCI also restricted district capacity to raise funds. In Tanzania, districts could not spend more than 10% of their budgets on training. In Kenya, limited financial decentralization meant that district managers had to rely on donors for financial support. Critically, the low priority given to IMCI at national and international levels also limited the expansion of training. Levels of domestic and donor support for IMCI have diminished over time in favour of vertical programmes, partly due to the difficulty in monitoring and measuring the impact of an integrated intervention like IMCI. Alternative, lower cost methods of IMCI training need to be promoted, and greater advocacy for IMCI is needed both nationally and internationally.

Luciane Cristina Feltrin de Oliveira, Marluce Maria Araújo Assis, André Renê Barboni

This study of theoretical revision discuss the Pharmaceutical Assistance in the Basic Units of Health, rescuing briefly the history of the National Drug Policy, the mechanisms of financing in the process of health decentralization and Pharmaceutical Assistance on the Basic Attention to Health. The expansion of the population access to the health system has demanded changes on drug distribution in order to increase the coverage and at the same time to reduce costs. It was identified advances in legal and institutional structures: the management decentralization of actions on pharmaceutical assistance; the expansion of the population access to essential medicines; and the establishment of the pharmaceutical assistance in some cities. However, it still persists priority actions in relation to the financing and population coverage, in detriment of quality processes. The conclusion is that, many Brazilian cities has low availability and discontinuity of essential medicine offer; dispensation by workers without qualification; inadequate conditions of storage that compromise the quality of medicines; medicine prescription that does not belong to the National Reference of Essential Medicines; and problems related to the access of users to the pharmacotherapy.

Helen K. R. Williams

Helen Williams of the London School of Economics attended the recent Talis open day covering all things semantic and how to apply these tools and structures in a library setting. Helen has included links to all the presentations from the day that covered a wide range of topics from making library resources web3 ready and the frameworks and schemas used in the Linked Data movement.

P. Trucco, Diana Tussie

No abstract is available for this record.

Giovanni Di Crescenzo, Javier Herranz, Germán Sáez

No abstract is available for this record.

Agus Tri Basuki

By autonomy, most of resources that managed by central government becomes managed by local government. By decentralization, services to the society will be more efficient and effectively. This paper will analyze how far the response of local income because of change in Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP,) and also the ability of regional finance in regional autonomy era. The result of this paper shows that the coefficient of elasticity of regional income more than one, it means that if Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP) increase one percent, it will increases local income more than one percent. The role of domestic income to local income decrease, it means that the local government has to look for a forward alternative how lo increases the role of domestic income to local income.

Catherine O’Neill

This chapter critiques environmental agencies' use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in the context of a concrete case study: the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) recent regulation of mercury emissions from coal-fired utilities under the Air Mercury Rule (CAMR). It identifies seven issues for regulatory impact analysis (RIA) that the CAMR brings to the fore. Rather than informing the decisionmaking process, the CAMR RIA served to obscure the range and contours of the regulatory options on the table. Rather than providing a neutral tally of are obviously and of the rule, the CAMR RIA enlisted value judgments to assign the impacts of mercury contamination to one side of the ledger or the other. Rather than permitting a complete accounting of these impacts, the CAMR RIA provided an accounting that was partial - in both senses of the term. Rather than laying bare the answer to the question what is at stake, for whom?, the CAMR RIA assessed only those impacts that had been monetized. Its bottom line, moreover, told us nothing about how the costs and benefits would be distributed. Rather than affording enhanced oversight by elected officials and the public, the CAMR RIA dazzled with detail but often obfuscated the considerations relevant to EPA's decision. Finally, rather than helping EPA satisfy its legal mandates, the CAMR RIA provided information that was unconnected to the relevant Clean Air Act provisions, treaties with the fishing tribes, and other legal obligations that constrained EPA's decision. Having identified these shortcomings, the chapter closes with recommendations for reforming regulatory impact analysis - suggestions that echo other recent efforts to envision a more pragmatic orientation for analysis of health, safety, and environmental regulations.

