The 4s web-marketing mix model

This paper reviews the criticism on the 4Ps Marketing Mix framework, the most popular tool of traditional marketing management, and categorizes the main objections of using the model as the foundation of physical marketing. It argues that applying the traditional approach, based on the 4Ps paradigm, is also a poor choice in the case of virtual marketing and identifies two main limitations of the framework in online environments: the drastically diminished role of the Ps and the lack of any strategic elements in the model. Next to identifying the critical factors of the Web marketing, the paper argues that the basis for successful E-Commerce is the full integration of the virtual activities into the company’s physical strategy, marketing plan and organisational processes. The four S elements of the Web-Marketing Mix framework present a sound and functional conceptual basis for designing, developing and commercialising Business-to-Consumer online projects. The model was originally developed for educational purposes and has been tested and refined by means of field projects; two of them are presented as case studies in the paper.\ud \u

Effects of the Electronic Structure, Phase Transition and Localized Dynamics of Atoms in the Formation of Tiny Particles of Gold

In addition to the self-governing properties, tiny metallic colloids are the building blocks of larger particles. This topic has been a subject of many studies. Tiny particles of different sizes developed under three different experiments are discussed in this work. The development of a tiny-sized particle depends on the attained dynamics of atoms. When atoms of the compact monolayer assembly bind by a nanoenergy packet, the developed tiny-sized particle elongates atoms of arrays into the structures of smooth elements at the solution surface. The impinging electron streams at a fixed angle can elongate the already elongated atoms of arrays. Travelling photons along the interface influence the modified atoms. Gold atoms can also develop different tiny particles inside the solution. In addition to the dynamics of atoms, miscellaneous factors can contribute in the development of such tiny particles. Atoms in the form of tiny clusters can also amalgamate to develop a tiny-sized particle. In the third kind of tiny particle, amalgamated atoms can bind by executing electron dynamics. However, not all of the atoms can bind by the electron dynamics. This study very concisely highlights the fundamental process of developing a variety of tiny particles in which electronic structure, phase transition and localized dynamics of gold atoms influence the structure. The study targets the specific discussion that how atoms of tiny-sized particles bind, and how travelling photons along the air-solution interface influence their structure. Several possibilities may be opened through pulse-based process to develop engineered materials

A chance to seize by women in francophone Africa

A rather disillusioned observation was recently made during a pan-Africa conference: Africa women consider new information and communication technologies as "futuristic" rather than a tool for development to be used today. If initiatives are not taken now to thwart this attitude, activities by women in Africa to promote sustainable development that also benefit them will take event longer. This will be especially true in regions on the continent where English is not the common language

Coordination and synergy – increasing the width and depth of research in organic farming (SYNERGY)

The Danish Research Centre for Organic Farming (DARCOF) is a "centre without walls", which is to say that the researchers remain in their own research environment but collaborate across institutes. The overall remit is to coordinate Danish R&D for organic farming, with a view to achieving optimum benefit from the allocated resources. The specific objectives of the SYNERGY project are to secure the continued interdisciplinary development of Danish research in organic farming and to explore the many possibilities of synergy in DARCOF II. In relation to these objectives, the assignments of SYNERGY are to: • Co-ordinate, evaluate and manage DARCOF II as a whole • Analyse, discuss and synthesis knowledge across research projects and disciplines • Develop research methodology and investigate values associated with organic farming • Contribute to the education of research scientists involved in the DARCOF II • Communicate the research findings to the organic farming community and society in general • Contribute to international co-operation and communication In this way the project intends to secure the completion of the overall objectives of the programme; namely to contribute to increased production, and closer relationships between organic and inherent qualities in organic farming

The TRIZ-CBR synergy: A knowledge based innovation process

Today innovation is recognised as the main driving force in the market. This complex process involves several intangible dimensions, such as creativity, knowledge and social interactions among others. Creativity is the starting point of the process, and knowledge is the force that transforms and materialises creativity in new products, services and processes. In this paper a synergy that aims to assists the innovation process is presented. The synergy combines several concepts and tools of the theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ) and the case-based reasoning (CBR) process. The main objective of this synergy is to support creative engineering design and problem solving. This synergy is based on the strong link between knowledge and action. In this link, TRIZ offers several concepts and tools to facilitate concept creation and to solve problems, and the CBR process offers a framework capable of storing and reusing knowledge with the aim of accelerating the innovation process

