The Commensurability Myth in Antitrust

Modern antitrust law pursues a seemingly unitary goal: competition. In fact, competition—whether defined as a process or as a set of outcomes associated with competitive markets—is multifaceted. What are offered in antitrust cases as procompetitive and anticompetitive effects are typically qualitatively different, and trading them off is as much an exercise in judgment as mathematics. But despite the inevitability of value judgments in antitrust cases, courts have perpetuated a commensurability myth, claiming to evaluate “net” competitive effect as if the pros and cons of a restraint of trade are in the same unit of measure. The myth is attractive to courts because it appears to allow the law to avoid the murky, value-laden compromises struck by other areas of regulation. But courts have suppressed important debates about what matters most about competition by glossing over the fact that even given a narrow mandate—to protect competition—antitrust law must make contested value judgments. Debunking the commensurability myth is the first step in stimulating scholarly and judicial debates about how to balance antitrust’s inherent tradeoffs, such as price effects with qualitative consumer welfare, present with future benefits from competition, and consumer welfare among different classes of purchasers

Botanic Gardens, People and Plants for a Sustainable World

On behalf of the European Botanic Gardens Consortium (EBGC), the University of Lisbon and Jardim Botânico da Ajuda (Botanic Garden of Ajuda) on the occasion of its 250th anniversary organized the 8th European Congress of Botanic Gardens – EuroGard VIII, that was held in Lisbon, 7th-11th may 2018. Under the theme “Botanic Gardens, People and Plants for a Sustainable World”, it was intended to address many of the issues to which Botanic Gardens are contributing, in particular raising public awareness of environmental conservation challenges that our planet faces. EuroGard VIII bring together the participation of Botanic Gardens in Europe and other world regions. Moreover, the 15th Symposium of the Ibero- Macaronesian Association of Botanic Gardens took place at the same time, during which the aim was to assess the work carried out to meet the Aïchi Biodiversity Targets adopted by the Iberian-Macaronesian botanic gardens for 2020. The Congress included a diverse range of subjects and topics on biodiversity conservation, especially related to plants and the complex and extensive roles of botanic gardens. It emphasized how Botanic Gardens have been actively involved in shaping national and international policies and practices in plant conservation. They continue to have an influential role at all levels through their engagement with governments (that are Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity), and through their involvement in the Global Partnership for Plant Conservation (GPPC). It is acknowledged that botanic gardens come from very different roots but since 2002, the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC), and its update in 2010, has provided a focus and primary framework to guide Botanic Gardens’ activities in strategic and practical contributions to plant conservation; The roles of Botanic Gardens in supporting the GSPC are manifold, from contributions of smaller gardens to single targets to potential contributions to all 16 targets by larger, better resourced, botanic gardensinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

An Analysis Of International Agreements Over Cybersecurity

Research into the international agreements that increase cooperation over cybersecurity challenges is severely lacking. This is a necessary next step for bridging diplomatic challenges over cybersecurity. This work aspires to be push the bounds of research into these agreements and offer a tool that future researchers can rely on. For this research I created, and made publicly available, the International Cybersecurity Cooperation Dataset (ICCD), which contains over 350 international cybersecurity agreements and pertinent metadata. Each agreement is marked per which subtopics within cybersecurity related agreements it covers. These typologies are: Discussion and Dialogue Research Confidence Building Measures Incident Response Crime Capacity Building Activity Limiting Defense Terrorism Drawing on ICCD and R for summary statistics and significance tests, as well as some quantitative insights, this research explores the relationship between different agreements, organizations, and other possibly related factors. The most significant takeaways from this research are: Governments view cybersecurity in terms of relative advantages and are hesitant to engage competitors with agreements over topics like incident response and capacity building. Authoritarian governments are involved with agreements over controlling or projecting state power and government authority while democratic governments focus on resilience and defense. There are two groupings of authoritarian governments, those with high technical capabilities and those without. Technically capable governments focus on agreements over terrorism, and they also often end up participating in activity limiting agreements. Those without are preoccupied with agreements over criminal activity. Discussion and dialogue agreements tend to accompany agreements over additional topics about one fifth of the time. While policy-makers shouldn’t create a hard rule out of this statistic, it does possibly strengthen an optimistic hypothesis that dialogue consistently leads to agreements. Hopefully this research invigorates researchers’ interest in studying and understanding when cooperation over cybersecurity is successful or not. Policy-makers will need this knowledge if they are to achieve their goals in an environment that is rapidly increasing in state actors and complexit

Degrowth at a Global Scale? Geographies of Chile¿s Fruit Production and Export between Extractivism and Socio-Ecological Transformation