Michael Whitecar

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Introduction From the simplest to the most sophisticated human activities, the power of computing has changed the way we interact individually, socially, governmentally, culturally, and globally. Yet have these influences been for the good or have they been less than positive? This year, we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the implementation of COBOL, a.k.a. Common Business Oriented Language, one of the most well-known of computer fundamentals. COBOL arose from the profound scholarship and industry of Admiral Grace Murray Hopper. Amazing Grace, as she was known, was one of the greatest American pioneers in the history of computer science. COBOL, one of the oldest programming languages, is an acronym for Common Business-Oriented Language, which defines its primary domain in business, finance, and administrative systems for companies and governments. Obtaining her doctorate in mathematics at a time when such academic achievements were not the usual experience for American women, Admiral Hopper was eventually elevated to her Navy rank by a specific honor from the Congress of the United States because of her genius, dedication, forward thinking, and unprecedented discoveries. She was an inventor par excellence whose personal life sustained the price of dedicated scholarship. The reflections and contributions of Admiral Hopper can be found today throughout our information industry. Just as we now develop new software or design new data chips, Admiral Hopper discovered the path to wide-spread usability from debugging software to developing the software engineering disciplines necessary to carry out today's demand for information. Her belief in decentralization opened new thought-provoking collaborative models that have both leap-frogged the advancement of technologies and, ironically, added to the many challenges we face today in managing the application of such new technologies. Reflections and Impact: From Mathematician to Professor, to Programmer, to Icon The many contributions of Admiral Hopper are well discussed in Kurt Beyer's 2009 work published by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Grace Hopper and the Invention of the Information Age. Among these contributions is debugging, a methodical process of finding and reducing the number of bugs, or defects, in a computer program or a piece of electronic hardware, to make it behave as expected. The terms bug and debugging were popularly attributed to Admiral Hopper in the 1940s. While she was working on a Mark II Computer at Harvard University, her associates discovered a moth stuck in a relay, thereby impeding operation; thereupon she remarked that they were debugging the system. Sub-routines, as the name subprogram suggests, behave in much the same way as a computer program used as one step in a larger program or another subprogram. A subroutine is often coded so that it can be started (called) several times and/or from several places during a single execution of the program, including from other subroutines, and then branch back (return) to the next instruction after the call once its task is done. Sub-routines today can be found in many object-oriented programming development models known as classes which represent real world activities and objects. More famously, Admiral Hopper had a strong belief in decentralized management--a process of dispersing decision-making governance closer to the users of software applications. It includes the dispersal of administration or governance in sectors like engineering, management science, political science, political economy, sociology and economics. Decentralization has enormous significance beyond software usage or computer governance. It is fundamental to contemporary organizational systems development and the structures and substructures of institutional life, including universities and research institutions. …

Abderrazak Dhaoui

This paper studies the relationship between R&D decentralization and financial performance. It examines also the impact of this decentralization on earnings management. To specify what does matter in the decentralization of the R&D we try to examine the relationship between centralization or decentralization of the R&D and the firm’s performance on one hand and the earnings management as measured by discretionary accruals on the other hand. We use two internal finance indexes (internal cash flows, internal market capital) and two mechanism of governance (stock-options, institutional investors) to explain the determinants of the R&D’s strategy.Using a sample of 160 U.S. Multinational companies (MNCs) between 2001 and 2006 our results show that MNCs decentralize their R&D for dual goal to improve firm’s profitability or performance and to help manager to manage earnings in their own interest. Moreover, despite the fact that R&D decentralization has a positive impact on performance, institutional shareholders and performance-based compensation encourage managers to decentralize their R&D in order to spur their opportunistic behavior.

Wiktor Owsiak, Olha Prokopiv

This paper presents the significance of the issues related to the activity of territorial self-government for the social and economic development of Ukraine. The efficient operation of self-government in any country is unfeasible without financial resources. Polish experience in the development of territorial self-government is particularly valuable in relation to the reform of Ukraine’s self-government. The paper outlines the differences in the structure and operation of territorial self-government in both countries. The paper is concluded with numerous observations on the direction of selected reforms of Ukrainian self-government. It shows the weaknesses of local self-government in Ukraine, which result from the lack of decentralization of finance and the small amount of state-collected taxes. The conclusions end with the observation that a consistent development of the Ukrainian state is required for Poland to develop well.

