Manufacturing industry developments - 2006/07; Audit risk alerts

https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_indev/2131/thumbnail.jp

Estimating the Economic Impact of Telemedicine in a Rural Community

One commonly discussed benefit of broadband access in rural America is the potential for telemedicine visits that allow rural residents to take advantage of urbanized medical services. While the primary benefit of telemedicine is often viewed as improved health care access, the availability of these services also offers significant economic contributions to the local community. Site visits to 24 rural hospitals of varying size over a four-state area in the Midwest provide information to develop a methodology for estimating telemedicine’s economic impact. Using this technique, telemedicine services contribute between $20,000 and$1.3M annually to these local economies, with an average of $522,000.telemedicine, economic impact, teleradiology, telepsychiatry, Community/Rural/Urban Development, Health Economics and Policy,

Globalisation : trends, issues and macro implications for the EU

Globalisation, defined as an increasingly integrated world economy, has the potential to generate the largest structural upheaval in economies since the industrial revolution. As in the past, this process is being underpinned by both technological change and by a shift in policies in many countries towards a more open, market based, system of economic governance. These policies reflect the realities of a new world order where knowledge creation and absorption and the flexibility of the regulatory and institutional frameworks will be the key determinants of the economic fortunes of economies. This paper examines the historical empirical evidence regarding globalisation and quantifies the macro benefits and costs for the EU over the coming decades.globalisation, trade integration, global productivity, terms of trade, Denis , Mc Morrow, R�ger

Trusted UAV Network Coverage using Blockchain, Machine Learning and Auction Mechanisms

The UAV is emerging as one of the greatest technology developments for rapid network coverage provisioning at affordable cost. The aim of this paper is to outsource network coverage of a specific area according to a desired quality of service requirement and to enable various entities in the network to have intelligence to make autonomous decisions using blockchain and auction mechanisms. In this regard, by considering a multiple-UAV network where each UAV is associated to its own controlling operator, this paper addresses two major challenges: the selection of the UAV for the desired quality of network coverage and the development of a distributed and autonomous real-time monitoring framework for the enforcement of service level agreement (SLA). For a suitable UAV selection, we employ a reputation-based auction mechanism to model the interaction between the business agent who is interested in outsourcing the network coverage and the UAV operators serving in closeby areas. In addition, theoretical analysis is performed to show that the proposed auction mechanism attains a dominant strategy equilibrium. For the SLA enforcement and trust model, we propose a permissioned blockchain architecture considering Support Vector Machine (SVM) for real-time autonomous and distributed monitoring of UAV service. In particular, smart contract features of the blockchain are invoked for enforcing the SLA terms of payment and penalty, and for quantifying the UAV service reputation. Simulation results confirm the accuracy of theoretical analysis and efficacy of the proposed model

COMPARE and Complexity - When is COMPARE Not Enough?

The purpose of this case study research is to determine the utility of COMPARE, the DoD approved software for conducting A-76 competitions, in the more complex world of public-private competition. COMPARE serves as the baseline for establishing cost factors, while two Air Force Depots are used as a basis of comparison. Research questions answered are: 1. What are the baseline cost comparison factors established in COMPARE? 2. What are the common cost factors found in the Air Force Depot public-private competitions? 3. What are the similarities and differences between the cost factors established in COMPARE and those used in the Air Force Depot public-private competitions? 4. What explains the differences between the cost factors established in COMPARE and those used in the Air Force Depot competitions? 5. What changes can be made to make COMPARE more robust in the comparison of more complex public and private entities? Results show that the significant difference between competitions is that public-private comparisons explicitly integrate Best Value into the cost comparison. This is accomplished through the quantification of strengths, weaknesses, and Risk into dollar values. COMPARE, on the other hand, relies heavily on the assumptions of a competitive marketplace to minimize risk while achieving low cost

Charging the Poor: Criminal Justice Debt & Modern-Day Debtors’ Prisons

Debtors’ prisons should no longer exist. While imprisonment for debt was common in colonial times in the United States, subsequent constitutional provisions, legislation, and court rulings all called for the abolition of incarcerating individuals to collect debt. Despite these prohibitions, individuals who are unable to pay debts are now regularly incarcerated, and the vast majority of them are indigent. In 2015, at least ten lawsuits were filed against municipalities for incarcerating individuals in modern-day debtors’ prisons. Criminal justice debt is the primary source for this imprisonment. Criminal justice debt includes fines, restitution charges, court costs, and fees. Monetary charges exist at all stages of the criminal justice system from pre-conviction to parole. They include a wide variety of items, such as fees for electronic monitoring, probation, and room and board. Forty-three states even charge fees for an indigent’s “free” public defender. With expanding incarceration rates and contracting state budgets, monetary sanctions have continued to escalate. Additionally, many states and localities are now outsourcing prison, probation, monitoring, and collection services to private companies, who add additional fees and charges to the criminal justice debt burden of defendants. The impact of criminal justice debt is especially severe on the poor and minorities as they are frequently assessed “poverty penalties” for interest, late fees, installment plans, and collection. Often they have to decide between paying criminal justice debt and buying family necessities. The deaths of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Eric Garner in New York, and Freddie Gray in Baltimore have prompted renewed calls for investigation of the adverse treatment of the poor and minorities in the criminal justice system. The fear of arrest, incarceration, and unfair treatment for those owing criminal justice debt creates distrust in the system. In February 2015, a class action complaint was filed against the City of Ferguson asserting that the city’s jails had become a “modern debtors’ prison scheme” that had “devastated the City’s poor, trapping them for years in a cycle of increased fees, debts, extortion, and cruel jailings.” Moreover, the Department of Justice’s report on the Ferguson Police Department presents a scathing indictment of a system apparently more concerned with revenue collection than justice. Unfortunately, as illustrated by recent lawsuits and investigations alleging debtors’ prisons in Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington, the abuses are not limited to Ferguson, Missouri. The same concerns that led to the historical restrictions on debtors’ prisons have risen again with the growth of modern-day debtors’ prisons. Similar to the prisons in London during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries that were criticized for using a privatized system that charged inmates for all services, including room and board, the current justice system improperly charges the poor. It is now time to revisit these concerns and implement effective restrictions to reduce the incidence of debtors’ prisons. To remedy these concerns, my Article proposes eliminating egregious sanctions, providing courts flexibility to base fines on earning levels, and establishing procedures to enforce restrictions against incarcerating those who are truly unable to pay their criminal justice debt