Anyone working in constructive theology surely knows the age of epistemological positivism is over, such that something more than qualifying our proofs positive of a historical Jesus is at stake in the teaching of Christology. As Christians we live within the public humiliation of Christianity-within the decades consequent to its imbrication with racism, sexism, colonialism, and (especially poignant for us in Western Canada) cultural genocide, while currently the public face of Christianity has been assumed as a front for North America's war against terrorism. Given the ways in which each of these structures of exclusion pivoted upon a Christological conviction, critical theories, like the practice of confession, prevent us from simply burying our sins under the insecurities of our present time. Critical theories help us remediate the ways in which our Christologies, our sacred imaginais, have been imbricated with structural oppression and the ways in which, without remediation of our symbolic imaginai, we will, among other things, metabolize these Christologies of imperial-colonial power and oedipalized disconnection from sentience. For these reasons as well as for reasons of a theologian's own intellectual integrity and ethical responsibility, the Christological curriculum needs to be brought into conversation with critical theories. But that said, the practice of critical theory can, in the theological classroom, be felt as yet one more, even the final and most vulnerable, challenge to any hope of religious entrustment to life. Theology students, if not Christians in the world at large, can-given the ingress of modernity and their own desire for ontological security-reach for a foundationalist approach to religion, for biblical positivism or literalism-as is verified by the turn to religious fundamentalisms, scripturally-based evangelicalism, and the insularity of narrative communities. So how can progressive Christianities attend to the psychic need of humans, given modernity's dis-embedding technologies so stressing our capacities of life entrustment, without giving up the credible intellectual critiques so important to disrupting the more destructive vectors, that is, those occasioning economic division and ecological decimation, of the globalizing of modernity? The temptation for the academic trained up in modernism may be to present students with various Jesus portraits and Christological propositions and then demonstrate how critical theories invalidate such proposals, or at least produce intellectual skepticism. Applied in this way, critical theories contribute to a modernist epistemological rationalism which elides the lived body in its social milieu and thereby undercut the confidence of the learner. But could there be a way to apply critical theories to what we teach and how we teach, such that these tools of reflection can help us not only ameliorate this age of insecurities, but resurrect Christianities? In pursuit of that possibility, I here consider where biblical and theological colleagues, working in the dimensions of poststructuralism and other critical theories, suggest we plant or root postcolonial, post-modern conversations on Christology. When we relent our struggles for mastery over Jesus, so much a part of both liberalizing and conserving modern theologies, where does Christological discourse end up? What does the application of critical theories suggest about the shape and content of Christologies for a feminist, postmodern, post-colonial context? This is not to say that critical theories can do everything for us. The practice of theology makes claims on us-to posit value, to promote livable imaginais-which are not necessarily the responsibility of other critical theories. Critical theories can help us undertake ethical, analytic reflection on our practice and help us, through something like theological archaeology,1 to recuperate theological wisdom from various historical strata of Christian experience. …
With the destructiveness of modern conflict, varied national and international calls have been made to constrain the employment of weaponry. Efforts to establish prohibition regimes attempt to cut through disorderly and diverse sociotechnical assemblages to locate the principal source of a problem in order to justify a certain course of action. Science and Technology Studies cautions against separating elements of socio-technical assemblages. Likewise, the fragility and contestability of particular determinations of the acceptability of weaponry are apparent in contemporary prohibition debates. Even while many acknowledge the problems of definitely locating some source of acceptability, many arms-control discussions invariably entail efforts to do just that. This paper considers the dynamics of the claims and counterclaims offered to support contentions about the acceptability of the employment of weaponry and thereby justify certain control regimes. As argued, when faced with fundamental difficulties and dilemmas associated with offering determinations of where unacceptability rests, actors engage in various strategies to deny, defer, deter and deflect having to resolve the complicated issues at stake. Alternative characterizations and definitions involve alternative ways of shifting the burden of proof for resolving intractable problems. The paper proposes the notion of ‘disposal strategies’ as a useful way of characterizing the processes of ordering, whereby actors attempt to manage persistent problems and dilemmas.
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.
