Implementing the market approach to enterprise support - an evaluation of ten matching grant schemes

Developing viable new business is critical to recovery, and long-term growth, especially in transition economies. There has been a long history of public support of enterprise development, starting with centralized state agency initiatives, but moving more recently to decentralized instruments for development of the business services market. The window of time during which the benefits of intervention are likely to be greatest: when a market is in its infancy, and its development is constrained by uncertainty, and lack of information. Interventions for enterprise support should be demand-responsive, and flexibly organized. In some circumstances, centralized assistance may still be effective, but it is generally better to use competitive private service providers responding to enterprises'changing needs. The main task is to stimulate the private services sector, improving its capacity to respond to the demands of new, and expanding private enterprises. Support for enterprises has tended to be either free, or heavily subsidized. But such subsidies can be justified only if interventions efficiently supply goods. Providing technical, and management know-how can be a public good if it generates externalities- if, for example, know-how benefits can be disseminated at proportionately low additional cost. Any subsidy for an intervention should be temporary, and should be phased out when the main objective of intervention is achieved - that is, when the market takes off. Grants should generally be for know-how, not for equipment. There may be a case for unbundling the know-how component of loans (including feasibility studies, and follow-up expert services) for grant funding. A package combining loans and grants - through a single financial institution, or through separate institutions - may work provided safeguards can be put in place to prevent perverse use of grants. The matching grant model, which is used increasingly in the World Bank, and elsewhere, is one solution - but it must be justified, and carefully designed. After evaluating ten matching grant funds, the author concludes that performance is mixed. Best practice models are needed. Ensuring economic benefits requires proactive management, with clear objectives of market facilitation ("making a market"). And it requires a balance between rapid grant approval procedures, and careful selection of services for grants.Economic Theory&Research,Decentralization,Enterprise Development&Reform,Environmental Economics&Policies,Banks&Banking Reform,Health Economics&Finance,Banks&Banking Reform,Economic Theory&Research,Environmental Economics&Policies,ICT Policy and Strategies

Technique for pinpointing submicron particles in the electron microprobe

Series of electron micrographs at successively lower magnifications can localize the substrate area sufficiently for a particle to be picked up by the beam of the electron microprobe. This approach could be modified to apply to fractographic studies, particularly of oxidation products stripped from fractures

Cheban loops

Left Cheban loops are loops that satisfy the identity x(xy.z) = yx.xz. Right Cheban loops satisfy the mirror identity {(z.yx)x = zx.xy}. Loops that are both left and right Cheban are called Cheban loops. Cheban loops can also be characterized as those loops that satisfy the identity x(xy.z) = (y.zx)x. These loops were introduced in Cheban, A. M. Loops with identities of length four and of rank three. II. (Russian) General algebra and discrete geometry, pp. 117-120, 164, "Shtiintsa", Kishinev, 1980. Here we initiate a study of their structural properties. Left Cheban loops are left conjugacy closed. Cheban loops are weak inverse property, power associative, conjugacy closed loops; they are centrally nilpotent of class at most two.Comment: 6 page

Hydraulic fluid interaction servovalve

Fluidic vortex valves used as fluid control elements in hydraulic servoactuator control syste

Holddown arm release mechanism used on Saturn vehicles

With the development of the Saturn launch vehicle, it became mandatory to develop a system for restraining the vehicle until after all checks and engine thrust buildup were completed. The basic Saturn I holddown arm constrains the vehicle by clamping it between a fixed support and a movable jaw. The jaw is on a link pinned to rotate sufficiently to release the vehicle. There are three links in the jaw (restraining) system arranged so that with a small force provided by a pneumatic separator mechanism, the large loads of the vehicle can be restrained. Design details discussed are the link system, the separator, adjustments, and the energy absorber. The function of preloading is discussed. The secondary release system is described. Finally, the design differences between the Saturn I and the Saturn V arm are described