Blockchain Papers

Endre Bangerter

Diese Dissertation befasst sich mit effizienten zero-knowledge Beweisen von Wissen für Homomorphismen. Einerseits\nuntersuchen wir die Effizienzbeschränkungen bestehender Beweise von Wissen für Homomorphismen, andererseits\nbeschreiben wir neue Protokolle, welche diese Beschränkungen zu überwinden vermögen. Die Hauptresultate der Arbeit\nsind die Folgenden:\n- Alle effizienten Beweise von Wissen wurden, vor unserer Arbeit, mittels des Sigma Protokolls erzielt. Wir zeigen auf,\ndass für das Sigma Protokoll inhärente und demnach prinzipiell nicht überwindbare Effizienzbeschränkungen bestehen.\n- Insbesondere waren für die praktisch bedeutsame Klasse von Exponentiations-Homomorphismen in Gruppen unbekannter\nOrdnung (wie z.B., RSA- oder Klassengruppen) bisher keine effizienten zero-knowledge Beweise von Wissen bekannt. Wir\nbeschreiben neue Protokolle, die erstmalig effiziente zero-knowledge Beweise von Wissen für Exponentiations-\nHomomorphismen in Gruppen unbekannter Ordnung liefern.

Frédéric Bachand

This article concerns the ascertainment by judges of normative facts that emanate from within foreign legal orders and must be taken into consideration in the interpretation of domestic rules. The author proposes an analytical approach which is based on three ideas. First, judges must remain in control of the process aimed at ascertaining such facts. Because the interpretation of domestic rules is at stake, they cannot remain passive and rule solely on the basis of the information adduced by the parties, as they normally do while ascertaining the contents of foreign rules under a classic conflict of laws scenario. Second, foreign normative facts are often reasonably disputable, and when that is the case the parties must be afforded the opportunity to comment on whatever information the court intends to rely on while ascertaining the contents of such facts. Finally, the assistance of experts may be necessary in some cases, but full-fledged party-appointed expert testimony will rarely be a cost-effective option. Judges and parties should consider alternative options, such as the testimony of a court-appointed expert or written statements provided by party-appointed experts.

Joseph J. Capuno

This paper attempts to trace and find evidence for the linkages between the quality of governance, and development at the local level since the adoption of the fiscal decentralization policy in the Philippines in 1991. The concern since then over the links has been prompted by the observed persistent imbalances in local development - across and within regions - which many believe is due to the less than prudent exercise of the devolved powers and responsibilities - hence, low quality of local governance. To be sure, the decentralization has led to not a few innovations in local service delivery and financing, and in increased people's participation in local civic activities. However, the spread of innovation has been slow and there has been less than genuine participation in the mandated local special bodies. The uneven quality of local governance thus may have contributed to imbalanced regional growth. Evidence also indicate that the initial level of economic conditions determine the acceptable quality of local governance, which explains why certain poor areas remain in the vicious circle of penury and misgovernance. To help improve the quality of local governance, some policy inputs are suggested.

Aneta Zwierko, Zbigniew Kotulski

The recent developments in the mobile technology (mobile phones, middleware) created a need for new methods of protecting the code transmitted through the network. The proposed mechanisms not only secure the compiled program, but also the data, that can be gathered during its "journey". The oldest and the simplest methods are more concentrated on integrity of the code itself and on the detection of unauthorized manipulation. Other, more advanced proposals protect not only the code but also the execution state and the collected data. The paper is divided into two parts. The first one is mostly devoted to different methods of securing the code and protecting its integrity; starting from watermarking and fingerprinting, up to methods designed specially for mobile agent systems: encrypted function, cryptographic traces, time limited black-box security, chained-MAC protocol, publicly-verifiable chained digital signatures The second part presents new concept for providing mobile agents with integrity protection, based on a zero-knowledge proof system.

Britta Klagge, Ron Martin

In recent years, stimulated by globalization, technological innovation and intensifying international competition, there has been a growing trend towards the increasing institutional and geographical concentration of financial systems and markets. At the same time, there has been mounting academic and policy interest in the financing problems faced by new and small firms, which are widely considered to suffer from a ‘funding gap’. These twin developments provide the motivation for this paper, which seeks to throw some theoretical and empirical light on the question of whether the spatial organization of the financial system impacts on the flows of capital to small firms across regions. Is it the case that a heavily spatially-centralized financial system, like that in the UK, militates against the ready access to capital by new and small firms in peripheral regions, while a more decentralized financial system, like that in Germany, results in a more even regional distribution? The paper first discusses this question theoretically in the context of the regional finance literature. It then compares capital market structures and the regional distribution of equity for SMEs in the UK and Germany. This comparison lends some support to the view that capital markets do not function in a space-neutral way, and that a highly centralized system like that in the UK may well introduce spatial bias in the flows of capital to SMEs. It also shows, though, as the case of Germany illustrates, that the actual impact of the geographical organization of capital markets depends on, and is mitigated by, other institutional and regulatory conditions. Our analysis suggests while a geographically decentralized financial system with sizable and well-embedded regional/local clusters of institutions, networks, agents, and markets could be advantageous in various ways, regional/local capital markets also face a number of major challenges and problems. The paper indicates the need for more research in this somewhat neglected area.

