National Service: can we afford it?

This thesis estimates the costs, implicit as well as explicit, of three National Service proposals. The three proposals examined were: (1) a completely voluntary system as presented by Donald Eberly, the Director of the National Service Secretariat; (2) a "coercive-voluntary" model developed by Richard Danzig and Peter Szanton in their book "National Service: What Would it Mean?"; and (3) a mandatory system similar to the military draft of the Vietnam War era. Costs included were: wages, medical benefits/coverage, GI Bill benefits, administrative costs, basic and specialized training costs, operational costs and recruiting/advertising costs. Additionally, implicit (i.e., opportunity) costs were included in Models Two and Three. Estimates were made only of the costs of the programs. The assessment of potential benefits from an untested program is even more problematic than the attempt to estimate economic costs and is beyond the scope of this thesis. This research indicates that previous estimates of the costs of National Service programs may be underestimated by several billion dollars. In all probability, these estimates were low due to the unintentional exclusion of certain relevant costs, such as training and implicit costs. However, it is also possible that conservative assumptions were used in many previous estimates to make national service more politically appealing. It was found that the voluntary model of Eberly is the least costly, but is also unrealistic. Greater expenditures in wages and benefits would be necessary to provide enough incentives to enlist sufficient volunteers. This thesis suggests a program that provides better incentives for volunteers and presents a more realistic cost of a voluntary system. It is found that the term "National Service," as used in this context, more accurately describes a job creation program for lower income youth than a service program designed to attract youth from a cross-section of American society.http://archive.org/details/nationalservicec00deboNAN

Commodity risk assessment of specified species of Lonicera potted plants from Turkey

The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High-risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by potted plants (2–4 years old) of specified Lonicera species produced in nurseries and that are imported from Turkey, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the NPPO of Turkey. The relevance of any pest for this Opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria listed in Section 4.1. Three species, the EU-quarantine pests Lopholeucaspis japonica and Meloidogyne chitwoodi and the protected zone quarantine pest Bemisia tabaci, fulfilled these criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Turkey were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with B. tabaci on evergreen species of Lonicera spp. being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,293 and 10,000 plants per 10,000 would be free of B. tabaci

Commodity risk assessment of Petunia spp. and Calibrachoa spp. unrooted cuttings from Kenya

The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to evaluate the probability of entry of pests (likelihood of pest freedom at entry), including both regulated and non-regulated pests, associated with unrooted cuttings of the genera Petunia and Calibrachoa produced under physical isolation in Kenya. The relevance of any pest for this opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria, based on the methodology used for High-Risk Plants adapted for the specificity of this assessment. Fourteen EU-regulated pests (Bemisia tabaci, cowpea mild mottle virus, Liriomyza huidobrensis, Liriomyza sativae, Liriomyza trifolii, potato leafroll virus, potato spindle tuber viroid, Ralstonia pseudosolanacearum, R. solanacearum, Scirtothrips dorsalis, tomato mild mottle virus, tomato spotted wilt virus, tomato yellow leaf curl virus and Xanthomonas vesicatoria) and six EU non-regulated pests (Aleurodicus dispersus, pepper veinal mottle virus, Nipaecoccus viridis, Phenacoccus solenopsis, Tetranychus neocaledonicus and tomato yellow ring virus) fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Kenya were evaluated, taking into account the possible limiting factors. Additionally, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom, taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with T. neocaledonicus being the pest most frequently expected on the imported cuttings. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9942 and 10,000 bags containing unrooted cuttings of Petunia spp. and Calibrachoa spp. per 10,000 would be free of T. neocaledonicus

Commodity risk assessment of Cornus alba and Cornus sanguinea plants from the UK

The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘high risk plants, plant products and other objects’. Taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the applicant country, this Scientific Opinion covers the plant health risks posed by the following commodities: Cornus alba and Cornus sanguinea bare-root plants and rooted plants in pots up to 7 years old imported into the EU from the UK. A list of pests potentially associated with the commodities was compiled. The relevance of any pest was assessed based on evidence following defined criteria. Four EU quarantine pests (Meloidogyne fallax, Phytophthora ramorum (non-EU isolates), tobacco ringspot virus, and tomato ringspot virus) and one EU non-regulated pest (Discula destructiva), were selected for further evaluation. For the selected pests, the risk mitigation measures implemented in the technical dossier from the UK were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with P. ramorum being the pest most frequently expected on the imported C. alba and C. sanguinea plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9823 and 10,000 bare-root C. alba and C. sanguinea plants per 10,000 will be free from P. ramorum

Commodity risk assessment of Sorbus aucuparia plants from the UK

The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘high risk plants, plant products and other objects’. Taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the applicant country, this Scientific Opinion covers the plant health risks posed by the following commodities: Sorbus aucuparia bare-root plants and rooted plants in pots up to 7 years old and specimen trees in pots up to 15 years old imported into the EU from the UK. A list of pests potentially associated with the commodities was compiled. The relevance of any pest was assessed based on evidence following defined criteria. Three EU quarantine pests (Entoleuca mammata and Phytophthora ramorum (non-EU isolates), Erwinia amylovora), were selected for further evaluation. For two of the selected pests (E. mammata and P. ramorum), the risk mitigation measures implemented in the UK and specified in the technical dossier were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies between the pests evaluated, with P. ramorum being the pest most frequently expected on the imported S. aucuparia plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9812 and 10,000 bare-root S. aucuparia plants per 10,000 will be free from P. ramorum

Commodity risk assessment of Petunia spp. and Calibrachoa spp. unrooted cuttings from Guatemala

The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to evaluate the probability of entry of pests (likelihood of pest freedom at entry), including both, regulated and non-regulated pests, associated with unrooted cuttings of the genera Petunia and Calibrachoa produced under physical isolation in Guatemala. The relevance of any pest for this opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria, based on the methodology used for high-risk plants adapted for the specificity of this assessment. Nineteen EU regulated pests (Bemisia tabaci, pepper golden mosaic virus, pepper huasteco yellow vein virus, tomato severe leaf curl virus, tomato yellow leaf curl virus, tomato spotted wilt virus, Liriomyza huidobrensis, Liriomyza sativae, Liriomyza trifolii, Bactericera cockerelli, Eotetranichus lewisi, Epitrix subcrinita, Epitrix cucumeris, Helicoverpa zea, Chloridea virescens, Spodoptera ornithogalli, Ralstonia solanacearum, Ralstonia pseudosolanacearum, Xanthomonas vesicatoria) and one EU non-regulated (Phenacoccus solenopsis) pest fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Guatemala were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors, and an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The limited and partially conflicting information provided in the dossier contributes to the wide estimates of pest freedom. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with Ralstonia spp. (R. solanacearum and R. pseudosolanacearum) being the pest most frequently expected on the imported cuttings. The expert knowledge elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9916 and 10,000 bags containing unrooted cuttings per 10,000 would be free of Ralstonia spp