Just Relations and Company–Community Conflict in Mining

This research engages with the problem of company–community conflict in mining. The inequitable distributions of risks, impacts, and benefits are key drivers of resource conflicts and are likely to remain at the forefront of mining-related research and advocacy. Procedural and interactional forms of justice therefore lie at the very heart of some of the real and ongoing challenges in mining, including: intractable local-level conflict; emerging global norms and performance standards; and ever-increasing expectations for the industry to translate high-level corporate social responsibility policy into on-the-ground practice. This research focuses on the “process” aspects of resource conflicts through an examination of existing grievance-handling procedures at six mining operations where company–community conflict was present. In their current form, and on their own, the six mechanisms were found to be insufficient in their capacity to advance justice. The authors argue that if the overall objective of global norms is that companies construct and perform grievance handling in ways that strongly preference just practices, then “mechanisms-in-practice” must be better understood and constructively critiqued along all justice dimensions.     

CONTROLLING BANKERS' BONUSES: EFFICIENT REGULATION OR POLITICS OF ENVY?

The positive relationship between bank CEO compensation and risk-taking is a well-established empirical fact. The global banking crisis has resulted in a chorus of demands to control bankers' bonuses and thereby curtail their risk-taking activities in the hope that the world can avoid a repeat in the future. However, the positive relationship is not a causative one. In this paper we argue that an implicit too-big-to-fail policy provides the incentive for banks to take excessive risks and design compensation packages to deliver high returns. A credible no-bailout policy will have a better chance of curbing excess risk-taking than controlling bankers' compensation.     

Ein Reservierungsverfahren für die Rechtsschutzversicherung nach Art der Lebensversicherung

In this paper we introduce a new approach to the calculation of claims reserves (known and IBNR cases) which is particularly adapted to the business model of legal expense insurance. An essential aspect here is the split into two model components: case numbers and average claim costs. In contrast to other reserving methods for case numbers and claims cash flows which are frequently used in practice without checking the validity for application we introduce a model in which the time until case settlement is described by a lifetime distribution according to the principles of life insurance. The split of model components also allows for a simple implementation of cost inflation effects which is required by German law. Finally, the approach proposed here can readily be transferred to the calculation of IBNR reserves.     

Food Safety,Who s at Fault?

So many frequently reported scandals keep reminding us that Chinese have the strongest and toughest stomach in the world.Food safety problems constantly attract Chinese public attention.This time,it was about Red Bull.A high school student's mother in Harbin,northern China,worried if the drink would do any harm to her beloved son,who drank bottles of Red Bull during his exams     

Sino-UX Advanced Engineering Cooperation Set Off

Asignificant marketing document produced by UK Trade & Investment (UKTI) to promote greater bilateral trade and investment co-operation between the UK and China in the area of advanced engineering was launched on 11 March,Beijing,by HM Ambassador,Sir William Erhman,UK Ambassador to China.     

Education of disadvantaged children

There are at least two basic strategies for finding answers to the questions posed: what compensatory programs are “successful”, for which groups of children, and at what cost? The first strategy involves the design and execution of a series of controlled experiments in education; the second involves statistical analyses of existing compensatory education programs. In line with the first strategy, next year, the Follow Through program will fund a series of educational demonstration programs based on a “menu” of different curricula for children in the early elementary grades. Participating school districts will opt for one or another of the approaches offered, and will, in the course of the year, receive the advice and counsel of consultants in implementing the approach selected. A second—and complementary—basic strategy for finding out what works in compensatory education capitalizes on the wealth of information waiting to be collected on the operation of existing programs.

Since the spring of 1967, staff members of the Office of the Secretary of DHEW, the Office of Education, and a contractor—TEMPO, a division of General Electric Company—have been engaged in a pilot cost-effectiveness analysis of compensatory education programs. For the 11 districts studied, two distinct developments appear to have occurred in pupil performance: first, there appears to have been a slight decline in average pupil achievement in the sample schools. At the same time, there appears to have been a slight improvement in the achievement of pupils who are at the lowest achievement levels in their respective grades. The achievement data from the districts in the study indicate considerable variation in achievement results. The conduct and content of compensatory programs vary greatly. Preliminary analysis suggests that the amount of achievement increase is positively related to the level of expenditures for compensatory education programs.

To make real progress in assessing the effectiveness of alternative education programs and to overcome the difficulties discussed throughout this paper, we see the need to pursue two major courses of action. The first concerns the funding of controlled experiments introducing major variations into school programs, using comparable measures of program costs, inputs and effectiveness over time. The second is a frontal assault on evaluation in the form of a cooperative effort with a small number of interested States and local school districts to carry out a longitudinal study of compensatory programs.