Leif Wenar

The twentieth century saw a vigorous debate over the nature of rights. Will theorists argued that the function of rights is to allocate domains of freedom. Interest theorists portrayed rights as defenders of well-being. Each side declared its conceptual analysis to be closer to an ordinary understanding of what rights there are, and to an ordinary understanding of what rights do for rightholders. Neither side could win a decisive victory, and the debate ended in a standoff.1 This article offers a new analysis of rights. The first half of the article sets out an analytical framework adequate for explicating all assertions of rights. This framework is an elaboration of Hohfeld’s, designed around a template for displaying the often complex internal structures of rights. Those unfamiliar with Hohfeld's work should find that the exposition here presumes no prior knowledge of it. Those who know Hohfeld will find innovations in how the system is defined and presented. Any theorist wishing to specify precisely what is at stake within a controversy over some particular right may find this framework useful. The analytical framework is then deployed in the second half of the article to resolve the dispute between the will and interest theories. Despite the appeal of freedom and well-being as organizing ideas, each of these theories is clearly too narrow. We accept rights, which do not (as the will theory holds) define domains of freedom; and we affirm rights whose aim is not (as the interest theory claims) to further the interests of the rightholder. A third theory, introduced here, is superior in describing the functions of rights as they are commonly understood. Will theorists and interest theorists have erred in adopting analyses framed to favor their commitments in normative theory. This has turned the debate between them into a proxy for the debate between Kantianism and welfarism. Yet that normative dispute cannot be resolved through a conceptual analysis of rights. The third theory presented here is not fashioned to fortify any normative position. Rather, it is offered as a vernacular standard against which to measure the interpretations of rights that various normative theories press us to accept. The ambitions of the article are thus principally descriptive. The first half of the article shows what kinds of things rights are (i.e., all rights are Hohfeldian incidents). The second half shows what rights do for rightholders (i.e., which Hohfeldian incidents are rights). The two halves together complete an analysis of the concept of a right. The analysis here is general. It holds for all rights of conduct: moral rights, legal rights, customary rights, and so on.2 The analysis aims to reveal the logical structure underlying our assertions of rights, while remaining faithful to an ordinary understanding of what rights there are, and of the significance rights have for those who hold them. The first half of the article sets out a modified Hohfeldian framework for explicating the meanings of rights assertions. The thesis of this section is that all assertions of rights can be understood in terms of four basic elements, known as the Hohfeldian incidents.3 There are two fundamental forms of rights assertions: “A has a right to phi” and “A has a right that B phi,” where “phi” is an active verb. We begin by connecting these two fundamental forms of assertion to the four Hohfeldian incidents: the privilege, the claim, the power, and the immunity. In the process it will emerge that each of the two fundamental forms of assertion can also indicate complex “molecular” rights, whose structure will be resolvable into combinations of the four “atomic” incidents. Finally, at the end of this section we show how rights assertions that lack active verbs can be translated into active-verb form. We will then have covered all forms of rights assertions, and will have shown that all rights assertions can be understood in terms of the Hohfeldian incidents. We begin with those rights assertions of the form “A has a right to phi” that indicate the privilege, the first of the four Hohfeldian incidents. A sheriff in hot pursuit of a suspect has the legal right to break down the door that the suspect has locked behind him. The sheriff's having a legal right to break down the door implies that he has no legal duty not to break down the door. For rights like the sheriff’s: “A has a Y right to phi” implies “A has no Y duty not to phi.” (where “Y” is “legal,”“moral,” or “customary,” and “phi” is an active verb)4 The type of right here is what Hohfeld called a “privilege,” which is also called a “liberty” or a “license.”5 The sheriff's right is a single privilege. A right that is a single privilege confers an exemption from a general duty. While ordinary citizens have a duty not to break down doors, police officers have a privilege-right [no duty not] to break down doors. When President Nixon asserted that he had a legal right not to turn over the Watergate tapes, he was asserting “executive privilege.” Ordinary citizens have a legal duty to turn over evidence when subpoenaed. Yet Nixon alleged that because he was President he had a legal right [no duty not] not to turn over his evidence. James Bond's license to kill is also an exemption from a general duty. Bond's (alleged) right exempts him from a duty not to do what civilians emphatically have a duty not to do, viz., to kill. Similarly, your driver's license gives you the right to drive. This right exempts you from a duty not to do what you would otherwise have a strong duty not to do—to operate dangerous machinery at high speeds. We can represent a right that is a single privilege, such as your right to drive, in graphic terms as seen in Figure 1. . The Right to Drive as a Single Privilege In Figure 1 your right to drive a car is displayed as a single privilege. This single privilege is classified according to its function (a single privilege is a right of exemption), and according to the form of its assertion (a single privilege is asserted by expressions of the form “A has a right to phi”). Some assertions of the form “A has a right to phi” indicate not a single privilege, but a paired privilege. A paired privilege is composed of two privileges. The holder of a paired privilege has a privilege [no duty not] to phi, and also has a privilege [no duty not] not to phi. That is, for a right that is a paired privilege: “A has a Y right to phi” implies both “A has no Y duty not to phi” and “A has no Y duty to phi.” (where “Y” is “legal,”“moral,” or “customary,” and “phi” is an active verb) A person vested with a paired privilege is entitled to perform some action, or not to perform that action, as he pleases. For instance, a chess player has the right to capture his opponent's pawn en passant. This right is a paired privilege: the player has a right [no duty not] to take en passant, and a right [no duty not] not to take en passant. The player may take his opponent's pawn, or not, as he thinks best. The function of a right that is a paired privilege is to endow its bearer with discretion, or choice, concerning some action. The chess player's right gives the player discretion over whether to take his opponent's pawn, or to leave that pawn on the board. Paired privileges can be enormously important. For instance, each person has extensive (if not unlimited) paired privilege-rights to move her body, and to use her property. In a liberal society each citizen also has extensive (if not unlimited) paired privilege-rights regarding her speech, association, and religious practice. These paired privilege-rights all entitle the rightholder to choose how to act within some domain: that is, they all specify what the rightholder has no duty (not) to do. It may be noticed that while a paired privilege is composed of two privileges, the function of a right that is a paired privilege is not related to the function of a right that is a single privilege. The function of a single privilege-right is to confer an exemption from a general duty. Yet neither of the privileges that make up a paired privilege need confer an exemption from a general duty. Rather, the function of the two privileges in a paired privilege-right is together to endow the rightholder with discretion concerning some action. The function of the single privilege-right (exemption) and the function of the paired privilege-right (discretion) are entirely independent.6 We can represent the chess player's right in the same space as we represented your right to drive, so long as we indicate that the rights which occupy this space may have either of two distinct functions (Fig. 2). . A Chess Player's Right as a Paired Privilege In Figure 2, “Privileges (not) to capture a pawn en passant,” indicates the paired privilege to capture and not to capture a pawn. This paired privilege-right is classified according to its function (a paired privilege-right is, unlike a single privilege-right, a right of discretion), and according to the form of its assertion (a paired privilege-right is, like a single privilege-right, asserted by expressions of the form “A has a right to phi”). We assert not only that “A has a right to phi,” but that “A has a right that B phi.” This second fundamental form of rights-assertion often implies not a lack of a duty in the rightholder A, but the presence of a duty in a second party B. In such cases: “A has a Y right that B phi” implies “B has a Y duty to A to phi.” (where “Y” is “legal,”“moral,” or “customary,” and “phi” is an active verb) Ignoring the domain restriction “Y,” let us examine the simple assertion “A has a right that B phi” when this implies “B has a duty to A to phi.” The Hohfeldian incident here indicated is the claim. For every claim in A there is some B who has a duty to A. Your right that I not strike you correlates to my duty not to strike you. Your right that I help you correlates to my duty to help you. Your right that I do what I promised correlates to my duty to do what I promised.7 As these examples suggest, rights that are claims can have three different functions. A claim-right can entitle its bearer to protection against harm or paternalism, or to provision in case of need, or to specific performance of some agreed-upon, compensatory, or legally or conventionally specified action. Claims, like privileges, can be of signal importance. Your right against assault, and a child's right to a decent education, and an employee's right to his pay are all examples of rights that are claims. Some rights are privileges, and some rights are claims. Many familiar rights are combinations of both of these Hohfeldian incidents. For example, in the United States arrestees have the right to remain silent. This is a “molecular” right made up of a privilege and a claim. The arrestee's privilege is a single privilege [no duty not] not to speak, which exempts the arrestee from the general duty to obey police instructions. The arrestee's claim correlates to the police officers’ duties not force him to speak, which protects the arrestee from the police (Fig. 3). . The Right to Remain Silent as a Privilege and a Claim Figure 3 displays an arrestee's molecular right to remain silent. On the left is the single privilege: a right of exemption of the form “A has a right to phi.” On the right is the claim: a right of protection of the form “A has a right that B phi.” The privilege and the claim together make up the arrestee's right to remain silent. “A has a right to phi” often implies a privilege, and “A has a right that B phi” often implies a claim. These implications hold often—not always—because each of these forms of rights-assertion can also indicate a different, “higher-order” Hohfeldian incident. We have not only privileges and claims, but rights to alter our privileges and claims, and rights that our privileges and claims not be altered.8 The higher-order incident indicated by “A has a right to phi” is the power. To have a power is to have the ability within a set of rules to alter the normative situation of oneself or another. Specifically, to have a power is to have the ability within a set of rules to create, waive, or annul some lower-order incident(s). I have a right to promise to give you my fortune. Before I exercise this right I have no duty to give you my fortune, and you have no claim that I do. In exercising my power by making the promise, I create in you a claim to my fortune and thereby create in myself the duty to give it to you. Similarly, a judge has the legal right (power) to sentence a criminal to prison, meaning that a judge has the ability to annul the criminal's privileges of free movement. Or again: in a restaurant you have the customary right (power) to waive your claim to be served a sample of the wine before the bottle is poured, thereby annulling the waiter's customary duty to serve you this sample. The power, like the privilege, is indicated by propositions of the form “A has a