Public-Private Partnerships for the Management of Agricultural Innovation Systems

Over the past 30 years, there has been a marked proliferation of the use of public–private partnerships (P3s) for the management of agricultural innovation systems. This is part of a larger worldwide trend of using P3s in the provision of public goods and services. Despite the large number of agricultural P3s in operation, a literature review demonstrated paucity of both case studies and of theory, meaning that the study of these emerging business models has not kept pace with practice. Over the last 30 years, only 38 peer-reviewed articles have been published. The objective of this dissertation is to advance the theory, analysis, and policy review of agricultural P3s. There are four independent investigations in this dissertation that advance the knowledge of agricultural P3s in seven specific ways. First, these investigations introduce two quantitative methodologies to empirically demonstrate the critical role P3s occupy in research and development (R&D) innovation networks and in the development, dissemination and commercialization of new technologies that enhance global food security. Second, this analysis suggests that the key variable influencing the formation of these organizations is people, rather than public policy or market incentives. Third, agricultural P3s require large up-front investments and they have extended gestation periods; therefore, they are dependent upon public support. Fourth, P3s are not a means of privatizing public functions; rather, they represent a new and emerging process of collaboration that transcends the public–private dichotomy. Fifth, agricultural P3s appear to operate in “orphan spaces,” sectors that, for a variety of reasons, are ignored by the public and private sectors. Sixth, there is evidence to suggest that many P3s require the services of P3 experts of which there is a shortage, particularly in the developing world. Seventh, each agricultural P3 is novel because each is the result of sector-specific challenges and has a structure that is dependent upon the types and number of partners and their objectives, limiting the ability to transfer explicit lessons from existing models to new P3s

The emerging role of nimotuzumab in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer

Current non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) chemotherapy and radiotherapy regimens, although showing definite survival benefit, still leave patients with a disappointing 15% 5-year overall survival rate. Because of the need to improve traditional outcomes, research has focused on identifying specific tumorigenic pathways that may serve as therapeutic targets. The most successful strategies to date are those aimed at the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), which is found to be upregulated in 40%–80% of NSCLC. Several tyrosine kinase inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been developed that inhibit the EGFR receptor and have demonstrated clinical benefit in trials as single agents and in combination regimens. Here we discuss one such agent, the mAb nimotuzumab, the background of its development, its clinical experience in NSCLC thus far, and the rationale for expanding its use to other NSCLC treatment settings

Defendant\u27s Motion to Exclude Testimony of Robert Parks or Motion for a EVID. R. 104 Hearing to Determine Admissibility

The State argues for either excluding the alleged confession of Richard Eberling as testified to by Robert Parks or, in the alternative, for a hearing to determine admissibility, because the statements do not meet the hearsay exception under Ohio R. Evid. 804(B)(3) allowing for statements made against the interest of the declarant. The State argues that the second element, which requires the statement to be against the penal interests of the declarant, was not satisfied, because the declarant was already serving multiple consecutive sentences in prison, ensuring that he would die in jail before his scheduled release. The State further contends that the third element, which requires corroborating circumstances to indicate the statement\u27s trustworthiness, is not met, because the circumstances show that not only did Eberling previously fail to make any confession when given ample opportunity, but also there exists other evidence that Eberling was not telling the truth

Social Mobility Or Social Stratification? Exploring The Relationship Between Public Policy Intervention And Outcomes At Minority Serving Institutions

Minority serving institutions (MSIs) are becoming an increasingly prominent part of U.S. postsecondary education and perform a critical role in educating and graduating students of color. These institutions receive discretionary and mandatory funding via the Higher Education Act to better serve their focal student populations. While a growing corpus of research illuminates the strengths of MSIs, few studies have focused on the possible relationship between MSI federal grants and student outcomes. This study incorporates institution-level Department of Education NCES data and Equality of Opportunity Project data with a regression discontinuity design to estimate the impact of Title III and Title V grants on college completion measures as well as upward social mobility measures. The results from this study indicate a positive relationship between institutions receiving MSI grant funding and institutional outcome metrics net of other variables. The relationship is particularly strong amongst Latino/a students graduating from HSIs. Implications for policy and practice as well as directions for future research are also discussed

Motion in Limine to Exclude Expert Testimony Pertaining to the Value of DNA Evidence

The State of Ohio’s motion to exclude the testimony of expert Neil Miller. As an expert witness, Miller’s testimony would pertain to the value of DNA evidence. Miller has written a report entitled Convicted By Juries, Exonerated By Science. The State of Ohio argues that Miller’s expertise is limited to rape cases therefore his testimony is not relevant to this homicide case. The State of Ohio also argues that the evidence Miller can provide cannot be either scientific or technical. In addition, the State argues that the rules of evidence require that that the testimony be excluded because there is no fact at issue in the case for which Miller’s testimony will prove insightful for the jury

Motion in Limine to Exclude Expert Testimony Pertaining to the Value of DNA Evidence

The State of Ohio’s motion to exclude the testimony of expert Neil Miller. As an expert witness, Miller’s testimony would pertain to the value of DNA evidence. Miller has written a report entitled Convicted By Juries, Exonerated By Science. The State of Ohio argues that Miller’s expertise is limited to rape cases therefore his testimony is not relevant to this homicide case. The State of Ohio also argues that the evidence Miller can provide cannot be either scientific or technical. In addition, the State argues that the rules of evidence require that that the testimony be excluded because there is no fact at issue in the case for which Miller’s testimony will prove insightful for the jury

Motion in Limine to Exclude Plaintiff\u27s Proposed Exhibits (#26, 27, 110)

The State of Ohio seeks to exclude Plaintiff\u27s Exhibits 26, 27, and 110 from trial, which are audiotapes and videotapes. The State argues that the tapes cannot be properly authenticated and that they are inadmissible hearsay. See order ruling on this motio

Motion in Limine to Exclude Plaintiff\u27s Proposed Exhibits (#31, 32, 38...)

The State of Ohio seeks to exclude the Estate\u27s proposed exhibits 31, 32, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 49, 77, 78, 79, 80, 91, 92, 93, 112, and 113. The State asserts that these exhibits are not admissible as hearsay under Ohio Evid. R. 802. See order ruling on this motio