Optical illusion? The growth and development of the Optics Valley of China

The ‘cultivated’ nature of the Chinese science parks, against the background of a transitional economy, differentiates them from spontaneous and cooperative Western models, and is a phenomenon deserving close examination. We study the dynamics and features of the so-called Optics Valley of China (OVC) in Hubei, aiming to explore the characteristics of an embryonic local innovation system constructed in a less-favoured region. The results show that institutional factors are the leading forces in a cultivated science park like the OVC. However, along with the shifting focus of the local government, the OVC’s industrial scale has remained small and its industrial chain has remained incomplete. Moreover, the lack of trust and interactions between various components in this innovation system has been highly noticeable. All these features may be seen as warnings to the OVC that a revision of this innovation system is needed in order to avoid the fate of becoming an ‘optical illusion’

HRTEM and Molecular Modeling of the MoS 2-Co9 S 8 Interface: Understanding the Promotion Effect in Bulk HDS Catalysts

As environmental regulations increase, more selective transition metal sulfide (TMS) catalytic materials for hydrotreating applications are needed. Highly active TMS catalysts become more and more desirable triggering new interest for unsupported Co-promoted MoS2-based systems that have high volumetric activity as reported here. Contrary to the common observation for alumina-supported MoS2-based catalysts, we found in our previous studies with dibenzothiophene (DBT) hydrodesulfurization (HDS) that the catalytic activity is directly proportional to the increase of surface area of the sulfide phases (Co9S8 and MoS2) present in Co-promoted MoS2 unsupported catalysts. This suggests that activity is directly connected with an increase of the contact surface area between the two sulfide phases. Understanding of the nature of the possible interaction between MoS2 and Co9S8 in unsupported catalytic systems is therefore critical in order to get a more generalized overview of the causes for synergy. This has been achieved herein through the detailed characterization by XRD, XPS, and HRTEM of the highly active Co9S8/MoS2 catalyst resulting in a proposed model for a Co9S8/MoS2 interface. This model was then subjected to a DFT analysis to determine a reasonable description of the surface contact region between the two bulk phases. Modelling of the interface shows the creation of open latent vacancy sites on Mo atoms interacting with Co and formation of direct Co-Mo bonds. Strong electron donation from Co to Mo also occurs through the intermediate sulfur atom bonded to both metals while an enhanced metallic character is also found. These changes in coordination and electronic properties are expected to favor a synergetic effect between Co and Mo at the proposed localized interface region between the two bulk MoS2 and Co9S8 phases.CONACYT, Mexico 207997MRTI of UTEP, Cotton Trust UTEPMicrolectronics Research Lab of UT-Austin and Departamento de Educacion y Cultura of Gobierno del Estado de ChihuahuaMicroelectronics Research Cente

Towards an Expert Network in Open Standards and Open Source Software: Research, Expertise and Synergy for Open and Libres Standards and Software (RESOLL) - Version 2.0

