Bank Of Holly Springs, Holly Springs, Miss.

https://egrove.olemiss.edu/ms_pcards/1089/thumbnail.jp

Profitability in Austrian industrial corporations

Cover title"To be Presented at the Rate of Return Conference, June 9-12, 1981, Lincoln Land Institute, Cambridge, Mass. U.S.A."Includes bibliographical references (p. 34-37 [i.e. p. 55-58]

The rate of return in German manufacturing industry

Cover titleSeries statement handwritten on cover"Paper Presented to the International Rate of Return Project Conference in Cambridge, Mass. June 9 - 11, 1981."Includes bibliographical reference

Measures of performance : the Swedish case

Series statement handwritten on cover"To be presented at The Meeting with the Rate of Return Group, MIT, June 9-12, 1981."Includes bibliographical reference

Ex post aggregate real rates of return in Canada: 1947-1976

Cover title"June 1981."Series statement handwritten on cover"This is a draft of a study to be published by the Economic Council of Canada. It is made available to participants in the Rates of Return Conference on the strict understanding that it is not to be circulated or quoted without permission from the Economic Council of Canada."Includes bibliographical references (p. 77-80

A broken silence? Mass Observation, Armistice Day and ‘everyday life’ in Britain 1937–1941

Between 1937 and 1941 the social survey organization Mass Observation collected material on the ways that the British people experienced and thought about the commemorative practices that marked the anniversary of the Armistice of 1918. What they found was that while people were largely united in their observation of the rituals of remembrance, their thoughts and feelings about these practices were diverse. For some, the acts of commemoration were a fitting way to pay tribute to both the dead and the bereaved. For others, these acts were hypocritical in a nation preparing for war. This article draws on the Mass Observation material to trace some of the diverse ways that remembrance was embodied in everyday life, practised, experienced and understood by the British people as the nation moved once again from peace to war, arguing that studies of the practices of remembrance alone tell us little about how they have been understood by participants

Intellectual Property, Open Science and Research Biobanks

In biomedical research and translational medicine, the ancient war between exclusivity (private control over information) and access to information is proposing again on a new battlefield: research biobanks. The latter are becoming increasingly important (one of the ten ideas changing the world, according to Time magazine) since they allow to collect, store and distribute in a secure and professional way a critical mass of human biological samples for research purposes. Tissues and related data are fundamental for the development of the biomedical research and the emerging field of translational medicine: they represent the “raw material” for every kind of biomedical study. For this reason, it is crucial to understand the boundaries of Intellectual Property (IP) in this prickly context. In fact, both data sharing and collaborative research have become an imperative in contemporary open science, whose development depends inextricably on: the opportunities to access and use data, the possibility of sharing practices between communities, the cross-checking of information and results and, chiefly, interactions with experts in different fields of knowledge. Data sharing allows both to spread the costs of analytical results that researchers cannot achieve working individually and, if properly managed, to avoid the duplication of research. These advantages are crucial: access to a common pool of pre-competitive data and the possibility to endorse follow-on research projects are fundamental for the progress of biomedicine. This is why the "open movement" is also spreading in the biobank's field. After an overview of the complex interactions among the different stakeholders involved in the process of information and data production, as well as of the main obstacles to the promotion of data sharing (i.e., the appropriability of biological samples and information, the privacy of participants, the lack of interoperability), we will firstly clarify some blurring in language, in particular concerning concepts often mixed up, such as “open source” and “open access”. The aim is to understand whether and to what extent we can apply these concepts to the biomedical field. Afterwards, adopting a comparative perspective, we will analyze the main features of the open models – in particular, the Open Research Data model – which have been proposed in literature for the promotion of data sharing in the field of research biobanks. After such an analysis, we will suggest some recommendations in order to rebalance the clash between exclusivity - the paradigm characterizing the evolution of intellectual property over the last three centuries - and the actual needs for access to knowledge. We argue that the key factor in this balance may come from the right interaction between IP, social norms and contracts. In particular, we need to combine the incentives and the reward mechanisms characterizing scientific communities with data sharing imperative

Making energy efficiency pro-poor : insights from behavioural economics for policy design

This paper reviews the current state of behavioural economics and its applications to energy efficiency in developing countries. Taking energy efficient lighting in Ghana, Uganda and Rwanda as empirical examples, this paper develops hypotheses on how behavioural factors can improve energy efficiency policies directed towards poor populations. The key argument is that different types of affordability exist that are influenced by behavioural factors to varying degrees. Using a qualitative approach, this paper finds that social preferences, framing and innovative financing solutions that acknowledge people’s mental accounts can provide useful starting points. Behavioural levers are only likely to work in a policy package that addresses wider technical, market and institutional barriers to energy efficiency. More research, carefully designed pre-tests and stakeholder debates are required before introducing policies based on behavioural insights. This is imperative to avoid the dangers of nudging