I was in bed when Christopher Middleton first entered my life. I had been sequestered there for almost a month with a refractory spine. The drugs I took, pure codeine at one point, were such that I wept through the whole of World Championship Darts, so moved I was by those Apollonic figures, a band of ogres really, on the flickering television screen, and also by those sacrificial helpings of chips, sausages and baked beans that the audience consumed at their beer-towered tables. It was an aspect of English life that had completely bypassed me. The doctor, finding me in this blissful state, instantly put me on a duller regime. I was forced back to poetry. My literary life, insofar as I was able to pursue one, for my eyes swam all over the page, comprised a small pile of Middleton's books on the floor beside me. It was, in truth, my earliest acquaintance with his work, in particular the handsome 1969 Fulcrum Press edition of Our Flowers & Nice Bones. (Oh my, he's got a brain for titles.) I do not wish to give the wrong impression here, for Middleton is primarily a man of words, of words exquisitely bound together, but in my drugged state I was peculiarly receptive to his poem Birth of Venus, which reads in full: V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V Could I really have been pondering the absence of that single V, finding in this something at once symbolic and full of erotic promise, when my wife came in and dropped in front of me a letter postmarked Austin, Texas? I looked at the sender's name and address and then I glanced at the volume beside me. This, surely, was proof enough that I'd reached a purely hallucinogenic stage of my existence. I do not wish to beat on about the zeitgeist or the want of one or about how whatever it is we're slumming our way through now is notable for its absence of generosity, especially in literary matters, but here, giving me succour when it was most needed, was a letter from a stranger full of kind words about a poem of mine he had read in a magazine. The impression this made upon me, especially in my physical state, was incalculable. One should not make too much of a man's age, but it is rare to find poets of Middleton's years and stature giving unsolicited encouragement to poets younger than themselves. I think this also has to do with Middleton's own youthfulness, which, in his work, is characterised by restlessness for and a desire to stake out new territories. Age does not deter him--juvenescence excites. Could he be one of the few to have properly understood Pound's injunction: MAKE IT NEW? I believe so, for what he writes is a matter of what he requires; it is born of necessity: there is no concession to prevailing modes. The letter marked the beginning of a friendship whose rewards, for me, have been immeasurable. A few months later, in the summer of 1992, Middleton came to England and to supper at our place. I shall record these first impressions of the physical man because, to some degree, they mark the interior one as well. There is a curious manner to how he walks, almost as if he were wearing bedroom slippers, a sort of floating aspect to him, and, quite frankly, the impression he made was one of a rather cool dude. A medallion hung from around his neck and the belt buckle he wore was as large as a horseshoe. Well, I might dissemble a little. If the man who soft-shoed into our lives was a Texan of one's imagination rather than of the real world the manner and voice were English in a way most English people no longer remember how to be. I have never had the opportunity to observe him in his adopted milieu, of course, so perhaps I am mistaken. It may be that he orders his glass of milk with a drawl and that tumbleweed does indeed tumble through the streets of Austin. What a strange and equally not so strange place for him to be. I am sorry to dwell at such length upon a man's attire and how it conceals the man inside, but I think there is some aspect of this in Middleton's writing: the precise English that comes of a fine education, such as this country offered once upon a time, dressed up in some fairly exotic clothes. …
A protocol for zero-knowledge proofs of identity based on ElGamal on conic is proposed in this paper. The solution to a hard puzzle is divided into two parts, and the P (prover) provides one of them according to the V (verifier) 's random bit. The eavesdropper cannot obtain any useful knowledge about the P (prover) 's identity during the process of authentication. No adversary in this protocol can cheat each other or get the privacy of each other. The security of this protocol relies on the discrete logarithm problem on conic over finite fields. Compared with those identification protocols implemented on elliptic, these kinds of identification protocols implemented on conic can be designed and implemented easier. Corresponding to the simple version, a parallel version is presented subsequently. The characteristic of ZKp and security of the simple version is proved. The trait of our identification protocol is given. We also analyzed the "soundness ", the "completeness ", before analyzed the amount of computation in the protocol. A simple solution considering t/sub timeout/ is proposed to prevent a potential leak of our protocol. Some problems need to be solved in the future is brought forward at the end of this paper.
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
Delegation, whereby an entity gives some of its rights to other entities, is considered the cornerstone of decentralized authorization, and many access control frameworks proposed recently make delegation its central tenet. In these frameworks, delegation is commonly viewed as a transfer between two autonomous agents---the grantor and the grantee. But the situation can be considerably more complex, and more challenging, in the case the grantor belongs to an organization. Generally, employees are not autonomous agents, but their actions are subject to the regulations of their enterprise. In particular, if an employee transfers his rights to another agent, this transfer is subject to the enterprise delegation policies.In delegation frameworks, authorizing a request requires finding a valid chain of credentials that delegates the authority from the source (the local policy of the entity that serves the request) to the requester. Unfortunately, chain discovery is a computationally expensive and time consuming task. It was shown that, in the general case, chain discovery is undecidable, and in more restrictive cases, it is polynomial in the number of credentials available to the server. Verifying compliance with the terms of a delegation policy adds a considerable overhead to request authorization.This paper presents a framework that considerably reduces the time required to authorize a request. In this framework, a delegation chain is condensed into a single credential, called chained delegation certificate (CDC). A CDC attests that the owner has a certain right, and serves as proof that every link in the chain complies with the policy governing delegation of the right in question. When CDCs are used for authorization, a server does not need to verify compliance with the delegation policy, nor does it need to perform the chain discovery step, and therefore requests are served considerably faster.