right to phi.” All rights that are powers confer authority. Rights that are single powers confer nondiscretionary authority. For example, a judge's right to sentence a convicted criminal under mandatory sentencing laws is a single power. The judge's right authorizes her to annul the criminal's right to free movement. Yet this is a single power because the judge has no discretion under the sentencing laws: she must use her authority to sentence the criminal to a specified term of years. A right that is a paired power confers discretionary authority. For example, you have the power to waive, and the power not to waive, the waiter's duty to serve you a sample of wine. Rights that are paired powers, like rights that are paired privileges, endow their bearers with discretion concerning some action. Rights that are paired powers are thus both authorizing and discretionary.9 The rights that are indicated by the form “A has a right to phi” have, in sum, three possible functions: single privileges mark an exemption from a general duty; both paired privileges and paired powers mark discretion within a certain domain; and both single powers and paired powers mark authority to alter the normative situation in some way. Powers can range over the rights of others. Clearly such powers must not be unlimited. The fourth and final Hohfeldian incident is the immunity. One person has an immunity whenever another person lacks the ability within a set of rules to change her normative situation in a particular respect. The immunity, like the claim, is signaled by the form “A has a right that B phi” (or, more commonly, “. . . that B not phi”). Rights that are immunities, like many rights that are claims, entitle their holders to protection against harm or paternalism. A professor has the right to teach and research at her university. A tenured professor has the right that her university not annul her rights to teach and research. The right of tenure is an immunity. The tenured professor's right corresponds to the university's lack of a right (power) to fire her. Similarly, an American's right that Congress not restrict her privilege of free speech protects her against the general power of Congress to impose duties upon her. A witness granted a right against prosecution gains an immunity against being indicted for certain crimes. A defendant who desires to be punished may invoke a right against being required to present evidence that might lead to his acquittal. All of these rights are immunities, and all protect the rightholder from harm or paternalism.10 Figure 4 displays all four Hohfeldian incidents working together within a complex right that you have over your body. This complex right comprises both first-order incidents (a paired privilege and a claim) and second-order incidents (a paired power and an immunity). On the first order, the paired privilege endows you with the discretion to move your body, or not to move your body, as you see fit. The claim on the first order affords you protection; it correlates to a duty in each other person not to touch your body. On the second order are your rights regarding the alteration of these first-order rights. Here we see the paired power that gives you the discretionary authority to waive your claim against others touching your body: your right, that is, to authorize others to touch your body. Also on the second order is your protective immunity against other people waiving your claim not to be touched: your right, that is, against anyone else authorizing others to touch your body. . A Complex Molecular Right As Figure 4 shows, the four incidents are positioned in the diagram according to their attributes. Rights over objects such as one's body are first-order privileges and claims. Rights over rights are second-order powers and immunities. As for the two columns, A's “active” rights on the left are privileges and powers, while A's “passive” rights on the right are claims and immunities. Privileges and powers are exercised, while claims and immunities are not exercised; they are merely enjoyed.11 Moreover, there is an overlap in function between privileges (exemption, discretion) and powers (discretion, authorization) on the left; and an overlap in function between claims (protection, provision, performance) and immunities (protection) on the right. Most rights are complex molecular rights like the one in Figure 4: rights made up of multiple Hohfeldian incidents.12 Molecular rights indicated by the form “A has a right to phi” (where phi is an active verb) will always contain an incident from the left side of the diagram—a privilege or power—although they may contain incidents from the right side as well. Thus the right to move freely is a molecular right that contains privileges (not) to travel about the country; and the right to lead a meeting is a molecular right that contains the power to close a debate.13 Molecular rights indicated by the form “A has the right that B phi” will always contain an incident from the right side of the diagram—a claim or immunity—although they may contain incidents from the left side as well. Thus the right that others respect one's privacy is a molecular right containing a claim against unwanted surveillance; and the right that the government not take one's property without due process is a molecular right containing an immunity against sudden expropriation.14 We have shown how the two fundamental forms of rights assertions can be understood in terms of the Hohfeldian incidents. In both of these fundamental forms of rights-assertion “phi” is an active verb. Assertions of rights in which “phi” is not an active verb but a noun (“Workers have the right to a decent wage”) or in which “phi” is a passive verb (“Children have a right to be educated at state expense”) are easily transposed into active verb forms. Workers have a right that their employers pay them a decent wage, and children have a right that the state pay for their education.15 Explications of assertions of rights containing nouns and passive verbs merge in this way into the explication of the two fundamental forms of rights-assertion. Finally, assertions of broad or indeterminate rights—such as the “right to free expression”—can be specified in several different ways into complexes of Hohfeldian incidents. The different specifications will correspond to different understandings of the right at stake. Indeed one of the virtues of the Hohfeldian framework is its capacity to display in exact terms various interpretations of what people might mean when they assert a broad or indeterminate right like the right to free expression. For example, should a controversial author assert that his right to free has by a to his a Hohfeldian explication will show that the author is not asserting the privilege-rights to by protective claims and immunities. is asserting a claim-right that others the of his expression. This Hohfeldian explication will be in the of the assertion that his right to free has The framework for explicating rights assertions into assertions about Hohfeldian incidents is Any assertion of a right can be translated into an assertion about a single Hohfeldian or into an assertion about a complex of or into a set of assertions about such incidents. All rights are Hohfeldian incidents. The of this thesis is In sample rights, we have Each right can be with one or more of the Hohfeldian and Each right has one or more of the specific functions (exemption, discretion, provision, The is to All rights are like All rights can be into Hohfeldian in this will as we more and more rights with the Hohfeldian and as we to find The may to or that in this is and may to the framework with more sample rights. The a of rights from a which may be for the of that the ordinary of rights is or Yet there is with ordinary The in ordinary is merely like many other such as Assertions of rights can to various Hohfeldian incidents. these incidents have different logical may into they do not the implications of their assertions. For example, it is not for a to assert a right that can only be a privilege, and then on to from this assertion that him a duty. Yet this of is not the of a in ordinary It is a in the understanding of the various meanings of the Ordinary can be entirely and that how assertions of rights the Hohfeldian incidents. The Hohfeldian framework shows that the of rights is not a simple it is the of composed of the of the and the concept of and range over and the concept of and range over lower-order incidents. and are exercised, and overlap in their functions. and are and their functions also All of the rights that we know are from these elements, in ways by the of the All rights are Hohfeldian incidents. all Hohfeldian incidents That is, would any of the four Hohfeldian or any of as A's right it to We might the theory that this the theory of rights. of the theories of the functions of will theory and the interest this theory. to the will theory and the interest theory, some Hohfeldian incidents do not as rights because they do not perform the function that all rights The will theory that only those combinations of incidents that give their holders certain kinds of are as rights. The interest theory the term to those incidents that further their well-being. The will and interest theories are each theories of rights. to these theories all rights have some single the two theories as to what that function theories would the explication of rights assertions in the first of this in which rights have distinct The long and between these two theories through interest and (a will into the In the twentieth century the between of the two theories ended in I as is often the case with this situation is by each side a of a Here I will the to each theory in order to show how each is too as an of the functions of rights, and to indicate how the of each theory is the of the A I is what might be called the several functions theory of rights. The several functions theory what is in the will and interest because it not that all rights have some single function it the of The of a theory of the functions of rights is how it our ordinary understanding of what rights there are and what significance rights have for rightholders. The several functions theory is, I will to both the will theory and the interest theory on these The will theory of rights that the single function of a right is to give the rightholder discretion over the duty of another. A has a right, for instance, because he has the power to waive or not to waive the duties that others have not to his A has a right because she has the power to performance of the or to waive as she As the thesis of the will theory, who has the right is a to the duty is The of the will theory is that it for rights the of over of action. Many rights do endow rightholders with this of discretion, and so serve the freedom of those who hold them. The between rights and so in is for will theorists a of the will on a certain of freedom what he as a right. The will theorist as a right only those Hohfeldian incidents that confer on their bearers the discretion to alter the duties of others. Thus the will theorist as rights only those molecular structures that a paired power (not) to create, waive or annul a claim that one person has against This of the function of rights also a restriction on the of rightholders. The will theorist as rightholders only those that have certain the to exercise powers to alter the duties of others. These the will theory narrow. This is in the range of rights that the theory Many rights, such as the complex right in Figure do a paired power to alter a claim. many do For example, you have no legal power to waive or annul your claim against being or your claim against being to The will theory not that you have a legal right against being or against being to Yet would these claims as rights, as the more rights that Will theorists have to this of in two The first is to restrict the of the theory to a this that the will theory is at the of the with the working of the and is not adequate to rights at the of The second is to to the incidents in as rights by who have discretion with to such as a government who has discretion over whether to a Yet this for always the would with an ordinary understanding of rights. For here the will theory is to that you have no right against being Rather, the right that you not be would be the right, the is the person with the The of the will theory are also in its to for the rights of and of The will theory can rights only in those to exercise powers, which and children are and children cannot on this have This is a at with ordinary would that it is for example, for children to have a right against The will theory in many rights that there Yet where the will theory the interest theory The interest theory holds that the single function of rights is to further their rights are those incidents whose is to the well-being of the As