Jasmina Omić

Epidemic theory has wide range of applications in computer networks, from spreading of malware to the information dissemination algorithms. Our society depends more strongly than ever on such computer networks. Many of these networks rely to a large extent on decentralization and self-organization. While decentralization removes obvious vulnerabilities related to single points of failure, it leads to a higher complexity of the system. A more complex type of vulnerability appears in such systems. For instance, computer viruses are imminent threats to all computer networks. We intend to study the interaction between malware spreading and strategies that are designed to cope with them. The main goals of this thesis are: 1. to analyze influence of network topology on infection spread 2. to determine how topology can be used for network protection 3. to formulate and study optimization of malware protection problem with respect to topology 4. to investigate non-cooperative game of security We used analytical tools from various fields to answer these questions. First of all, we have developed homogeneous and heterogeneous N-intertwined, susceptible - infected - susceptible (SIS) model for virus spread. This model is used to determine the influence of topology on the spreading process. For the N-intertwined model, we show that the largest eigenvalue of the adjacency matrix of the graph rigorously defines the epidemic threshold. The results of the model also predict the upper and lower bounds on epidemics as a function of nodal degree. The epidemic threshold is found to be a consequence of the mean field approximation. However, slow convergence to the steady-state justifies the application of the threshold concept. We used the exact 2N-state Markov chain model to explore the phase transition phenomenon for two contrasting cases, namely the line graph and the complete graph. The N-intertwined model assumes that the infection spreading over a link is a Poisson process. By introducing infection delay, we studied the influence of deviation from Poisson process assumption on epidemic threshold for the special case of a complete bi-partite graph. Due to the special structure of bi-partite graphs we were also able to derive approximate formula for the extinction probability in the first phase of the infection. In the case of SIS epidemic models, the effects of infection depend on the protection of individual nodes. We studied optimization of protection scheme for different networks. We use the results from heterogeneous N-intertwined model to determine the global optimum at the threshold. Above the threshold, the problem is a sum of ratios fractional programming problem, which is NP-complete. Therefore, we only determine the upper bound on the optimum. Contrary to the common sense, reducing the probability of infection for higher degree nodes pushes the network out of the global optimum. For the case of complete bi-partite graphs, we derive optimal threshold if only 2 fixed protection rates are available. Computer networks are generally distributed systems and protection cannot be globally optimized. The Internet is an extreme example: there is no global control center, and obtaining complete information on its global state is an illusion. To approach the issue of security over decentralized network, we derived a novel framework for network security under the presence of autonomous decision makers. The problem under the consideration is the N players non-cooperative game. We have established the existence of a Nash equilibrium point (NEP). The willingness of nodes to invest in protection depends on the price of protection. We showed that, when the price of protection is relatively high for all the nodes, the only equilibrium point is that of a completely unprotected network; while if this price is sufficiently low for a single node, it will always invest in protecting itself. We determine bounds on the Price of Anarchy (PoA), that describes how far the NEP is from the global optimum. We have also proposed two methods for steering the network equilibrium, namely by influencing the relative prices and by imposing an upper bound on infection probabilities. A quarantine is another possible measure against the epidemic. A quarantine on a set of network nodes separates them from the rest of the network by removing links. The concept of threshold and the N-intertwined model provides a tool to analyze how quarantine improves the network protection. We studied several different networks from artificially generated to real-world examples using the modularity algorithm. The real-world networks tend to show a better epidemic threshold after clustering than artificially generated graphs. The real-world networks have typically two or three big clusters and several smaller ones, while Barabasi-Albert (BA) and Erdos-Renyi (ER) graphs have several smaller clusters comparable in size. However, the number of removed links in a graph using modularity algorithm is unjustifiably high, suggesting that complete quarantine is not a viable solution for real-world networks.