L'abstract è presente nell'allegato / the abstract is in the attachmen

Strategizing in the new normal : implications of digitalization for strategizing and uncertainty : philosophical and managerial considerations

Something fundamental is changing – or is it? The firms are preoccupied by transformations and disruptions, the scholars are reassessing the validity of old theories, the politicians are wondering where the power is, and the individuals are struggling to understand how to go about making a living tomorrow. Has this always been the normal, or are we evidencing an era that can rightfully be called a New Normal? This research is an attempt to synthetize knowledge from several rich sources in order to understand the drivers of the changes emerging from the phenomenon labelled digitalization. The research quandary of this conceptual monograph is the impact of digitalization – as a sociotechnical trinity of digital technological systems, humans and perceptions – on strategizing, the individual level actions and decisions tackling the fundamental uncertainty of anything future-oriented, subsequently coalescing into collective level outcomes. This research explores the constitutions of strategizing, uncertainty and digitalization in order to understand the impact of the drivers of digitalization on the constitution of uncertainty dealt with in strategizing, and the subsequent changes therefore reflected on strategizing. Tracing these ripples requires reconceptualizing uncertainty as consisting of three dimensions: lack of knowledge, difficulty of choosing between diverse standards of desirability, and the infathomability of the meaning making mechanisms that underpin the creation of those standards of desirability. As findings, this dissertation presents three theses: first, digitalization obliterates one type of uncertainty, while changing and enforcing other types; secondly, digitalization erodes the boundaries of extant entities and creates new boundary forming mechanisms; and thirdly, digitalization changes the shape and impact of what we take for granted, consider normal – the doxa. These findings have implications for both the theorists and the practitioners. As scholars, we need to redefine such units of analysis, as heretofore captured by concepts like the firm, market or nation. As practitioners, we need to cherish such rationalities that do not compete with the algorithmic intelligence, to emphasize such creative thinking a machine cannot do. As individuals, we need to understand how many of our actions are grounded on the unreflective acceptance of what we take for granted, and how susceptible our notion of normal is to manipulation. Together, we need to understand that the digital representation of reality, being constructed today to give the shape for our tomorrow, reflects not only the physical entities datafied and digitized, but also our values and preferences – whether we reflectively acknowledge them or not.Elämme perustavanlaatuisen muutoksen aikaa – vai elämmekö? Yritykset keskittyvät disruptioihin ja muutoksiin, tutkijat arvioivat vanhojen teorioiden kykyä selittää uusia ilmiöitä, poliitikot pohtivat vallan uusia muotoja ja yksilöt taistelevat huomisen toimeentulon kanssa. Onko tämä ollut aina yhtä normaalia, vai elämmekö aikaa, jota voimme rehellisesti kutsua uudeksi normaaliksi? Tämä tutkimus pyrkii yhdistämään rikasta, olemassaolevaa tietoa monista lähteistä luodakseen ymmärrystä digitalisaatioksi kutsutun ilmiön synnyttämien muutosten ajureista. Tämän teoreettisen monografian tutkimusalue on digitalisaation – digitaalisten teknologisten systeemien, ihmisten ja oletusten muodostaman sosioteknisen kolmiyhteyden – vaikutus strategiointiin, eli tulevaisuuteen elimellisesti liittyvän epävarmuuden käsittelyyn sellaisella yksilötason toiminnalla ja päätöksenteolla, joka yhdistyy kollektiivisen tason lopputuloksiksi. Tämä tutkimus perehtyy strategioinnin, epävarmuuden ja digitalisaation luonteeseen selvittääkseen digitalisaation ajurien vaikutusta strategioinnissa käsiteltävään epävarmuuteen, ja siitä syntyviin muutoksiin strategioinnissa. Tämän vaikutusketjun ymmärtäminen vaatii epävarmuuden uutta konseptualisointia: epävarmuus muodostuu kolmesta ulottuvuudesta, jotka ovat tiedon puute, eri arvoskaalojen välillä valitsemisen vaikeus, sekä niiden merkityksen muodostamismekanismien hahmottomuus, joista arvoskaalamme kumpuavat. Tämän kirjan tulokset muodostavat kolme väitöstä: ensinnäkin, digitalisaatio tuhoaa yhden epävarmuuden tyypin ja muuttaa sekä vahvistaa muita; toiseksi, digitalisaatio haurastuttaa olemassa olevien entiteettien rajoja ja synnyttää uusia rajanmuodostusmekanismeja; ja kolmanneksi, digitalisaatio muuttaa itsestäänselvänä ja normaalina pitämiemme asioiden muotoa ja vaikutusta. Näillä tuloksilla on niin teoreettisia kuin käytännönkin vaikutuksia. Tutkijoina meidän on uudelleen määriteltävä sellaisia analyysin yksiköitä kuten yritys, markkina tai valtio. Yritystoiminnan harjoittajina meidän on vaalittava sellaista rationaalisuutta, mihin algoritminen äly ei kykene, painotettava luovaa ajattelua. Yksilöinä meidän on ymmärrettävä miten iso osa toiminnastamme perustuu itsestäänselvyyksinä pitämiimme asioihin ja miten helposti käsitystämme normaalista voidaan manipuloida. Yhdessä, meidän on ymmärrettävä, että tänään muodostumassa oleva, huomistamme muovaava digitaalinen todellisuuden representaatio heijastelee, paitsi fyysisen maailman digitaaliseksi dataksi muunnettuja entiteettejä, myös arvojamme ja preferenssejämme – riippumatta siitä, tiedostammeko ja tunnistammeko ne vai emme