Rosa Maria Formiga‐Johnsson, Karin Kemper

The paper describes and analyzes river basin management in the most intensely urbanized and industrialized region of Brazil. The area covered by the Alto Tiete basin is almost coterminous with the Metropolitan Region of Sao Paulo. With a drainage area of 5,985 square kilometers (2.4 percent of the state's territory), the basin encompasses 35 of the 39 municipalities and 99.5 percent of the population of Greater Sao Paulo. Population growth and urban sprawl in Greater Sao Paulo have been rapid and uncontrolled in recent decades. In 2000, 17.8 million people lived in the basin and by 2010 the population is estimated to reach 20 million. This massive human occupation was accompanied by the large-scale construction of water infrastructure, including dams, pumping stations, canals, tunnels, and inter-basin transfers to and from neighboring basins. Today, the Alto-Tiete basin is served by a complex hydraulic and hydrological system. Despite this extensive water infrastructure, the water availability of the region is still very low (201 m3-hab-an) and even lower than the semiarid regions of the Brazilian Northeast. The two key management issues to be addressed in the Alto Tiete basin are water quantity to supply a burgeoning population, and water quality which is deteriorating to a point where water availability for a range of uses is severely affected. Urban flood control and mitigation represents another major challenge in the basin. Although important achievements have been made over the past 15 years, the decentralization process - characterized by the creation of the Alto-Tiete committee and its subcommittees and some financing from the State Water Resources Fund - has yet to reveal measurable physical results such as the improvement of water quality or the rationalization of water use. It is undeniable that the Alto-Tiete committee and its subcommittees have already played an important leadership role around several issues. An extraordinary mobilization around water issues, problems, and management has occurred, even though solving many water-related problems may be beyond the capacity of the committees or even of the water resources management system as a whole. Charging for water remains one of the key issues in making the Alto Tiete Committee more relevant and giving it more say in water investment and management decisions. As long as such decisions remain at the individual agency level (both state and municipal), decisionmaking will remain fragmented and it is unlikely that key policy instruments to curb water demand increases and pollution will be implemented.

Shawn D. Knabb, Christiana Stoddard

ABSTRACT Cross-country studies of education and economic prosperity often reach conflicting results when using growth rates as the measure of economic development. However, growth rates lack persistence over time and may not accurately measure long-term economic success over relatively short economic horizons. To overcome this potential specification problem, we estimate the relationship between key education variables and the capital to physical labor ratio. Using both cross-sectional and panel specifications, we find that both the primary-pupil–teacher ratio and decentralized education finance are associated with a larger capital to physical labor ratio. The relationship between human capital and expenditures, private education, and test scores are less robust.

Matthias Zana Naab

Matthias Zana Naab, PhDUniversity of Pittsburgh, 2005This study examines decentralization and democratic local governance in Ghana by assessing the effectiveness of the performance of District Assemblies (DAs) in order to better understand how DAs plan, implement, and manage development activities in close partnership with communities. It applied the proposition that decentralization and democratic local governance are expected to result in more efficient, effective, sustainable, and equitable outcomes through the hypotheses that decentralization results in more effective local government; more responsive local government; local government that is democratic, more accountable, and more participatory; local people having more positive perceptions of government; and local governments providing high quality services that respond to local demands.Engaging in both exploratory and explanatory research, this study identifies important variables and relationships as well as plausible causal networks that shaped local government and governance in Ghana. Using an inductive and theory-building design, it explains a model of decentralized governance and highlights potential partnership arrangements for the effective engagement of Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) in complementing the efforts of local governments.The results of decentralization, interpreted through questionnaires as well as stories and conversations with local people in two Ghanaian District Assemblies, was a combination of success and failure. In the two case study districts, the assemblies have resulted in a slight increase in development projects and services. However, the poor level of local revenue mobilization has limited the ability of the assemblies to finance significant development projects in their districts. Consequently, this has forced the assemblies to depend on the District Assemblies' Common Fund as well as on external donor funded projects and programs and on local people in self-help projects. The analysis of revenue and expenditure patterns in the two districts showed that per capita development spending was low, while recurrent expenditure and spending on local government infrastructure was high. District assemblies and CBOs often remain unwilling partners, and both are faced with serious capacity constraints which militate against structuring effective partnerships for service delivery. The successful implementation of decentralization depends on the degree to which national political leaders are committed to decentralization, and the ability and willingness of the national bureaucracy to facilitate and support decentralized development. Therefore, the ongoing process of decentralization in Ghana must be seen in the broader context of a deliberate redirection and change in the internal regulatory framework of the state.

Guillermo Cortiñas⋆

We consider algebras over a field $k$ of characteristic zero. The article is concerned with the isomorphism of graded vectorspaces \[ H(\gl(A))\iso\wedge (HC(A)[-1]) \] between the Lie algebra homology of matrices and the free graded commutative algebra on the cyclic homology of the $k$-algebra $A$, shifted down one degree. For unital algebras this isomorphism is a classical result obtained by Loday and Quillen and independently by Tsygan. For $H$-unital algebras, it is known to hold too, as is that the proof follows from results of Hanlon's. However, to our knowledge, the proof is not immediate, and has not been published. In this paper we fill this gap in the literature by offering a detailed proof. Moreover we establish the isomorphism in the general setting of ($H$-unital) pro-algebras.

J.M. Marques, Leandro Navarro, Τhanasis Daradoumis

Asynchronous collaborative applications and systems have to deal with complexities associated with interaction nature, idiosyncrasy of groups and technical and administrative issues. Inclusion of requirements derived from them is costly (in time, resources and economically). Existing solutions addresses asynchronous collaboration via simplification of requirements and by using centralized models. In this paper we present LaCOLLA, a fully decentralized infrastructure for building collaborative applications that provides general purpose collaborative functionalities. The provision of those functionalities will avoid applications deal with most of complexities derived from groups and its members, what will help inclusion of collaborative aspects. The implementation of LaCOLLA follows the peer-to-peer paradigm and pays special attention to autonomy of its members and to self-organization of the components of the infrastructure. Another key aspect is that resources (e.g. storage) and services (e.g. authorization) are provided by its members (avoiding dependency from agents not belonging to group).

