Population dynamics of phyllocnistis citrella (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae) and its parasitoids in Tafí Viejo, Tucumán, Argentina

Seasonal abundance of the citrus leafminer, Phyllocnistis citrella Stainton (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae), was investigated between Nov 1999 and Apr 2003 in Tafí Viejo (Tucuman province). Phyllocnistis citrella populations increased during spring and summer, declined during fall, and disappeared in the winter. Five species of parasitoids, one exotic and four indigenous, attacked citrus leafminer immature stages in commercial and experimental lemon orchards. Ageniaspis citricola Logvinovskaya (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae) was the most abundant parasitoid. Cirrospilus neotropicus Diez & Fidalgo (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) was the most abundant indigenous species, followed by Galeopsomyia fausta LaSalle (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae). The other indigenous species were not common and were only occasionally collected from citrus leafminer larvae. Parasitoids and P. citrella exhibited similar population fluctuations throughout the entire sampling period. A certain degree of synchrony exists between the most abundant parasitoids (A. citricola, C. neotropicus, and G. fausta) and the pest. The highest rates of parasitism were observed in the fall. Ageniaspis citricola exhibited approximately 29.5% parasitism, whereas all the native species together were only 8.2%. Data showed that a clear dependence existed between percentages of parasitism and citrus leafminer population density for the most frequent parasitoid populations. The results of this study show that C. neotropicus has an important role among the native species present in Argentina.Fil: Diez, Patricia Alejandra. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Regional de Investigaciones Científicas y Transferencia Tecnológica de La Rioja. - Universidad Nacional de La Rioja. Centro Regional de Investigaciones Científicas y Transferencia Tecnológica de La Rioja. - Universidad Nacional de Catamarca. Centro Regional de Investigaciones Científicas y Transferencia Tecnológica de La Rioja. - Secretaría de Industria y Minería. Servicio Geológico Minero Argentino. Centro Regional de Investigaciones Científicas y Transferencia Tecnológica de La Rioja. - Provincia de La Rioja. Centro Regional de Investigaciones Científicas y Transferencia Tecnológica de La Rioja; ArgentinaFil: Peña, Jorge E.. University of Florida; Estados UnidosFil: Fidalgo, Patricio. University of Florida; Estados Unido

Testing differences in long run growth among Spanish regions: Can growth models explain it?

During the last decade we have assisted to a renewal interest in growth. There were a great number of theoretical and empirical works since the question was reopen by the Romer (1986) article about long run properties of growth models. Growth models can be classified in two kinds: exogenous growth models and endogenous growth models. The main differences between them are that the endogenous models try to incorporate into the behavior of the agents the assumptions that the first assumes as exogenous. This difference, that sounds only methodological, has important implications. The conclusion of the exogenous models is that, in presence of free factor mobility and free diffusion of technology, countries and regions will converge to the same rate of growth, and, in absence of technical progress, they will converge to the same level of per capita income, without any influence of initial conditions or political intervention in the economy (This result is obtained by Barro(1991) and Barro y Sala(1992)). With endogenous models the economies will growth at a rate determined by the behavior of the agents in the economy and could be the same or different among different economies. The theoretical result of these models is that in the long run could exist convergence or divergence. The main focus of this paper is, using the data for Spanish Regions from 1955 to 1991 and applying unit root time series methodology, to determine long run growth rates for each region with the aim of knowing if we can choose between the two kind of growth models.

