6,868 research outputs found
Rethinking Force Majeure in Public International Law
Climate change is one of todayâs most significant and complex problems. The number and level of severity of extreme weather events is increasing rapidly around the world. One year after the next, we learn that heat records have been broken once again. Climate change has been traced to a wide range of severe problems around the world, ranging from the obvious damage caused by hurricanes, floods, extreme rainfall, prolonged droughts, wildfires and a host of other weather-related issues to the perhaps less obvious such as physical and mental illnesses, âcivil unrest, riots, mass migrations and perhaps wars caused by water and food shortages.â âIt is no longer rationally debatable that climate change will take a huge toll on human health and prosperity as well as pose significant risks to national security if it is not curbed.â
This Article proceeds as follows: The history of the excuse doctrines that could and are applied in the context of âsevere weatherâ will be briefly described to create a view of current law in the light of its development over time. Similarly, the traditional legal distinction between âmanâ and ânatureâ will be examined as this differentiation, at worst, no longer makes sense in relation to climate change and, at best, is one without significance. Because this article solely addresses the excuse doctrines that may apply to legal liability on nation states in the climate change context, the Paris Agreement on climate change (the âAgreementâ) becomes relevant as it would have been fair and equitable to apportion loss and damage under this Agreement. However, as the Agreement explicitly states that developed nations will not be liable for loss and damage under the treaty provisions, the article will proceed to analyze alternative theories of nation state responsibility for internationally wrongful acts. Finally, the article critiques the modern potential applicability of these doctrines for reasons of law and public policy
Multiplicity for critical and overcritical equations
On a Riemannian compact manifold, we give existence and multiplicity results
for solutions of elliptic PDE by introducing isometry invariances. When the
groups we used have finite orbits, we get multiplicity results for equations
with the classical critical Sobolev exponent, for instance the Yamabe equation.
When there is no finite orbits, the multiplicity is obtained for equations with
overcritical exponents
Who Controls a Constitutional Convention?âA Response
This paper presents PDEs that describes sedimentation by a system of diffusion and transportation equations. These PDEs are implemented with a semi-implicit scheme and solved on a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU). The equations are solved with the iterative solvers (conjugate gradient and biconjugate gradient stabilized method) provided by the software ViennaCL. The timings from these operations are compared with a CPU implementation. Before using the iterative solvers, a sparse matrix and a right hand side vector is set. The sparse matrix and the right hand side vector are efficiently updated on the GPU. The implicit terms of the PDEs are stored in the sparse matrix and the explicit terms in the right hand side vector. The sparse matrix is stored in the compressed sparse row (CSR) format. Algorithms to update the sparse matrix for the PDEs, which have Neumann or a mix of Neumann and Dirichlet boundary conditions, are presented. As the values in the sparse matrix depend on values from the previous results, the sparse matrix has to be updated frequently. Considerable time is saved by updating the sparse matrix on the GPU instead of on the CPU (slow data transfers between CPU and GPU are reduced). The speedup for the GPU implementation was found to be 8-10 and 12-18 for the GPUs GTX 590 and K20m respectively, depending on grid size. The high speedup is due to the CPU model of the CPUs used for timings being an older model. If a newer CPU model were used, the speedup would be lower. Due to limited access to newer hardware, a more accurate value for speedup comparison has not been acquired. Indications still prove that the GPU implementation is faster than the sequential CPU implementation.  Den hÀr uppsatsen presenterar PDEer som beskriver sedimentering av ett system av diffusion och transport ekvationer. Dessa PDEerna blir implementerade med en halvimplicit metod och löst med en grafikprocessor (GPU). Ekvationerna Àr lösta med iterativa lösare (CG och BiCGStab) frÄn mjukvaran ViennaCL. TidsmÀtningarna frÄn dessa operationerna blir jÀmförda med en CPU-implementation. För anvÀndandet av de iterativa lösarna blir en gles matris och en vektor pÄ höger sida satt. Den glesa matrisen och vektorn blir effektivt uppdaterat av GPUen. De implicita termerna blir lagrat i den glesa matrisen och de explicita termerna i vektorn pÄ höger sida. Den glesa matrisen Àr sparat i det komprimerade glesa rad (CSR) formatet. Algoritmer för att uppdatera den glesa matrisen för PDEs som har Neumann, eller Neumann och Dirichlet randvillkor blir presenterade. Eftersom vÀrdena i den glesa matrisen beror pÄ vÀrdena frÄn det förra resultatet, mÄste den glesa matrisen uppdateras ofta. AvsevÀrt med tid sparas av att uppdatera den glesa matrisen pÄ GPUen istÀllet för pÄ CPUen (lÄngsamma data överföringar mellan CPU och GPU reduceras). Accelerationen för GPU-implementationen konstaterades vara 8-10 och 12-18 för GPUena GTX 590 och K20m beroende pÄ storleken pÄ rutnÀtet. Den höga accelerationen beror pÄ att CPU-modellen som anvÀndes till tidmÀtning Àr en Àldre modell. Om en nyare CPU modell anvÀndes, ville accelerationen bli lÀgre. PÄ grund av begrÀnsad tillgÄng till nyare hÄrdvara, har inte mer exakta vÀrden för acceleration kunnat uppdrivas. Indikationer visar dock att GPU-implementationen Àr snabbare Àn den sekventiella CPU-implementationen