Following successful establishment of Expanded Program on Immunization
(EPI) in the 1970's as vertical program, the burden of disease for many
of the vaccine preventable diseases was pushed to low levels. The
current round of health reforms in Tanzania calls for decentralization
and integration of vertical programs. This has the potential to assist
or erode generally good performance of EPI. Reforms on the programme
have been undertaken in Tanzania since 1996, and have included 1)
integration of the procurement, storage, and distribution of vaccine
and related equipment into the operations of a quasi-autonomous drug
procurement agency. 2) government financing of procurement of the oral
polio vaccine, cold chain kerosene, and 3) the integration of kerosene
and vaccine distribution, supervision and monitoring to district health
system. Our analysis shows that the integration of the procurement and
distribution of vaccines into the operations of the drug procurement
agency, and privatization of the distribution of the cold chain
kerosene initially stalled EPI reforms for several reasons and had an
adverse effect on EPI decentralization and coverage. The major cause of
the problems was opposition from the EPI providers at district level
who had to accept decreased income consequent to the reforms. We
conclude that greater involvement of all stakeholders in the planning
of the programme, would have presented an opportunity for forecasting
the opposition and developing mitigating strategies.
ABSTRACT Young firms grow faster through franchising than via the traditional organization. However, research shows that as much as three fourths of new franchise systems die within ten years of establishment. Although recent franchising system survival research has recognized industry as a potentially important variable, a theory for its influence has not been available. This paper develops propositions linking industry variations to the survival of franchising systems. Specifically, it suggests that franchising system survival is negatively related to the degree of decentralization of critical decision tasks, brand-space proliferation, and knowledge intensity, but positively related to labor intensity, cost of the material factor, specific investments and revenue variability. Implications of this theory for both prospective franchisors and franchisees are discussed. INTRODUCTION The study of firm growth and survival has been a central concern in entrepreneurship research. Increasing support is emerging for the view that contractual, hybrid forms of organizations such as franchising, strategic alliances, and licensing are viable alternatives to the traditional, hierarchical form of organization (e.g., Larson, 1992). In particular, franchising is seen as a means of faster growth relative to the traditional form of organization for young firms (Caves & Murphy, 1976). Franchising creates opportunities for thousands of budding entrepreneurs every year (Combs & Ketchen, 2003, p. 443), and over 200 new franchisors appear in dozens of industries (Michael, 1998, p. 162). However, Shane (1996) showed that as much as three fourths of new franchise systems die within ten years of establishment. Likewise, Bates (1998, p. 122) found that franchises are dramatically less profitable and their survival prospects are worse than those of independent business start-ups. The low rates of survival of both franchising systems as well as individual outlets seem puzzling given the popularity of franchising among new entrepreneurs. Perhaps budding entrepreneurs lack an understanding of realistic prospects of franchising. In order to prevent wastage of entrepreneurs' costly efforts, identification of variables that might influence the survival of new franchising systems is important. Although recent franchising system survival research appears to have recognized industry as a potentially influential variable (e.g., Bates, 1998; Michael, 1996; Shane, 1996), its role has been limited to a control variable. Perhaps what is needed is a theory explaining why differences in industry may be crucial to franchising system survival. This paper attempts to fill this important theoretical void. The paper begins with a brief review of franchising and its two dominant viewpoints: the resource-scarcity thesis and the administrative-efficiency thesis. In light of these theses, a theoretical framework is developed involving several factors that might lead to important industry differences influencing franchising system survival. The industry variables are: the allocation of decision tasks, brand-space proliferation, labor intensity, the cost of the material factor, specific investment, revenue variability, and knowledge intensity. Propositions are presented suggesting the effect of each variable. Finally, important implications of this framework for franchising research and practice are discussed. BACKGROUND OF FRANCHISING Franchising involves granting exclusive rights for the local sale of a service or trademarked product and receiving in return a fee and/or royalty and conformance to quality standards, price controls, and other practices (Mathewson & Winter, 1985). A franchisor thus enjoys the benefits of revenue and control without having to make the investments required for ownership. The franchisee receives many services including training, advertising and, frequently, financing or assistance in obtaining finance (Bumstien, 1968-69; Woll, 1968-69). …
This article examines the effect of party composition of government on the centralization of budgeting institutions in Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Bulgaria in 1989-1999, and assesses the impact of the centralization of budgeting institutions on the capacity of these countries to meet the fiscal deficit requirement for the European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) membership. The article finds that centralization of budgeting institutions through delegation to a strong finance minister and/or prime minister is likely to occur in one-party governments or coalition governments composed of parties which expect to fight repeated elections together, with effective punishment mechanisms. The article finds that countries with centralized budgeting institutions are likely to be more capable of meeting the EMU deficit requirement than countries with decentralized institutions.