Press Councils in Portugal and France : something new on the Western front

In a time when ultra-liberalism, de-regulation and market-driven trends increasingly dominate the media business, but also when their ‘clients’ increasingly demand to have a more active voice in the public communication process, the issues of media responsibility and media accountability seem to be gaining a renewed interest. The technological environment of our digital era, with the expansion of Internet, of social networks and of opportunities for selfedition, allowed many new actors to enter the media field, or to get much closer to it, claiming for a new relationship between the traditional media ‘producers’ and the traditional media ‘consumers’. These last ones demand more and more to be regarded as citizens, rather than just ‘consumers’, and therefore as partners in the process of news production and diffusion in the public sphere. But in order to achieve this, media must also be willing to open the doors of their ‘fortresses’ and accept that transparency and interaction with their publics are an unavoidable prerequisite for the legitimization of their power in a democratic society. This is what media social responsibility is all about, after all. In this context, an important role could be played by the so-called Media Accountability Systems (M*A*S*, as they were named by Claude-Jean Bertrand), and particularly by the Press Councils – mechanisms that bring together representatives of the media industry, of the journalists and of the public, in order to held the media more accountable on a voluntary, self-regulated basis. In the last year, two movements emerged in two Western European countries, both trying to launch a Press Council: France (where such a mechanism never existed, although the country was a pioneer in the struggle for press freedom) and Portugal (where a Press Council was created in 1975, soon after the recovery of democracy, but was extinguished fifteen years later, having been somehow replaced by a State-driven regulatory entity). In spite of their obvious differences, these two cases, besides coinciding in time, show some similarities that deserve our attention and can be regarded as examples of new trends in the media landscape. It is our purpose, in this paper, to look at the French and the Portuguese cases, trying to understand their specific backgrounds and to systematize the arguments of the main protagonists of the two movements going on. We’ll do this, in a first moment, through historical and documental research, and, in a second moment, through interviews to some of the leading supporters of this idea in both countries. As for the Portuguese case, we’ll also evoke the experience of the former Press Council, trying to shed light on the (mostly political) motives that led to its premature death

Journalists’ professional identity : new challenges to an old quest

The efforts made by journalists, in different countries and within different social and historical contexts, to have their ‘craft’ or ‘occupation’ recognized as a true ‘profession’, have always been somehow contradictory and ambiguous. The appeal of professionalism still divides opinions inside the professional group itself, with some voices claiming for a more demanding set of conditions to enter and work in this activity (for example, a University degree and stronger accountability mechanisms), and other voices insisting that it must be an ‘open’ job in order to guarantee the universal right to freedom of expression. Actually, the journalists’ professional group seems very often to claim the benefits and privileges of being legally treated as a ‘profession’, but doesn’t look equally demanding when it comes to the responsibilities and duties implied by such a status. The activity of gathering and disseminating news and information in the public sphere – which was some kind of a monopoly in the journalists’ hands – has, in the meantime, become accessible to almost everyone, everywhere, thanks to the Internet and the digital technologies. Within this context, new questions seem to challenge the very definition of a journalist or, at least, the core elements that should differentiate his/her professional identity from a multiplicity of other practitioners in the open field of public communication. And that, as we try to discuss in this paper, could bring us back to a kind of reviewed professionalism

A valorização 'teórica' do saber 'prático' no jornalismo

O processo de construção do jornalismo como uma disciplina específica e uma profissão autónoma foi, desde os primórdios, complexo e cheio de ambiguidades. Uma das questões mais discutidas foi sempre a de saber se o métier deveria ser obrigatoriamente ensinado em universidades – o que pressupunha reconhecer-lhe um corpo de saberes bem identificado e validado pela comunidade – ou se, pelo contrário, o jornalismo, encarado mais como uma vocação para a qual se “nasce”, deveria ser aprendido apenas na situação concreta de uma redacção, fazendo e vendo fazer, retirando ensinamentos do trabalho concreto dos profissionais no activo. Com este debate, acentuou-se a visão dicotómica entre um “saber teórico”, que só a escola garantiria, e um “saber prático”, que só o trabalho num jornal poderia dar. Ao mesmo tempo, qualquer destas perspectivas desenvolveu um discurso negativo e crítico sobre a outra, provocando algum afastamento entre académicos e profissionais, quando é certo que uns e outros procuram, a seu modo, contribuir para o mesmo fim: o de que haja cada vez melhores jornalistas, quer na capacidade prática de fazer o que fazem, quer na capacidade teórica de reflectir sobre o que fazem. Nesta comunicação defendo a necessidade de ultrapassarmos esta dicotomia. Mais especificamente, argumento sobre a importância de revalorizarmos a componente prática da aprendizagem do jornalismo, não a tratando apenas como um conjunto de técnicas que reproduzem mecanicamente o que outros já se habituaram a fazer, mas como um “saber de acção” ou um “saber profissional” que comporta, necessariamente, dimensões reflexivas (teóricas, se se quiser) de grande importância. O aprofundamento de uma “epistemologia da prática”, defendida por alguns autores, pode ser um bom contributo para colocar em novos moldes a questão da formação dos jornalistas – e da sua própria identidade

Novos desafios a um velho ofício ou... um novo ofício? A redefinição da profissão de jornalista