Richard L. Hasen

In the 2004 presidential election, the United States came much closer to electoral meltdown, violence in the streets, and constitutional crisis than most people realize. Less than a 2% swing among Ohio voters toward Democratic candidate for President John Kerry and away from incumbent Republican President George W. Bush would have placed the Ohio - and national - election for president well within the margin of litigation, and it would have gotten ugly very quickly. Allegations of voter fraud and voter suppression were rampant on both sides, and even though Kerry conceded the election on the day after Election Day, public confidence in the U.S. system of American administration is now quite low. Previously unpublished data demonstrate that there is a growing partisan divide over views of the fairness of the election process.The bad news from the story of Election 2004 is that things likely won't get better in 2008. As Part I details, the extreme partisanship and close division of the American electorate, coupled with the Electoral College system, make the possibility of another razor-close presidential election in one or more battleground states fairly likely. Add to that mix election administration incompetence and a widely decentralized system of election administration with a patchwork of inconsistent rules. What's worse, since Bush v. Gore, losing candidates have become more willing to resort to election law as part of a political strategy: the number of election-law related cases in the lower courts has risen dramatically compared to the period before the case. It all adds up to a recipe for electoral meltdown.In Part II of this Article, I argue for three reforms that could significantly lower the risk of electoral meltdown. First, I advocate registration reform, in particular universal voter registration conducted by the government coupled with a voter identification program. There has been a wide partisan divide in the election administration debate between Democrats who have expressed concern about voter suppression and Republicans who have expressed concern about voter fraud. The registration reform I advocate can alleviate both of those concerns, minimize the potential for and political rhetoric regarding voter fraud, and eliminate a great majority of potential litigation surrounding presidential election administrationSecond, I advocate a transition to nonpartisan election administration. The nonpartisan solution aims to create both the actuality and appearance of neutrality in election administration, thereby bolstering the public's faith in the process. Australia and Canada serve as good models for reform in this regard, though not necessarily their nationalization of election administration. I consider how to assure that U.S. election administrators are truly nonpartisan, and contrast arguments for nonpartisan election administration with calls for nonpartisan redistricting commissions and campaign finance enforcement.Third, I discuss the role of the courts in minimizing electoral meltdown. The key here is to encourage courts to be more willing to entertain pre-election litigation and much more chary of entertaining post-election litigation. To the extent election administration problems can be recognized in advance, pre-election judicial review prevents future harm from occurring, rather than putting courts in the position of trying to undo the bad effects of a past harm. The costs of post-election review are large: the pressure put on courts to decide arcane election law questions when the outcome of an election - especially a presidential election - is huge, and the appearance of partisan decisionmaking is inevitable.

Thomas Döring

In the last 40 years, in public finance the examination of spatial aspects of federalism and intergovernmental fiscal relations was dominated by allocative and distributional issues. Modern growth theory and complementary approaches lead to a shift in the research perspective. Against this background the paper discusses how the findings of modern growth theory can affect the design of intergovernmental fiscal relations. The results of this analysis can be summarized as follows: (1) the existence of a geographically different growth dynamic provides an additional justification for a decentralization of political competences. (2) To cover more exactly the regional economic backward and forward linkages, especially local government authorities should intensify their cooperative behavior. (3) From the perspective of economic growth, the equalizing effect of horizontal transfers between decentralized jurisdictions should be limited.

