Belief in public efficacy, trust and attitudes to modern genetic science

The official published version can be accessed from the links below - Copyright @ 2007 Wiley-BlackwellGovernment and policymakers want to engage the public in a dialogue about the conduct and consequences of science and increasingly seek to actively involve citizens in decision-making processes. Implicit in this thinking is that greater transparency and public inclusion will help dispel fears associated with new scientific advancements, foster greater public trust in those accountable, and ultimately increase the acceptability of new technologies. Less understood, however, are public perceptions about such high-level involvement in science and how these map onto public trust and attitudes within a diverse population. This article uses the concept of public efficacy—the extent to which people believe that the public might be able to affect the course of decision making—to explore differences in trust, attentiveness, and attitudes toward modern genetic science. Using nationally representative data from the 2003 British Social Attitudes Survey, we begin by examining the characteristics of those who have a positive belief about public involvement in this area of scientific inquiry. We then focus on how this belief maps on to indicators of public trust in key stakeholder groups, including the government and genetic scientists. Finally, we consider the relationship between public efficacy and trust and attitudes toward different applications of genetic technology. Our findings run contrary to assumptions that public involvement in science will foster greater trust and lead to a climate of greater acceptance for genetic technology. A belief in public efficacy does not uniformly equate with more trusting attitudes toward stakeholders but is associated with less trust in government rules. Whereas trust is positively correlated with more permissive attitudes about technologies such as cloning and gene therapy, people who believe in high-level public involvement are less likely to think that these technologies should be allowed than those who do not.The support of the Economics and Social Research Council (ESRC) is acknowledged. The work arises from the ESRC Attitudes to Genomics project L145251005

Implications of Integrated Commodity Programs and Crop Insurance

Moving from price-triggered to area revenue–triggered programs was perhaps the most common theme among 2007 farm bill proposals. Area revenue–triggered commodity programs may make farm-level revenue insurance products seem redundant, raising questions about why the federal government should continue both programs. Area revenue–triggered programs would remove much of the systemic risk faced by producers. As a result, private sector insurers may be able to insure the residual risk without federal involvement. This paper examines the effects of moving to area revenue–triggered commodity programs with a focus on public policy issues that would likely arise.commodity programs, revenue insurance, systemic risk, Agribusiness, Crop Production/Industries, Productivity Analysis, D81, G22, Q18,

Are Our Agricultural Risk Management Tools Adequate for a New Era?

risk, commodity programs, insurance, Agricultural Finance, Risk and Uncertainty, D80, G11, Q18,

Does Size Matter? School Consolidation Policy Issues in Arkansas

Providing a reasonable education for all students in Arkansas is a legal responsibility explicitly mandated by the state’s constitution. Consistent with the long-standing American tradition of “grassroots” control of education, public schools in all states are funded and managed first and foremost at the local level. The federal government can and does enact legislation with which schools must conform. Directly or indirectly, federal mandates provide significant amounts of monies to support particular types of school services and programming. But ultimate responsibility for financing and operating schools devolves on state government. In Arkansas, it has been held, the state must provide “a general, suitable, and efficient system of free public schools” (Lakeview v. Huckabee, 2001)

INVESTIGATING THE IMPLICATIONS OF MULTI-CROP REVENUE INSURANCE FOR PRODUCER RISK MANAGEMENT

This study investigates the potential for alternative multi-crop revenue insurance designs in comparison to single crop yield and revenue insurance designs. A non-parametric multi-crop insurance model is developed which subsumes the single crop designs. The results compare alternative designs in terms of rate levels and risk reduction gains for representative Mississippi producers.crop insurance, revenue insurance, risk, Risk and Uncertainty,

Customizable Area Whole Farm Insurance (CAWFI)

The customizable area whole farm insurance (CAWFI) was designed and compared with no insurance program and currently available whole farm insurance based on farm level yield (CFWFI). The CAWFI yields higher certainty equivalents over no insurance program, but lower to CFWFI; CAWFI has fairly small indemnity compared with CFWFI.Agricultural and Food Policy, Crop Production/Industries, Production Economics, Risk and Uncertainty,

Difficulty of distinguishing product states locally

Non-locality without entanglement is a rather counter-intuitive phenomenon in which information may be encoded entirely in product (unentangled) states of composite quantum systems in such a way that local measurement of the subsystems is not enough for optimal decoding. For simple examples of pure product states, the gap in performance is known to be rather small when arbitrary local strategies are allowed. Here we restrict to local strategies readily achievable with current technology; those requiring neither a quantum memory nor joint operations. We show that, even for measurements on pure product states there can be a large gap between such strategies and theoretically optimal performance. Thus even in the absence of entanglement physically realizable local strategies can be far from optimal for extracting quantum information.Comment: 5 pages, 1 figur

Life raft stabilizer

An improved life raft stabilizer for reducing rocking and substantially precluding capsizing is discussed. The stabilizer may be removably attached to the raft and is defined by flexible side walls which extend a considerable depth downwardly to one another in the water. The side walls, in conjunction with the floor of the raft, form a ballast enclosure. A weight is placed in the bottom of the enclosure and water port means are provided in the walls. Placement of the stabilizer in the water allows the weighted bottom to sink, producing submerged deployment thereof and permitting water to enter the enclosure through the port means, thus forming a ballast for the raft

Stable, inflatable life raft for high seas rescue operations

Raft is easily deployed and highly maneuverable in water. It has false bottom of water ballast containers attached to underside, making it exceptionally stable platform from which swimmers can operate. Raft is attachable to external moorings