CIRANO and its partners are proposing the creation of an Expert Network in Open Standards and Open Source Software (Research, Expertise and Synergy for Open and Libres Standards and Software-RESOLL), which would be a partnership between information technology research centres, government and private user organizations, and businesses working in the field. The network will conduct studies and pilot projects that integrate computer solutions based on open standards and open source software, mainly in e-government fields such as health, education, and scientific research, as well as municipal and quasi-public services and business processes for SMEs. The knowledge, expertise and tools thus developed will be disseminated in a number of ways in order to Quebec and Canadian expertise in the field. RESOLL will also have economic and strategic benefits in that it will put the new economic model to the test in terms of open standards and open source software as well as the reuse of software components by organizations. Background The development of on-line government services and e-business is a priority for governments and businesses of all sizes. It requires considerable spending and significant strategic and organizational changes. Of the many information technology solutions available, the use of open standards and open source software is often brought up by those in the know. Although the Internet and many world-renowned software programs were developed largely from open standards and open source software, there is still a need to study, and above all prove the advantages of this approach for public and quasi-public organizations as well as small to medium-sized businesses. It is essential to identify the needs of these organizations, document best practices, experiment with open source software solutions, evaluate the performance of the software and share the knowledge and know-how of Quebec and Canadian research centres and businesses. RESOLL Goals he main goal of the Expert Network on Open Standards and Open Source Software (RESOLL) is to give people an understanding of the benefits of open standards and open source software and suggest an intelligent and advantageous use of them for public and quasi-public organizations and SMEs. More specifically, the goals are as follows: Document and share government and industry policies, strategies, and practices with respect to the use and development of adaptive software and open source software, defining open standards, open source software, adaptive software, and proprietary software; Adapt these practices and share the different methods with partners and the IT management and development communities in government and business; Establish innovative prototypes and pilot projects in order to test and demonstrate the advantages and features of this approach; Develop the expertise of Quebec and Canadian organizations in the field and create synergy between them and their users; P ublish and share the findings of the work, contribute to the enrichment of a collective software asset base available to public and quasi-public organizations and SMEs while explaining the legal issues involved in the various types of licences and electronic services. Process ESOLL is a multilateral partnership founded on the excellence of partners in their respective field. The RESOLL process will be based on the needs of its partners and users. Once these needs have been identified, research will be conducted to identify available solutions, adapt them through an integration process and alpha test them. This would be followed by a pilot project as required by the organizations and businesses. The pilot project will be implemented and evaluated in order to learn from it and ensure that necessary adjustments are made. Solutions thus obtained will be implemented as electronic services either by the client organization’s IT department or by a business partner. It is up to each organization to select their service provider. RESOLL will encourage the transfer of developed tools and services to partners for complete autonomy. Each project will have its own budget, funded by client partners. RESOLL will use part of its operating budget to start projects and develop a start-up asset base for its activities. Expectations and Deliverables The expectations of RESOLL partners and the team can be expressed by the achievement of their goals. RESOLL’s actions will quickly lead to concrete results. The deliverables will be: Policy and position papers to help partners make clear and informed decisions; Needs analyses and suggested solutions; Software solutions based on open standards and open source software integrated into experimental electronic services; Pilot project experiments that combine strategies, plans, software solutions, project support, evaluation and recommendations; Studies and interpretation documents for different types of licences and software; Collaborative Web site for sharing documents and open source software developed in the context of RESOLL projects or available on the Internet, with comments and explanations; Information and knowledge sharing activities for RESOLL and its partners (conferences, workshops, training, etc.). Partners RESOLL is a multilateral partnership. The partners that have been asked to become involved are: CIRANO, CRIM, RISQ, the governments of Quebec and Canada, Industry Canada, university researchers, Canadian and Quebec software and information technology companies, and not-for-profit user organizations from the software and information technology fields. Budget ESOLL’s master infrastructure budget will make it possible to establish a small coordination team involving part-time resources seconded from their parent organizations. We plan to obtain general financing from government and the businesses involved. The individual projects will provide their own financing. Other Benefits RESOLL will contribute to Quebec’s and Canada’s world leadership by sharing the results of its work. It will contribute to the eventual creation of resources that will enable partner companies to commercialize services based on open source software.Open standard, free software, open software, FOSS, e-government, business process, small and medium enterprises,

Development of criteria and procedures for the evaluation of the European Action Plan for Organic Agriculture