Exploring how entrepreneurs make decisions on the growth of their business: A cognitive perspective

The purpose of this study was to explore how entrepreneurs, who are past the start-up stage of business, evaluate and make decisions on growth opportunities. Small business growth is a complex, dynamic and episodic phenomenon and prior research on firm growth has emphasised cross-sectional approaches, rather than view growth as a dynamic process over time. Understanding small business entrepreneurs’ cognition and behaviours when making opportunity-related decisions will show how growth decisions are made. It is still unclear what cognitive styles and knowledge structures entrepreneurs use to process and frame information for opportunity-related decision-making. A closer look at opportunity evaluation, decision-making and entrepreneurial cognition revealed fragmentation, research gaps and areas for future research recommended by key scholars. As a consequence of this, an integrated process approach was taken using these three research streams. Specifically, a cognitive style lens, as a complex construct with multiple dimensions was used for viewing opportunity-related decisions, an approach missing from the opportunity evaluation literature. Additionally, the study was conceptually underpinned by dual process theory, the cognitive experiential self-theory or CEST. A longitudinal, concurrent triangulation design was used to explore the decision-making process over five time points in a two-year period. A mixed methods approach supported the pragmatic paradigm for an exploratory study. A multiple-case strategy used a sample of 11 small manufacturing entrepreneurs, from novice to mature, with 3-30 years’ experience as owner-manager. Data was collected at each time point using semi-structured interviews and two style assessments, the CoSI and REI. Quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis for the qualitative data. Combining interviews and psychometric questionnaires for triangulation produced robust findings. Data was used to construct cognitive maps and cognitive complexity for insight. Findings showed entrepreneurs were high on more than one style and switched between styles according to context, demonstrating styles were orthogonal. A unique finding was a synthesised, versatile style observed as a ‘mirror effect’ between the analytical and intuitive styles. Novices developed a more intuitive style over time, contingent with experience. A developing link in the novices’ mental structures showed how past experience increased cognitive complexity and connectivity. A further unique finding showed the central concept ‘Thinks it through’ in the decision process as a structural conduit or 'Hub' for both analytical and intuitive processing. Analysis suggested that cognitive complexity mediated the relationship between creative and experiential information styles and successful opportunity-related decision-making effectiveness. These unique findings show opportunity-related decisions as a dynamic, time-based process. The time-based model provided a framework for future opportunity evaluation research as a contribution to theory. Likewise, a dual process and information processing perspective has offered an alternative structure for examining opportunity evaluation. Finally, a teaching model was developed to improve metacognitive thinking and connectivity for decision-making effectiveness as a contribution to practice

Alter ego, state of the art on user profiling: an overview of the most relevant organisational and behavioural aspects regarding User Profiling.

This report gives an overview of the most relevant organisational and\ud behavioural aspects regarding user profiling. It discusses not only the\ud most important aims of user profiling from both an organisation’s as\ud well as a user’s perspective, it will also discuss organisational motives\ud and barriers for user profiling and the most important conditions for\ud the success of user profiling. Finally recommendations are made and\ud suggestions for further research are given

Creating Age-friendly Communities

The "Creating Age-friendly Communities: Housing and Technology" publication presents contemporary, innovative, and insightful narratives, debates, and frameworks based on an international collection of papers from scholars spanning the fields of gerontology, social sciences, architecture, computer science, and gerontechnology. This extensive collection of papers aims to move the narrative and debates forward in this interdisciplinary field of age-friendly cities and communities