Jaideep J. Pandit, Steve Yentis

Doctors are expected to keep up to date with the literature, and to change their practice on the basis of what they have read. We believe that the skills needed for evaluating and interpreting scientific papers are often lacking. Even when they are taught, the emphasis is often focused on technical aspects of a paper without consideration of its value, a term we use here to encompass not only the quality of a paper's methods, but also its context and importance. We argue that critical appraisal, the term used to describe the assessment of a paper's methodological niceties [1], should never take place in isolation but must always occur in parallel with assessment of its value, since a paper may be methodologically sound but contribute little to a better understanding of the subject. Here, we discuss various aspects of scientific papers that contribute to or detract from their value, and suggest a stepwise approach for assessing them. The purpose of a scientific publication, of which there are numerous types, is to communicate information. Editorials are summary or personal views, perhaps commenting on a specific paper. Reviews are longer, in-depth analyses of the literature; they are most persuasive when their analysis is objective but their conclusions (as with editorials) are often subjective and personal. Specific forms of supposedly objective reviews are quantitative or systematic reviews, or meta-analyses[2]. Case reports describe one (or more) specific clinical cases, either so unusual as to be of interest, or from which it is hoped some particular lesson can be learned. A letter (correspondence) is a comment on, or criticism of, another's published paper, or seeks answers to a question. A letter may also convey information or data that do not constitute a full study but nonetheless are thought worthy of dissemination. Finally, there are experimental investigations. Broadly, these attempt to answer a question by the use of the ‘scientific method’, which involves the following process [3, 4]. First, the researcher formulates a hypothesis. This hypothesis may represent current ideology (the current theory, or paradigm), or it may be an idea developed de novo (e.g. suggested by preliminary observations). The hypothesis leads to an experimental prediction: if a certain experiment is conducted, then this predicted result should obtain if the hypothesis is correct. A result consistent with the prediction supports the hypothesis, but does not ‘prove’ it (thus scientific proof is very different from mathematical proof). If, on the other hand, the experimental result is not as was predicted, then either the hypothesis is incorrect (so disproved) or the conduct of the experiment was flawed. There are many types of experimental investigations: clinical studies or trials (the terms are often used interchangeably, although the latter is sometimes restricted to investigations of a treatment's efficacy); laboratory investigations; mathematical modelling of data; and some observational studies and audits. We focus here on experimental investigations since these are the papers that advance the knowledge base the most. There are generally two aspects to excellence in an experimental study: first, the study's conduct (of which handling of the data is an inherent part), and second, its presentation. Important aspects of presentation are covered by journals' instructions to authors and by specific publications [5, 6], and we will not discuss these in detail here. First, the study must consider a clear hypothesis that is stated unambiguously, ideally, illustrated by the results that would be expected if the hypothesis were true. The final results and conclusion of the study should relate to this prediction and must either refute or be consistent with the hypothesis. Second, the study must have appropriate ethical approval (or conform to animal research guidelines). We will not consider this issue further, since it has been addressed recently [7]. Third, the technical conduct of the experiment must be sound. Particular attention should be given to the avoidance of surrogate measures, appropriate measurement tools, proper randomisation and blinding, appropriate use of control groups, and appropriate application and interpretation of statistics. We consider each of these below. Surrogate measures or end-points have serious limitations. For example, a study of the control of minute ventilation may not actually involve measurement of this outcome at all, but instead may try to derive conclusions based on the measurement of another, related variable (say, arterial Pco2). The problem is that other factors may influence the related variable (e.g. ventilation is not the only factor influencing Pco2). Furthermore, measures that seem superficially related may not be; for example, although flecainide reduces cardiac arrhythmias, it increases mortality – a much more relevant end-point [8]. Surrogate measures are sometimes used in clinical studies because of the difficulty in measuring the desirable end-point, such as long-term survival. They might also give crude estimates of trends over time for certain variables [9], but they have very little (if any) place in studies that seek to question or overturn fundamental hypotheses in the underlying science. Measuring devices and assessment tools must be valid (measure what they are supposed to measure), accurate (measure the true quantity), and reliable (different users obtaining the same results) – aspects that often escape attention in manuscripts. This is not restricted to technical measurements; for example, assessment of ‘maternal satisfaction’ with the use of a simple visual analogue scale continues widely despite little evidence to support it [10]. When technology is used, coefficients of variation should be given, but rarely are. Further, there ought to be some confidence as to how the technology works. For example, much of the growing literature on the bispectral index (BIS) as a monitor of ‘awareness’ raises concerns. Since it is not known precisely what is being measured by the BIS [11], it can never be known whether an unexpected result has arisen because the BIS is invalid or inaccurate, or because the hypothesis being tested is incorrect [12]. Randomisation and blinding are intended to minimise the influence of bias. The hope with randomisation is that all ‘confounding factors’ (both known and unknown) that might influence the outcome will be distributed equally amongst the groups. If any differences are found they can therefore be attributed to the sole factor – the treatment under study – that has not been ‘shared out’ in this way. However, even with proper randomisation, groups may be unequal: chance alone might result in one group's subjects being older, heavier, younger or just luckier than those in the other group. Even when groups appear equal, small inequalities might combine to influence the results. For example, in a study by Greif et al. [13] into the possible anti-infective effect of peri-operative oxygen therapy, patients randomly allocated to receive extra oxygen were by chance more likely to be fitter and less likely to be smokers, to have inflammatory bowel disease, and to undergo rectal surgery than those in the ‘no oxygen’ group. Could these factors have combined to contribute to the dramatic reduction in infection seen in the ‘oxygen’ group, such that a subsequent study obtained completely the opposite results [14]? In addition, the human urge to guess or manipulate treatment allocations, or otherwise interfere with proper randomisation in studies, is well reported [15]. Blinding is present when the person treating the patient, or making the assessments, does not know which patients receive which treatment. Some studies fail to take even the simplest steps to ensure blinding, while others go to extraordinary lengths (for an example of the latter, see Smith and Thwaites's [16] commendable study comparing intravenous with inhalational anaesthesia). Occasionally, blinding is impossible (e.g. when comparing two different laryngoscope blades or bougies [17]), but the results of a blinded study are always more persuasive. Indeed, studies with insufficient blinding tend to report greater treatment effects than those with proper blinding procedures [15]. Control groups may be inappropriate because of poor randomisation or blinding. Even if these are sound, though, there may be other reasons why treatment effects may be masked or exaggerated by problems with control groups: lack of consideration of other possible ‘confounding factors’; use of historical, rather than contemporaneous, controls; comparison of a treatment against placebo instead of standard practice, or against an inappropriate treatment; or (at worst) lack of a control group at all. Much of the above might give the impression that the testing of hypotheses by close attention to the study's conduct will always give a clear-cut result. Unfortunately, this is not the case, because we can never achieve certainty; the best we can do is use statistical analysis to indicate the degree of uncertainty [18]. A full discussion of statistical methods is dealt with elsewhere [19], and here we consider only two related areas that commonly cause difficulties: significance and power. Significance. If, in a study, one drug appears more effective than another, the traditional approach is to ask the question: ‘What is the likelihood (or probability) that this result is a chance finding, and that these two drugs are in fact equivalent?’ This approach (testing the equivalence, as opposed to testing the difference) is known as testing the null hypothesis. It is important to stress that this null hypothesis assessed by the statistical test may not always be exactly the same as the underlying scientific hypothesis being examined by the study as a whole: the result of the former will help interpret the latter. Many statistical tests ultimately generate a ‘p-value’: the lower the p-value, the less likely it is that the null hypothesis is correct. A p-value of 0.03 indicates that if the two drugs are indeed equivalent, chance alone would be expected to yield the observed results three out of every 100 times one conducted the study. Conventionally, a p-value of < 0.05 is taken to represent ‘statistical significance’, although this value can and should be adjusted in certain circumstances, for example if multiple comparisons are made [20, 21]. Confidence intervals can be used as an alternative to testing the null hypothesis [22, 23]; nonetheless, the conclusions reached by using confidence intervals are invariably the same. The real problem lies in how p-values are interpreted rather than how they are calculated [24]. An entirely different approach is to interpret a study's results mathematically in the context of prior knowledge (Bayesian statistics) [25, 26]. Regardless of the method of calculating or presenting statistical significance, the smaller the p-value, or the further away from zero the difference in confidence intervals, the less likely the result is to be a ‘chance’ finding and therefore the more likely it is that the difference between the two groups is indeed ‘genuine’. But such a chance finding is still possible, albeit unlikely; as Counsell et al. [27] point out, chance ‘…doesn’t get the credit it deserves'. Furthermore, a low p-value does not exclude poor methodology in the conduct of the study. Power. If the p-value in a drug study is, say, 0.07, does this mean there is genuinely no difference between the two drugs? Or does it mean that there might be a true difference, but that the study has simply failed to show it? It is specifically to help answer such questions that a power analysis is useful. The power analysis estimates how likely it is that a negative result can be ‘believed’. One emerging problem is that some researchers (or their critics) are placing far too much emphasis upon power analysis [28]. One example demonstrates the type of misplaced faith in power analysis: ‘…at least 400 patients would be required to prove there is no statistically significant difference between the groups…’[29] (our emphasis). Such statements reveal a poor understanding of the scientific method and of the concept of scientific proof. One reason for our concern is that the concept of power analysis itself has very serious limitations. Power analyses are only crude estimates of a sample size (indeed, the word ‘crude’ is emphasised by statisticians [30]). For example, two main elements that contribute to power for normally distributed continuous data are the difference between the means that is deemed important and the expected standard deviation (SD) of the measure of interest. Both of these are subject to serious shortcomings. The choice of what constitutes an ‘important difference’ is almost entirely subjective, and small but arbitrary adjustments to its value can have a great impact upon a study's calculated power. Where no previous data exist, the expected SD is usually taken from a pilot study, often without a control group, and by definition always smaller and less robust than the planned substantive study. In reality, the power analysis itself is probably best expressed in terms of a confidence interval: for example, ‘Power analysis indicated that we would require 20–60 subjects to be 70–90% confident of detecting a difference between the means of 10–50 s’– although this is rarely done. The crudeness of the power analysis as a tool is reflected in the different sample sizes yielded by different methods. If we assume that for a hypothetical study, the important difference is 1.0 arbitrary units, with a standard deviation of 0.8 arbitrary units, then various calculations give a sample size per group (with 80% power at p < 0.05) of 10 [30], 11 [31], 13 [32] and 18 [33]. So at best, power analysis only gives an approximate estimate of sample size. Indeed, Bacchetti [34] has suggested that a study's power should only be criticised if the study has no other shortcomings; in other words, all other features of a study (especially relating to its conduct) are far more important than its power analysis. In practice, the actual sample sizes of studies are related to the type of outcome, the variability of the result and the statistical test used. We observe that in published studies, sample sizes tend to fall into three groups, though with considerable overlap in which the outcome is and or there is little variability with factors (e.g. laboratory or studies in which experimental can be with use smaller sample usually increases patients are since are to studies comparing have sample in which the outcome is variability is great factors are much sample sizes It is how often studies and their sample sizes fall into these groups. It is to whether this is a of proper power analysis the of each study, whether tend to use sample sizes because of the in their particular of or whether they even the power calculations to yield sample sizes that the study to be a There are ethical reasons for power calculations as well as scientific and we do not suggest that should but given the crudeness of these calculations we help but whether the crudeness of is any It can be seen from the above that studies, despite their not to subjects in advance – as they do on data – are than have to on surrogate measures, using tools that be with little of blinding and of the groups and their The one of studies is the with which very can be So much for a paper's We to a different question: what one paper more than another, proper and attention to their some the answer to this question will always be subjective and upon the interest, and However, we suggest that there are some elements that contribute to a paper's We these as being related to the the type of question addressed and the answer the of the evidence certain aspects of a paper. The of the type of question to its This will on the (e.g. of the person assessing the paper, the significance of the problem being and whether the and appropriate question is being For clinical studies, the of a paper can on the of the change in practice likely to from the the with which that change might and the of such a For example, the that the of and their more and than alternative drugs The problem it addressed of is relevant to a of and is and serious to it a very significant Furthermore, the question was more effective than was stated and appropriate for current knowledge at the The change in clinical practice by the study was and to was predicted to result in a reduction in and mortality Indeed, practice and as a result A particular of the is that it a clear and is more effective than its and we should use it to of The of for the of still in an of great clinical and significance, as many questions as it reduces the of but whether we should give it to all is less certain This example that sometimes the of a paper's conclusion can its as well as the of the question in the in which the answer may a paper's value to the of information For example, a study of the effects of on in the and of the reduction in and other but not the or In whether the reduction in might be or for a particular patient, knowledge of the likely of the best and might be more relevant than how the of patients might be the value of the study is by this the value of the published paper is as a result. For studies in it is perhaps the effect on which is likely to be rather than any For example, in the the of no but certain better than more traditional An example from the of papers that we is the that is a is the finding that is fundamental to this to in a all in which the of the is The in these but there are many less well known For the of a that specific and that is to by the to consider the that this is a if not by which may be at the It is possible indeed to clinical and scientific of The of in are to from to a clinical problem to the a approach to its results would be to consider whether there is a fundamental reason why better than other and that this reason will help more as a However, we must that in related finding the between and clinical is not The of to is not always to and can often be by the to control all the variables in clinical of the type of question which can equally to clinical and is its and – if the study's results can be into an are to the more than and this can sometimes to the of proper scientific by a A example is the of study of the between and in the impact factor – see and then the subsequent of this paper In the scientific a very of the of studies appears to have in upon the type of question This to have been by the with for and we discuss these further below. The of the evidence in a paper first, on those methodological aspects second, on the greater to certain types of study over a by and When assessing the of the would do well to ask (as indeed the should have there possible for these results other than the conclusions methodology and attention to the above aspects may or many of these alternative but the more that and the less the that should be to a of results. This approach may seem an negative but we to of it as a of and for a scale of the of evidence in studies is in The emphasis on as a tool has been much criticised Some have that is, in a of rather than that has no place in scientific studies to test hypotheses The to clinical and not to scientific argue that fundamental hypotheses in can only be addressed with the scientific as by a conducted experiment to test the prediction from the hypothesis, and not by simply the results of different of It is possible that is more for those studies of a drug or or for rather than problem with is that it reports and to the of the of evidence In many areas of in the more such as reports can have a very persuasive effect on an clinical practice, since they are based on clinical and not on trials in which may be masked by into and summary statistics. If a a drug and for example, then that drug may cause the results of a clinical Case reports are for very for very or when they describe unexpected clinical (or We the above term to those aspects of a paper not relating to its scientific or but which nonetheless seem to have an and influence on the in which papers are by the scientific or clinical The the was out is one of these For example, from the of or is likely to have greater impact than of say, a The can be criticised for this the obtain better and can more which in is as more since it from the and so on A related issue is the for authors to their to the quality and they to its importance. A quality is by a the impact factor index of how often papers published are by other the impact factors have some a paper published say, a will have very of its scientific quality and so is to be widely though, impact factors are a poor measure of a and are to by However, some authors and perhaps also the to a paper's by the in which it is The of the authors (or at least one of may also have an A study a current fundamental hypothesis is more likely to be and if a is an It is perhaps that an is to time on Finally, the of a study can influence its importance. A study's support from a (e.g. or gives the impression that the or at least its preliminary has some and that in a it has been discuss this further The of areas for research by the and superficially but may the influence of certain since it is that studies the current areas are more However, aspects can of that the impact of a paper (e.g. when has been obtained from to support a paper relating to research However, such may be and we have how an might critical a have developed by which they or a process of to their which research to the the study is conducted or the that the published from the study will have a value to this the published by which it research It is clear that particular emphasis is given to that have a impact on practice or scientific and to those that are important in terms of or knowledge of The for of each to support research and research and the is the method used to these to the the most The used by although not made seem to place emphasis on the of to by of as those to the in and to papers in impact factor In the they receive to using our impression of the types of paper which seem to more in this are to much criticism and whether they critical is to However, they de the means by which research is If a as on research which does not a value in these then these will ensure (as they are to that the as so will research and research and then it may impossible for that to conduct any research at all. Many authors have how is in such a So while critical of papers by an (or by a might to one by may to a different The for a in this is to consider the to which it to (or of from We have various aspects of a paper that can contribute to its We here by an approach to a paper, based on the a hypothetical of with the the most papers and the the The is to go each paper and at the of the be to place it in the appropriate of the above factors – aspects of the study's conduct of other aspects of its methodology not covered the of the question and the answers the of the evidence and any persuasive factors – should be at intervals when a paper, and each has the to the paper up or to the impression The steps are in this process the paper can be or many times up in its final in two First, every paper will have some value, even if it up in the any a paper should be for what is all a considerable in the current Second, different may place the same paper into different final – but this is a and appropriate of value in any of the paper with or the should be reasons for the paper to a particular and for being in various (or by all aspects of the paper. This it to to others how the process of and is a of discussion and which is a process in We also by our to some One of our is to the value of all any given paper, the should can we further on the approach used to answer the question The specific answer to this will in on the of the paper we have indicated above some of these might However, in to these by a better study or the researcher will the serious problems the as a those related to discussion above two important questions to First, if is so critical to studies to be conducted, then we should not to what we alone value, but also ‘What do the Second, any given which as a there are always a of possible questions we might It is here to specific questions or hypotheses this will the value of our It is possible that for the of to our others place value on hypotheses different from those the has We hope that our discussion above might generate a which answer these two is an of this in in all aspects of the conduct and of is the of the of with the report on the for and Both have of and clinical and have papers that they have been more The above are the and do not of the of the of of and or the of