This final report provides a synthesis of the results of the EU-funded ORGAP project, with the title “European Action Plan of Organic Food and Farming - Development of criteria and procedures for the evaluation of the EU Action Plan for Organic Agriculture”. This project started in May 2005 and was completed in April 2008. The overall objective of this project was to give scientific support to the implementation of the EU Organic Action Plan (EUOAP) by the development of an evaluation toolbox. In the project 10 partners from 9 countries (CH, UK, DE, IT, DK, SI, CZ, NL, ES) participated, as well as the European umbrella organisation of the Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM EU Regional group), ensuring a broad stakeholder consultation process and dissemination all over Europe. Chapter 1 describes the background and the objectives, structure and the outcome of the ORGAP Project. It shows that since the late 1980s, organic farming development in the European Union (EU) has been stimulated mainly by two factors, one related to strong consumer demand, supported by the EU regulation defining organic food, and the other to policy support for the provision of public goods. Responding to concerns that area payments as ‘supply-push’ measures can impact negatively on the markets for organic products, policy-makers have started to take a more integrated approach to policy using the ‘action plan’ mechanism. Action plans can be found in most EU member states. At national level, action plans provide a mechanism to ensure a balanced policy mix, reflecting different aims and the various supply-push and demand-pull policy instruments available, tailored to local conditions. In 2004 the European Commission launched the European Action Plan for Organic Food and Farming. The plan contained 21 action points, which relate to the following areas: • Consumer information and promotion campaigns; • Improved research, market intelligence and statistical data collection; • Full utilisation of the rural development programme and other existing options to support organic farming; • Improving the transparency, scope and implementation of the regulation defining organic farming In the meantime, the European Commission has started to implemented most of the actions. In chapter 2 a brief history about organic action plan development is given, in particular about the European as well as national organic action plan for organic food and farming. The European Action Plan for Organic Food and Farming (EC 2004) is the result of a three-year process of developing the Action Plan, starting in 2001. This process led to: a Commission staff paper exploring the options for an action plan in 2001; the establishment of an independent expert working group in 2002, a public internet consultation on specific options in February 2003; a European Parliament hearing on the action plan options in June 2003; and a public hearing on the action plan options in January 2004. In June 2004 the action plan was decided by the EU Council in June 2004, following significant internal debate within the Commission and the EU Parliament. The involvement of stakeholders in the development of the EUOAP was mainly in the explorative phases involving identification of organic sector development needs and possible solution phase. The actual action plan was prepared after the public hearing in January 2004, so that stakeholders were not able to comment on the action plan document or the balance of individual actual action points. During the subsequent implementation phase, primary responsibility also rests with the EU Commission, with input from the EU Council, EU Parliament and member-state government representatives, with only limited input from other stakeholder groups. The European Commission has started to implement the actions of the European Organic Action Plan, many of which have been achieved or are at an advanced stage of completion. The most significant initiatives are the publication of the new Council regulation (EC) 834/2004 on organic production and labelling of organic products and the consumer information campaign. The development of national organic action plans started in Europe in 1995 when Denmark introduced its first organic action plan. Denmark thus acted as a forerunner and pioneer in this field. Nowadays, most EU Member States have organic action plans for organic food and farming. Of those that don’t, some have plans in preparation. Under the framework of the ORGAP Project, six national (CZ, DK, DE, IT, NL, SI) and two regional (Andalucia (AND), England (ENG) action plans for organic food and farming were com-pared. As a consequence of the very different situation in the eight case-study countries, the action plans studied vary in their scope. The English and the Dutch action plans represent market-driven and demand-led approaches with a clear focus on market development measures. The German Federal Organic Farming Scheme on the other hand puts a distinct emphasis on informational policy instruments to strengthen the organic sector through consumer information as well as through research and development. Finally, the Andalusian, Czech, Danish, Italian and the Slovenian action plans represent quite broad approaches integrating a broad portfolio of measures targeted to supply and market development as well as to information and research. Apart from the Andalusian Action Plan, all other action plans studied include quantitative tar-gets. Most typically targets for organic adoption are set (CZ, DK, NL, SI and DE). However, the Dutch and Slovenian action plans include a combination of targets addressing the share of nationally produced organic products, the domestic organic market share in general, organic sales per capita and the development of tourist farms. The English action plan target was defined in terms of the proportion of the organic market for indigenous products supplied by domestic producers. To conclude, the case study action plans vary with regard to the development process, targets, objectives and the emphasis of measures on certain areas. This is due to quite different political and socio-economic framework conditions for organic farming in these countries. The comparison revealed that the weaknesses identified in the status quo analyses have only partly been translated to the targets and measures included in the action plan documents. This is on the one side a result of the national priority and budget setting and on the other side on the interdependency between EU policies and national policies. However, as all action plans were developed together with stakeholders, the composition of the stakeholder groups and the power of the initiating actor are crucial to the target and priority setting. In chapter 3 the authors write about organic action plans – what we know and do not know. This includes success factors, stakeholder involvement, coherence and consistency issues and the how to evaluate organic action plans with ORGAPET. What makes a successful action plan? This question is much more difficult to answer than it looks at first sight. Many other economic, social and policy developments influence the organic sector and often instances occur which have not been foreseen when a certain action plan was devised. Because of this a simple measurement of the state of a specific objective might be too simplistic. Under certain circumstances an organic action plan could already be regarded as a success if the measures contribute substantially to a development in the right direction. The point of reference would be here: What would have happened if the organic action plan would have not been in place? The second point to keep in mind in judging the success of an organic action plan is to be aware of the fact that such action plans are often not complete in a sense that they fully include all political measures directly relevant for organic farming. In such cases it is important to keep in mind and to analyse the broader policy and market environment relevant to organic farming in order to judge success of the action plan. Organic farming policies can