Texto elaborado no contexto do projecto colectivo de investigação Mediascópio – Estudo sobre a reconfiguração do campo da comunicação e dos media em Portugal.Enredada, desde os primórdios da sua afirmação enquanto actividade autónoma e sócio-juridicamente legitimada, numa razoável teia de indefinições e ambiguidades, a profissão de jornalista tem assistido (como é bem patente no quinquénio 2000-2004) a um conjunto de mudanças que, aparentemente, não facilitam o desfazer dessa teia. Pelo contrário, novos elementos decorrentes sobretudo das evoluções tecnológicas, dos contextos político-económicos e das transformações sociais – designadamente as que se ligam com o aparente redesenhar da esfera pública tal como a conhecíamos – parecem vir reforçando essas indefinições e ambiguidades, o que dificulta a construção e afirmação (sempre inacabadas, é certo) de uma identidade profissional clara nos seus contornos, forte na sua coerência interna (“para si”) e especificamente reconhecida na sua relação externa (“para o outro”). Este grupo profissional tornou-se bastante mais numeroso em Portugal, sobretudo durante os anos 1990, por força do alargamento do mercado televisivo ao sector privado e pela explosão de projectos mediáticos especificamente on-line. Entre 1990 e 2001, o número de jornalistas com carteira profissional quase triplicou, passando de 2.347 para 6.230 profissionais. Em consequência, a pirâmide etária modificou-se um pouco a favor do grupo de jornalistas mais jovens, tendo-se também observado um aumento significativo da presença feminina na proporção jornalistas-mulheres / jornalistas-homens. Por outro lado, embora não haja dados oficiais sobre a quantidade de jornalistas no activo com formação académica de nível superior, e especializada, há indícios que apontam, como seria expectável, para o aumento desse tipo de profissionais. Este rápido alargamento do grupo profissional acarreta uma maior heterogeneidade que, associada à progressiva diversificação de suportes e de ofícios no campo dos media, pode implicar alguma redefinição da profissão de jornalista, em moldes que aqui e além já se intuem, dados os sinais detectáveis numa diversidade de planos.Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT)

Newsroom councils in search of lost times

In April 1974, when Portugal recovered democracy and press freedom, after almost 50 years of political dictatorship that included a fierce media censorship, the elaboration of a new legal framework for the media was one of the strongest priorities. The importance granted to this issue was such that some of the rights and duties associated to media freedom were even inscribed in the fundamental law of the country – the Constitution itself. Among these rights and duties was the obligation for all media companies to have a newsroom council, elected by the journalists, with important powers regarding for example the choice of a new editor-in-chief, the hiring of new staff members or the adoption of major editorial principles and practices. The underlying ideas were that (a) in a democratic context, democracy should be practised also in the newsroom, and (b) journalists, besides owners and managers, should have a word in the internal decision processes, in order to make sure that the media meet their social responsibilities. This strong example of what we could call ‘participative democracy’ didn’t last long, at least in these terms. With the successive changes that brought the country closer to the general political model of European western democracies, newsroom councils kept their place but lost some of their powers and, therefore, many journalists felt less and less motivated to actively engage with them. In this paper, we intend to make a brief historical description of the changes that allegedly weakened the role of the newsroom councils, in spite of their potential as a means of media accountability and of press self-regulation. In a second moment, we’ll present the results of a survey among the existing newsroom councils of national news media, in order to try to understand the consequences of these legal changes in what regards journalists’ participation in the editorial process. Furthermore, we intend to find out if such changes altered the balance of power within media companies, opening the way to a more market-driven management and devaluating the active contribution of journalists to the editorial decisions

A questão das fontes nos códigos deontológicos dos jornalistas

As múltiplas questões suscitadas pela relação entre jornalistas e fontes de informação fazem parte das mais recorrentes preocupações desta classe profissional. Não admira, portanto, que sejam referidas com frequência nos Códigos Deontológicos dos jornalistas. Constatamos entretanto, quando lemos códigos de diversas latitudes, que essas referências são muito desiguais – tanto no pormenor com que aprofundam (ou não) o assunto, como no maior ou menor enfoque dado a determinados aspectos particulares -, revelando sensibilidades diversas, tradições particulares e até enquadramentos legais específicos. O objectivo desta comunicação é tentar mostrar, de modo necessariamente breve e não exaustivo, as principais semelhanças e diferenças existentes nos Códigos Deontológicos (ou Códigos de Conduta Profissional) de jornalistas, no espaço europeu, quanto à abordagem da problemática das fontes. Analisa-se complementarmente, de modo mais detalhado, a questão específica da protecção das fontes confidenciais de informação (sigilo profissional)