International Monetary Fund Structural Adjustment Policy and Loan Conditionality in Ghana: Economic, Cultural, and Political Impacts

Ghana has, until very recently, been involved in structural adjustment programs since 1983 as a condition of its receipt of loans from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Structural adjustment required the restructuring of the Ghanaian economy in accordance with neoliberal economic theory with the intent of promoting economic development. The IMF has lauded the Ghanaian SAP experience as a success story based upon macro-level economic indicators that show growth in the national economy. However, this view ignores the micro-level economic effects of structural adjustment in Ghana, as well as the impacts on the country’s sociocultural and political circumstances. This paper uses a multidisciplinary approach to examine the broad reaching impacts that participation in structural adjustment programs have had on Ghanaian development. It argues that SAPs have done more harm than good in their economic, political, and sociocultural impacts and that Ghana has and will continue to see improvements in all of these areas as it distances itself from strict adherence to SAP recommendation following the recent exit from the program

UK hydrological review 1997 (2nd ed.)

This Hydrological Review, which also provides an overview of water resources status throughout 1997, is a reformatted version of the original commentary released as a web report in 1998. Some of the data featured in this report, particularly the more extreme flows, may have been subsequently revised. The annual Hydrological Reviews are components in the National Hydrological Monitoring Programme (NHMP) which was instigated in 1988 and is undertaken jointly by the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (CEH) and the British Geological Survey (BGS) – both are component bodies of the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). The National River Flow Archive (maintained by CEH) and the National Groundwater Level Archive (maintained by BGS) provide the historical perspective within which to examine contemporary hydrological conditions. A primary source of information for this review is the series of monthly UK Hydrological Summaries (for further details please visit: http://www.ceh.ac.uk/data/nrfa/nhmp/nhmp.html). The river flow and groundwater level data featured in the Hydrological Summaries – and utilised by many NHMP activities – have been provided by the Environment Agency (EA), Natural Resources Wales - Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and their precursor organisations. For Northern Ireland, the hydrological data were sourced from the Rivers Agency and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency. The great majority of the reservoir level information has been provided by the Water Service Companies, the EA, Scottish Water and Northern Ireland Water (formerly Water Service). The generality of meteorological data, including the modelled assessments of evaporation and soil moisture deficits featured in the report, has been provided by the Met Office. To allow better spatial differentiation the monthly rainfall data for Britain are presented for the regional divisions of the precursor organisations of the EA and SEPA. The Met Office monthly rainfall series are Crown Copyright and may not be passed on to, or published by, any unauthorised person or organisation. The provision of the basic data, which provides the foundation both of this report and the wider activities of the NHMP, is gratefully acknowledged

UK hydrological review 1998 (2nd ed.)

This Hydrological Review, which also provides an overview of water resources status throughout 1998, is a reformatted version of the original commentary released as a web report in 1999. Some of the data featured in this report, particularly the more extreme flows, may have been subsequently revised. The annual Hydrological Reviews are components in the National Hydrological Monitoring Programme (NHMP) which was instigated in 1988 and is undertaken jointly by the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (CEH) and the British Geological Survey (BGS) – both are component bodies of the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). The National River Flow Archive (maintained by CEH) and the National Groundwater Level Archive (maintained by BGS) provide the historical perspective within which to examine contemporary hydrological conditions. A primary source of information for this review is the series of monthly UK Hydrological Summaries (for further details please visit: http://www.ceh.ac.uk/data/nrfa/nhmp/nhmp.html). The river flow and groundwater level data featured in the Hydrological Summaries – and utilised by many NHMP activities – have been provided by the Environment Agency (EA), Natural Resources Wales - Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and their precursor organisations. For Northern Ireland, the hydrological data were sourced from the Rivers Agency and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency. The great majority of the reservoir level information has been provided by the Water Service Companies, the EA, Scottish Water and Northern Ireland Water (formerly Water Service). The generality of meteorological data, including the modelled assessments of evaporation and soil moisture deficits featured in the report, has been provided by the Met Office. To allow better spatial differentiation the monthly rainfall data for Britain are presented for the regional divisions of the precursor organisations of the EA and SEPA. The Met Office monthly rainfall series are Crown Copyright and may not be passed on to, or published by, any unauthorised person or organisation. The provision of the basic data, which provides the foundation both of this report and the wider activities of the NHMP, is gratefully acknowledged

UK hydrological review 1996 (2nd ed.)

This Hydrological Review, which also provides an overview of water resources status throughout 1996, is a reformatted version of the original commentary released as a web report in 1997. Some of the data featured in this report, particularly the more extreme flows, may have been subsequently revised. The annual Hydrological Reviews are components in the National Hydrological Monitoring Programme (NHMP) which was instigated in 1988 and is undertaken jointly by the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (CEH) and the British Geological Survey (BGS) – both are component bodies of the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). The National River Flow Archive (maintained by CEH) and the National Groundwater Level Archive (maintained by BGS) provide the historical perspective within which to examine contemporary hydrological conditions. A primary source of information for this review is the series of monthly UK Hydrological Summaries (for further details please visit: http://www.ceh.ac.uk/data/nrfa/nhmp/nhmp.html). The river flow and groundwater level data featured in the Hydrological Summaries – and utilised by many NHMP activities – have been provided by the Environment Agency (EA), Natural Resources Wales - Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and their precursor organisations. For Northern Ireland, the hydrological data were sourced from the Rivers Agency and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency. The great majority of the reservoir level information has been provided by the Water Service Companies, the EA, Scottish Water and Northern Ireland Water (formerly Water Service). The generality of meteorological data, including the modelled assessments of evaporation and soil moisture deficits featured in the report, has been provided by the Met Office. To allow better spatial differentiation the monthly rainfall data for Britain are presented for the regional divisions of the precursor organisations of the EA and SEPA. The Met Office monthly rainfall series are Crown Copyright and may not be passed on to, or published by, any unauthorised person or organisation. The provision of the basic data, which provides the foundation both of this report and the wider activities of the NHMP, is gratefully acknowledged

Letter to the Editor: Cheaters Never Prosper...Or Do They?

The following article is a perspectives piece regarding the newly discovered USMLE cheating rings taking place in Nepal, India, Pakistan, Jordan, and Japan. As this situation escalates, we call for action to find a solution to a widespread problem: eliminate the need for cheating by making licensure exams pass/fail. Score frenzy is out of control, and it has created a problem for graduate medical education as it applies to both applicants and programs. Here we address this problem and provide a solution that encourages readers to consider how we can create a system of resident selection that focuses not on numbers and scores but on people, passion, and humanism in medicine

Enrollment decision-making in U.S. forestry and related natural resource degree programs

This article investigates enrollment decision-making trends among students currently enrolled in forestry and related natural resource (FRNR) degree programs in the United States. We conducted an online survey administered to all student participants attending the Society of American Foresters (SAF) National Convention in Salt Lake City, UT, in 2014 to obtain our enrollment decision-making data. Students were asked to rank the enrollment factors they considered most important to their decision to enroll, and factors that caused them to hesitate when enrolling in their degree program. We found that the “typical” FRNR enrollee was a person who enjoyed being outdoors and had an affinity toward nature, while being attracted to the idea of working outdoors on subject material that pertained to nature in general. We also found that there were many important differences between the “typical” FRNR enrollee and their minority counterparts. For example, women were found to be significantly more hesitant about enrolling in a FRNR program than males (the dominant demographic of FRNR students). In addition to these differences, we found critical differences between degree program and specialty that also crossed gender lines. We report the results of these findings and discuss the implications for future recruitment efforts geared toward both boosting FRNR enrollment overall as well as increasing FRNR student diversity