of course only be successful if they are successfully implemented and need sufficient care and knowledge with respect to the often numerously legal conditions outside the specific organic farming area that influence implementation. It also means that a clear mission of implementation agencies and qualified and motivated personal involved are a key to successful organic policies and to successful organic action plans. Is the concept of an organic action plan an outdate concept? Some policy makers believe that it has been a fashion and its time is over. The authors of this report are convinced that any at-tempt to unify elements that influence organic farming and organic farming policies and to bring policies into an integrated, coherent framework will still be necessary and welcome in the future. Whether such attempts in the future will be called organic action plans is a different issue. Currently some key challenges include the question whether the general trend in agricultural prices has actually been reversed. If agricultural prices which tended to decrease in real terms throughout the 20th century are actually moving upwards due to factors such as increased demand for agricultural products, climate change and a possible slowdown of technological progress. Such general developments will also influence the development of organic farming and the development of suitable measures to support it. Some of the implications of a higher price level for conventional agriculture and a higher volatility of prices both in the conventional and organic markets might challenge the continuation of the traditional per hectare organic support policies. If climate change is actually perceived as the key challenge for decades to come then effects with respect to mitigate climate change of organic farming and with respect to the adaptive capacity of organic farming are quite important for any policy justification in support of organic farming. And finally, there is the productivity issue. If the actually demand for food stuff is increasing rapidly throughout the world then the obvious limitations of organic farming in this respect reported from industrial countries become more serious. In that context research and development supporting increasing productivity in organic farming might become much more important than in the past. It is clear that just looking at the originally envisaged targets and objectives might not be sufficient to judge whether or not an action plan has been successful. One key argument going be-yond clear targets and well balanced measures is that embedding action plan development in the wider policy area seems to be absolutely essential to be successful. However, there are a number of other issues to be dealt with which are also quite important prerequisites for successful organic action plans such as stakeholder involvement, coherence and consistency of action plans and an evaluation monitoring capacity. Stakeholder involvement may be understood and carried out in quite different ways including the provision of information, providing opportunities to comment on proposals, and empowering stakeholders to make their own choices. When preparing the toolbox aimed for evaluating the European Organic Action Plan in the OR-GAP project, attempts were made to involve both organic and mixed stakeholders in various steps in eight different national/regional settings and with different methods. These experiences form the background for recommending stakeholders with a purely organic and/or mixed portfolio to involve through group discussions in order to increase and optimize their analytical capacities and thereby their delivery of relevant information regarding the preconditions for implementing the EUOAP and for assessing its policy impacts. Parallel to this, relevant non-organic stake-holders could be involved on the basis of individual interviews or small group interviews. When deciding on which stakeholders to involve in any stage it is thus necessary to identify all stakeholders considered relevant to the issue and to clarify for each of them which perspective they represent in first priority. Therefore a general model for analysing stakeholder involvement in public policy on organic food and farming has been developed in the project. It includes a distinction of expertise involved in the three main perspectives of organic action plans realised in Europe up to now: the specific values defining organic food and farming; the market perspective as organic food in most plans is expected to develop in response to consumer demand; and a political recognition of the public goods delivered as a consequence of performing organic farming practices. With regard to each of these three perspectives, it is possible to specify expertise of stakeholders acting in the core or periphery of the perspective and to distinguish expertise of purely organic stakeholders and other stakeholders with a mixed or even non-organic expertise relevant for the development of policies in support of organic food and farming. The degree to which participatory methods realise their potential contribution depends critically on how carefully they are used and in what context. There is no one set of techniques to be mechanically applied in all contexts for all participants, but a diverse range of possible techniques which need to be flexibly adapted to particular situations and needs. Stakeholder involvement helps improving the information basis and the legitimacy of public policies. This is especially important on complex issues such as organic action plans, which involves actors with stakes in issues as different as the values of organic food and farming, the food market and the public goods of organic food and farming at one and the same time. Successful stakeholder involvement thus demands: careful preparations of which stakeholders to include at any stage of the policy process and of the methods used to promote participation; sufficient time for the stakeholder to react; this means at least 8-12 weeks of time for allowing substantial and broad participation, in particular in the case of involvement of farmers organisations, and good communication and transparency in each of the five stages of the policy process. Although this results in higher costs and more resources for those administrating the process, the outcome of such a process will improve the legitimacy and acceptability of the decisions and will facilitate very much the implementation (e.g. through public private partnerships). Such a more participative, transparent and time-balanced process helps to avoid unnecessary discussions and misunderstandings, which at the end might be more effective and cost-efficient. Project Synthesis For an evaluation of the internal and external coherence of the EU Organic Action Plan (OAP), the ORGAP project team generally made use of empirical methods and techniques suggested for analysing the synergy of programmes as well as their cross-impacts. A policy analysis of key synergies (positive and negative) was performed by means of a matrix of cross impacts as specified in the MEANS framework (EC, 1999). Two separate matrices were constructed: to appraise the internal coherence between the various measures of the EU Organic Action Plan; and to appraise the external coherence between the EUOAP and some national organic action plans. Experts involved in this evaluation process (Evaluation team) identified any synergy which may exist between pairs of measures or categories of measures. The effects of synergies or conflicts have been rated with the help of 2 electronic consultation rounds. After validation of these ratings, the calculation of the “synthetic” coefficient of synergy was performed, in order to evaluate the overall level of synergy/conflict within the European Organic Action Plan. The analysis suggests that Actions 9 (ensure integrity) and 10 (harmonisation of standards) are essential for the success of the EUOAP, given their synergetic effects. They in addition enter into synergy with many other actions. Interesting is also Action 13 (risked based-inspections) wit