Exploring the Impact of Socio-Technical Core-Periphery Structures in Open Source Software Development

In this paper we apply the social network concept of core-periphery structure to the sociotechnical structure of a software development team. We propose a socio-technical pattern that can be used to locate emerging coordination problems in Open Source projects. With the help of our tool and method called TESNA, we demonstrate a method to monitor the socio-technical core-periphery movement in Open Source projects. We then study the impact of different core-periphery movements on Open Source projects. We conclude that a steady core-periphery shift towards the core is beneficial to the project, whereas shifts away from the core are clearly not good. Furthermore, oscillatory shifts towards and away from the core can be considered as an indication of the instability of the project. Such an analysis can provide developers with a good insight into the health of an Open Source project. Researchers can gain from the pattern theory, and from the method we use to study the core-periphery movements

Architectures for Wireless Sensor Networks

Various architectures have been developed for wireless sensor networks. Many of them leave to the programmer important concepts as the way in which the inter-task communication and dynamic reconfigurations are addressed. In this paper we describe the characteristics of a new architecture we proposed - the data-centric architecture. This architecture offers an easy way of structuring the applications designed for wireless sensor nodes that confers them superior performances

Externalities, clusters and economic growth: The Cluster Policy Paradox

The literature on clustering has highlighted several advantages of industrial agglomerations. Persons and firms benefit from the production and innovation activities of neighbouring companies in the same and related industries. Considering such benefits, which are viewed as positive externalities, Michael Porter argues that clustering is an important way for firms fulfilling their competitive advantages and for rising regional and national competitiveness. So, it is opportune to ask: what is the appropriate policy for maximizing the benefits of CE (cluster externalities)? There are basically two possible replies to the above question: on the one hand, the traditional optimal-policy perspective recommends providing a subsidy to firms generating CE, with the subsidy adjusted for equalizing the strength of the externality; on the other, a more pragmatic perspective based on Porter’s policy prescriptions. However, the evidence shows a paradox: policy makers use the competitiveness rhetoric inspired in the competitive advantages of Porter but, in practice, they go on using the industrial targeting that was also criticized by Porter. In this paper we deal with this paradox proving that despite the extensive amount of externalities is the traditional comparative advantage approach that must guide policy. This finding is congruent with the Porter’s policy prescriptions and has clear implications in regional policy allowing to support the answer to the following question: Must policy be focused on creation of new clusters in activities that have verified large positive effects elsewhere or, conversely, on developing the traditional activities in region, which allegedly have shown lower externalities? But the answer to this question depends on our comprehension of industrial aggregation processes, which implies the full understanding of concepts as clusters and externalities. So, the remainder of this paper is organized as follows. After reflecting on the concept of cluster in section 2, section 3 deals with the different type of externalities present in industrial agglomerations. Section 4 considers the existence of dynamic externalities and relates them with the advantages of backwardness. Section 5 uses a model that includes various types of externalities in order to draw lessons for guiding clustering policy. Finally, section 6 concludes.