Jon H. Fiva, Jørn Rattsø

Decentralization of government with property tax financing is the standard recipe for public sector reform. Fiscal competition is assumed to stimulate efficiency and hold down the tax level. Property taxation offers additional incentives for efficiency. We study the incentive mechanisms involved using data for decentralized governments and in a setting where they can choose to have property taxation or not. The empirical analysis addresses whether fiscal competition and political control problems influence the choice of having property taxation. The results indicate that both incentive mechanisms are relevant and consequently support the standard advice. Fiscal competition generates a distinct geographic pattern in local taxation and political fragmentation seems to motivate property taxation to control common pool problems. The main methodological challenge handled concerns spatial interaction with discrete choice.

Kazuhisa Matsui

Decentralization in Indonesia was introduced institutionally in 2001, with a democratization drive promoted by international donors and by the intention of the new government to clear away the centralistic image of Soeharto. Decentralization has had some effects on regional economies and on local government administration. Compared to the period before decentralization, the share of GRDP and local government finance has increased in Java, though investment and bank borrowing have expanded to the outer islands. In qualitative aspects, decentralization has transferred not only administrative authority but also many new vested interests from the center to regions. Local governments have become more extensive economic actors in regional economies. Regional economic actors now compete actively for such vested interests and have missed the opportunity to create market-friendly regional economies. The government sector should not be a mere rent-seeking economic actor, but should play a role as a facilitator promoting private sector activities in regional economies.

Jorge P. Gordín

This dissertation explores the politics of fiscal decentralization in comparative perspective. Case studies of Argentina and Spain are used to provide insights into the way that the distribution of institutional and economic resources in multitiered polities shapes the extent to which the policy of transferring revenue and revenue authority to subnational governments can be exploited for political gain. This approach draws attention to the political conditions that inhibit the coordination of fiscal reform efforts between the different levels of government and perpetuate the financing of subnational spending with revenue collected by the national government. This political context undermines national fiscal adjustment efforts and leads to economic catastrophes such as those experienced in Argentina throughout the last two decades. Specifically, this study uses statistical analyses and empirical institutional theory to show how patterns of territorial representation and bargaining strategies hindered revenue decentralization in Argentina but advanced it in Spain.The research suggests, first, coalition-building goals drive national executives in Argentina to reach out legislators of the opposition by means of allocating larger shares of federal transfers to the provinces the latter belong to. However, all else equal, legislatively overrepresented, i.e. economically marginal and sparsely populated, provinces will be targeted first. Second, the increasing role of regionalist parties in Spanish national politics and their acceptance in joint-policy mechanisms tilts the allocation of chosen federal transfers slightly in favor of economically developed and densely populated autonomous communities, which are generally governed by regionalist forces. Third, whereas Argentine subnational interests are "locked-in" at the Senate level and intergovernmental negotiations are conducted bilaterally, open-ended institutional arrangements and a relatively impotent senate in Spain boosted the redressing of regional concerns through informal intergovernmental fora and increasing multilateral collaboration Fourth, such differences in patterns of institutional representation and bargaining strategies explain the paucity of fiscal decentralization in Argentina and its relative progress in Spain.