Foreword
UtifrÄn forskning och en pÄgÄende debatt i dagens samhÀlle gÄr det att utlÀsa en problematik kring medborgardialog dÀr den potentiella nyttan stÀlls mot eventuella risker. Debatten kring medborgardialogen har dessutom skapat diskussioner kring dess pÄverkan pÄ effektiviteten i planprocessen i relation till de kvaliteter som erhÄlls. FrÄgan har blivit allt mer aktuell de senaste Ären dÄ planprocessen anses vara ineffektiv i relation till vad som krÀvs för att tillgodose behovet av bostÀder (SOU 2013:34). Samtidigt har ett ökat intresse för medborgardialog uppmÀrksammats i landets kommuner (Khakee, 2006 m.fl.), nÄgot som generellt uppfattas som en tidskrÀvande process. Stadsbyggnadsbenchen Àr en samarbetsorganisation i Stockholms lÀn dÀr Ätta kommuner jobbar med benchmarking i stadsbyggnadsfrÄgor. De Ätta kommunerna utgör i denna uppsats den empiriska plattformen dÀr strateger och styrdokument har studerats för att studera kommunernas syn pÄ medborgardialog. Syftet har varit att klarlÀgga de olika kommunernas syn och förhÄllande till medborgardialog med hÀnsyn till dess effektivitet och kvalitet i planprocessen. Effektivitet handlar i denna uppsats om kortare och snabbare planprocesser för att kunna framstÀlla bostÀder i takt med inflytten till Stockholmsregionen. Kvaliteterna som kan erhÄllas genom medborgardialog Àr mÄnga och utlÀses i uppsatsens undersökning, men handlar exempelvis om demokratiska kvaliteter som politisk jÀmlikhet och förtroende, men Àven andra kvaliteter som lokalt anpassade lösningar och ökat socialt kapital. Dokumentanalys och intervjuer med tjÀnstemÀn och politiker har varit de frÀmsta metodologiska tillvÀgagÄngssÀtten i uppsatsen. Resultatet visar pÄ att kommunerna ser positivt pÄ idén om medborgardialog. MÄnga av dem har dessutom vÀlformulerade strategier och handböcker som talar för en bred kunskap kring vad medborgardialogen kan bidra med, men Àven en medvetenhet om dess risker och fallgropar. Den generella uppfattningen bland bÄde tjÀnstemÀn och politiker Àr att medborgardialog tar tid. Tiden kan eventuellt tas igen i slutskedet, men det finns inte nÄgra garantier pÄ att det sker vilket innebÀr ett visst risktagande om projekten Àr under tidspress. Det krÀvs en tydlig strategi som efterlevs, engagemang bÄde frÄn kommun och medborgare samt tilldelade resurser för att eventuellt kunna skapa en effektiv och kvalitativ medborgardialog
Cultural Values and Government
Mr. Dellinger Mr. Dellinger originally delivered these remarks for the panel entitled The Role of Government in Defining Our Culture, at the Federalist Societyâs 2006 National Lawyers Convention, on Saturday, November 18, 2006, in Washington, D.C. commenting on the Ninth Circuit decision Finley v. National Endowment for the Arts. The case involved the constitutionality of the Helms Amendment which required that the National Endowment for the Arts take decency into account in choosing who should be awarded artistic grants
The Constitutionality of a National Wealth Tax
Economic inequality threatens Americaâs constitutional democracy. Beyond obvious harms to our nationâs social fabric and peopleâs lives, soaring economic inequality translates into political inequality and corrodes democratic institutions and values. The coincident, relentless rise of money in politics exacerbates the problem. As elected officials and candidates meet skyrocketing campaign costs by devoting more and more time to political fundraisingâand independent expenditures mushroomâAmericans lose faith and withdraw from a system widely perceived as beholden to wealthy individuals and corporate interests.
The United States needs innovative approaches to help rebuild foundational, shared understandings of American democracy, the American Dream, and opportunity and fairness. Tax policy provides one central context in which collective judgments about fundamental values help form national identity. We believe that a national wealth tax (that is, a tax on individualsâ net worth) should be among the policy options under consideration to support vital infrastructure, social service, and other governmental functions. Although not a new concept, a wealth tax may be an idea whose time has come, as inequality soars toward record highs.
Our aim in this Essay is to help ensure that a wealth tax is among the policy options available to Congress by challenging a common assumption that has unduly harmed its prospects: the belief that the U.S. Constitution effectively makes a national wealth tax impossible. We believe this conventional wisdom is wrong and its casual repetition has been harmful. Devising a progressive tax system that effectively taxes the wealthy is notoriously difficult, but whether a wealth tax is part of that system should depend upon the policy choices of democratically elected representatives, not faulty constitutional understandings
- âŠ