Over the past decade the relationship between law and popular culture has become the subject of a considerable and growing literature. This work has addressed, via a range of research methods and t...
Fundamental changes in China's finance system for social services have decentralized responsibilities for provision to lower levels of government and increased costs to individuals. The more localized, market-oriented approaches to social service provision, together with rising economic inequalities, raise questions about access to social services among China's children. With a multivariate analysis of three waves of the China Health and Nutrition Survey (1989, 1993 and 1997), this article investigates two dimensions of children's social welfare: health care, operationalized as access to health insurance, and education, operationalized as enrolment in and progress through school. Three main results emerge. First, analyses do not suggest an across-the-board decline in access to these child welfare services during the period under consideration. Overall, insurance rates, enrolment rates and grade-for-age attainment improved. Secondly, while results underscore the considerable disadvantages in insurance and education experienced by poorer children in each wave of the survey, there is no evidence that household socio-economic disparities systematically widened. Finally, findings suggest that community resources conditioned the provision of social services, and that dimensions of community level of development and capacity to finance public welfare increasingly mattered for some social services.
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.
In Lao PDR, lack of skilled manpower and financial resources in the central government, plus the policy urging local authorities to be self-sufficient and self-reliant caused the central government to decentralize all sectors to the provincial level in 1987. After 1987, the provinces took over all responsibilities such as planning, financing and provision of health services, only informing the Ministry of Health (MOH) about their activities. Because of economic differences between the 18 provinces, health services became unequal between the richer and poorer provinces. Some provinces generated high revenues, leading to over spending. The decentralized system had some negative impacts on the health service. The technical and planning functions managed from the ministry level became separated from management and financial decision making at the local level, and the ministry lost influence on the direction of health policy. Salaries from the local government were often delayed. Because health budgets were not allocated centrally by the Ministry of Health, there were no mechanisms by which health resources could be distributed preferentially to poorer areas with greater need. However, donors continued to support health programs through the Ministry of Health, sending drugs, vaccines, and other supplies to the provinces. The implementation of decentralization faced many difficulties due to the lack of experienced staff and insufficient training required for practicing decentralization. Similar problems in other sectors, such as agriculture, education, and communication, caused the central government to retake control from the provinces in 1992. During the recentralization period, utilization of health facilities increased. The Ministry of Health set rules and established regulations to strengthen the health system. A cost-recovery system was introduced to obtain additional funds, and conditions in the provinces gradually improved. The unique situation of decentralization followed by recentralization provides an excellent opportunity for study. We reviewed documents relating to these periods and interviewed officials at all levels who were concerned with the process.
This study first develops a framework for thinking about educational decentralization, and next describes the most common kinds of policy reforms associated with decentralization. It focuses, in particular, on the decentralization of basic education functions and responsibilities from central government ministries to sub-national governments, to communities, and to the schools themselves. Drawing upon the now significant international experience with education decentralization, the study presents guiding principles and lessons learned with an emphasis on how these could prove applicable in the Turkish context. The author develops a typology of education decentralization and a conceptual framework for considering education decentralization in Turkey. Throughout, he highlights some specific country case examples that provide insight into the choices Turkey faces. Finally the study assesses where Turkey stands in the context of this typology and conceptual framework, and explores potential paths for education reform. The main objective of this study is to inform policymakers and other stakeholders of the issues, justifications, advantages, and risks of decentralizing or de-concentrating education management, service delivery, and financing.
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.
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.
Oil and Gas (MIC: 14.2 SIC: 381 NAIC: 13111) Helmerich & Payne is engaged in contract drilling of oil and gas wells for others. Co. is also engaged in the ownership, development, and operation of commercial real estate. Co. is organized into two separate autonomous operating entities being contract drilling and real estate. Both businesses operate independently of the other. Both the contract drilling and real estate businesses are conducted through wholly-owned subsidiaries. Operating decentralization is balanced by a centralized finance division, which handles all accounting, data processing, budgeting, insurance, cash management, and related activities.
University autonomy is a common and influential policy in higher education adopted by government in the paradigm of decentralization.By analyzing the value of university autonomy and factual estimation about its activity,we find that the core value of university autonomy mainly embody competition,choice,paramount,equivalence exchange,quality,efficiency and effectiveness,accountability,loosing control and decentralizing decision,pluralizing of origin financing,alteration of model of government imbursement,sharing in cost and user paying,which reveal the values of market.Therefore,department selfishness of market is the nature of university autonomy.