イズミ ホシノ, 泉 星野, Izumi Hoshino

No abstract is available for this record.

Florence Eid

No abstract is available for this record.

Omar Khadeer Hussain, Elizabeth Chang, Farookh Hussain, Tharam S. Dillon · 5 authors

Risk is associated with almost every activity that is done in daily life. Analyzing the Risk involved in a transaction is important to decide whether to proceed with the transaction or not. Till now, Risk has been discussed extensively in the area of Investment, Finance, Health, Environment, daily life activities and Engineering. All these areas have different interpretations of Risk, which is not suitable to apply to a transaction in the area of Computer Science. In this paper we focus on defining Risk in a decentralized transaction in e-commerce.

Idham dan Ali Ghufron Mukti

Implementation of decentralized drug policy brings an impact in the form of finance mechanism changes. Before decentralization, drug budget was calculated by the amount of resident and indigent resident percentage. After decentralization, the budget is specified by each regional government according to needs and existing health problems. This change leads to problems of allocation and distribution especially in some areas where Original Earnings of Area (PAD) is relatively small. The allocation is strongly influenced by the amount of Common Allocation Fund (DAU) and the drug manager ability in the area to manage the fund of drugs as efficient and effective as possible to assure the availability and sustainability of health service. The aim of the study was to calculate the adequacy rate of drug cost before and after decentralization and to determine the influence of decentralization itself toward the adequacy of drug cost in the area.\nA case study was conducted using quantitative data and the result was analyzed with regard to drug cost adequacy. The study began with calculating indicator of drug management and drug cost requirement on the therapy of top 10 diseases using morbidity method during 1999-2002. The result was analyzed with ABC analysis and compared to realization of drug cost on the same periode and interpreted to assess the drug cost adequacy before and after decentralization.\nThe result showed that the average of ability on the drugs cost procurement based on comsumtion method to fullfill drug cost requirement based on morbidity method before decentralization was 31,33%, after decentralization increased to 78,51%. And then the average of ability on the drugs cost based on comsumtion method to fullfill drug cost requirement based on morbidity method before decentralization was 15,14%, after decentralization increased to 60,67%. Nevertheless, the increase of fund adequacy and drug cost rate was not significant (p&gt;0,05) between before and after decentralization. It was concluded that although the adequacy rate of drugs cost and fund has increased significantly after decentralization, it was not able to fulfill the requirement up to 100%. In other words, decentralization has not influenced the cost adequacy rate of primary health care drugs in the area.\n\nKeywords: availability –adequacy –decentralization –cost of drugs.

Grzegorz Bywalec

In the literature on the subject of economy there are three functions of public finance&#13;\ndescribed: stabilazing, redistributing and allocating. Effectiveness of realization of the abovementioned&#13;\nfunctions depends to a large extent on the political system of a given country,&#13;\nespecially on the degree to which it is decentralized. In the article the author embarks on an&#13;\nattempt to identify the advantages and disadvantages of decentralization of particular public&#13;\nfinance functions and in effect to show which of the functions can be more effectively realized&#13;\nby the central authorities and which of them can be decentralized that is transfered to the&#13;\nlocal authorities.

Nelson Chalfun

O trabalho discute, do ponto de vista economico, as vantagens e desvantagens que diferentes graus de centralizacao/descentralizacao fiscal e tributaria apresentam para um crescimento economico equilibrado. Para tanto, sao apresentadas as posicoes defendidas pelos centralistas e descentralistas, autores que, baseados nos resultados de suas pesquisas, tendem a se aproximar de um ou de outro polo, no continuum do sistema politico federalista, os primeiros sustentando a concentracao do poder de tributar e de gastar nas maos do governo central, e os ultimos defendendo a devolucao desses poderes ao nivel de governo o mais distante possivel do centro. O trabalho comeca apresentando as relacoes entre o Federalismo e as estruturas tributaria e fiscal; em seguida coloca a polemica entre as duas correntes mencionadas, concluindo com a indicacao dos temas de uma agenda de pesquisa voltada para o estabelecimento de uma estrutura fiscal e tributaria adequada aos paises em desenvolvimento, uma vez que muito da literatura sobre o tema esta voltada para os problemas dos paises desenvolvidos.Abstract This paper provides a discussion, in economic grounds, of the advantages and disadvantages that different degrees of fiscal and tax centralization/decentralization pose towards achieving a balanced economic growth. Accordingly, it introduces arguments and contentions of both centralist and decentralist authors. Based on their research outcomes they reveal a tendency towards a polarized position within the continuum of the political system of federalism. Whereas the former group sustains the concentration of taxation and spending powers at the federal level, the latter advocates the devolution of such powers to the level of government the most afar from the center. The paper starts presenting the relationships between Federalism and fiscal and tax structures; then it analyses the arguments posed by members of the two streams of thought and concludes proposing specific themes to compose a discussion agenda devised towards the institution of fiscal and tax structures specifically designed to fulfill particular characteristics of developing countries, given that most of the literature is based on the experience of developed countries. Key words: Public goods. Public finance. State and local taxation. State and local budget and expenditures. Intergovernmental relations. Federalism

Yukio Kawakami, Seiichi Kagaya

The Nakasone political power modeled on the policy of Thatcher in Britain and Reagan in the United States, and promoted deregulation, privatization and the administrative reform. To revitalize Tokyo when “The Fourth Comprehensive National Development Plan” was formulated in 1987, spatial policy such as “Control the Metropolitan Areas and Promote Local Areas” until that time was changed. The Nakasone policy has changed gradually into the measure that expanded the investment in public works from the fiscal reconstruction in the background of the asset-inflated economy.In the post Nakasone political power after the burst of the economic bubble, it was in the state of straying to alternate retrenched finance and measures to boost the economy. It was “Basic Plan for the Public Investment” in 1990 to influence the investment in the public works expansion.The Hashimoto political power enacted the Fiscal Structure Reform Law in 1997. But the austerity would be stopped before long so that the business, which just began to recover, worsened. That political power changed measures again, boost the economy and tax reduction were executed. “Grand Design for the 21st Century” (21GD) as the fifth comprehensive national development plan was formulated in 1998 under that circumstances.The numerical target was almost none at all in the 21GD though that plan had aimed at different one from the former development plans. Therefore it came to plan the long & large bridge project easily because of no brake of the fiscal framework. Moreover, the concept “National Axis Zone” is not supported. However, it was appreciable to have induced trends of today's urban renewal, consolidation of municipalities, etc.The environment that surrounds spatial planning like the movement of restructuring of government ministries and agencies and decentralization, etc. changed greatly after 21GD. The symbols of a conventional spatial policy like New Industrial City Construction Law, Special Measures Law of Industrial Development, etc. were abolished as an epoch event. On the other hand, new legislation of an individual field like the Infrastructure Maintenance Emphasis Plan Law and the Urban Renewal Law, etc. continues.These series of trends are new currents that deny the sense of comprehensiveness, character of a long term, and the feature of regionalism that the spatial planning has possessed up to now. The problem is how to reform the spatial planning system from now on.JEL classification : N95, O21, R53, R58