Search results

Academic library consortia activity has become an integral part of academic libraries’ operations. Consortia have come to assert considerable bargaining power over publishers and have provided libraries with considerable economic advantage. They interact with publishers both as consumers of publishers’ products, with much stronger bargaining power than individual libraries hold, and, increasingly, as rival publishers themselves. Are consortia changing the relationship between academic libraries and publishers? Is the role of academic library consortia placing academic libraries in a position that should and will attract the attention of competition policy regulators? Competition policy prohibits buying and selling cartels that can negatively impact the free market on which the Canadian economic system, like other Western economies, depends. Competition policy as part of economic policy is, however, only relevant where we are concerned with aspects of the market economy. Traditionally, public goods for the greater social and cultural benefit of society are not considered part of the market economic system. If the activities of academic library consortia are part of that public good perspective, competition policy may not be a relevant concern. Using evidence gained from in-depth interviews from a national sample of university librarians and from interviews with the relevant federal government policy makers, this research establishes whether library consortia are viewed as participating in the market economy of Canada or not. Are consortia viewed by librarians and government as serving a public good role of providing information for a greater social and cultural benefit or are they seen from a market-economic perspective of changing power relations with publishers? Findings show government has little in-depth understanding of academic library consortia activity, but would most likely consider such activity predominantly from a market economic perspective. University librarians view consortia from a public good perspective but also as having an important future role in library operations and in changing the existing scholarly publishing paradigm. One-third of librarian respondents felt that future consortia could compete with publishers by becoming publishers and through initiatives such as open source institutional repositories. Librarians also felt that consortia have had a positive effect on librarians’ professional roles through the facilitation of knowledge building and collaboration opportunities outside of the home institution.

This paper aims to investigate the extent to which accounting standards for social impact reporting are in the public interest. This study aims to explore what the public interest means for social impact reporting by charities; and assess the extent to which the accounting standardisation of social impact reporting supports the public interest so defined.

This study conducts a case study of how stakeholders in Australian charities conceptualise the public interest when discussing accounting standardisation. This paper distinguishes three concepts of the public interest from prior research, namely, aggregative, processual and common good. For each, this paper analyses the implications for accounting and how accountants serve the public interest, and how they align with stakeholder views.

Stakeholder views align with the aggregative and processual concepts of public interest, however this was contested and partial. Accounting standards for social impact reporting will only serve the public interest if they also capture and implement the common good approach.

Clarifying how key stakeholders interpret the public interest can help standard-setters and governments design (or withhold) accounting standards on social impact reporting. This paper also distinguishes different practical roles for accountants in this domain – information merchants, umpires or advocates, which each public interest concept implies.

This paper extends prior research on accounting for the public interest to social impact reporting. The paper empirically demonstrates the salience of the common good concept of public interest and demonstrates the diversity of views on the standardisation of social impact reporting by charities.

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

This study aims to investigate the public deficit issue by contrasting conventional and Islamic views encompassing the paradigm, technical base, orientation and consequence detailed in nine discussions, which are rarely investigated in the research. There is a predisposition that contemporary Muslim scholars discuss the public deficit as well as the private sector perspective, which is used in the conventional conception, without riba as a primary feature.

The paper develops a comparative approach that derives two perspectives from the available literature using the qualitative method under the critical thinking method. It was drawn up in detail on how the paradigm and its related budgeting process contribute to public deficits, mainly in government institutions.

The paper reveals a prominent difference in public deficit in the Islamic view from a conventional perspective. From 9 points of comparison, the analysis covers 18 discussion that differentiates between private and public area criticism seems to overlap. The foundation giving a unique perspective in Islam toward public deficit is the concept of ownership that differs from capitalism, mainly the function of public spending is to distribute the wealth among people not for economic growth. The Islamic Government spent for public purposes based on cash-basis budgeting. The budgeting system in Islamic public spending is founded on treasure availability.

The paper uses a qualitative method that cannot empirically snapshot the actual or factual condition, in which subjectivity plays a plausible role. Furthermore, there is no actual sample (best practices) of the concept to be examined.

The research encompasses overlap between Islamic and conventional perspectives, including public and private issues regarding public deficits. The main beneficiary of the paper is a policymaker, including academicians or practitioners who are appropriate to use the concept in their circumstances.

The study is a pioneering study in public deficit comprehensively comparing conventional and Islamic perspectives and drawing up conceptual and technical aspects.

National Health Service (NHS) managers as change agents have been given the responsibility for the implementation of the NHS reforms and their views, beliefs and attitudes are therefore paramount to the effective and successful implementation of the reforms. A total of 28 managers from two acute care and one community care NHS Trusts in London were interviewed, after completing questionnaires, with a view to understanding their perceptions of the NHS managerial culture and also what they believed to be their public image. It appeared that managers generally believed that all NHS workers share altruistic core values and they thought that these core values had remained unchanged despite the previous and present reforms. The managers generally saw the recent NHS reforms as being compatible with this pan‐organisational altruistic culture; this should contribute positively towards their successful implementation. The managers, however, believed that the public did not see managers as being a part of this altruistic culture but at the same time they felt that this public view was misguided and unfair. Furthermore the managers do not appear to have allowed their perceived negative public perception to influence or shift their commitment to their altruistic values and ethos.

The prospect of public sociology is beginning to be widely discussed and debated. Critics put forth several reasons for skepticism, one of which is that the program of public sociology, under the leadership of Michael Burawoy, will infect sociology with a Marxist drift. This paper examines whether this drift in fact comports with Marx's ideas on the relationship between scientific knowledge, the role of intellectuals in the class struggle, and the type of political action he advocated. It finds that critics are fundamentally mistaken about the extent to which Marx's ideas are expressed in public sociology's program.

A circular letter addressed by the Local Government Board on the 27th October, 1913, to Authorities administering the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts, is printed as an Addendum to a recently issued Report by DR. MACFADDEN, on the work of the Board's Inspectors of Foods during the year 1913–14. This letter relates to the administration of the “Public Health (Milk and Cream) Regulations, 1912,” and points out that by these Regulations “ a definite restriction ” has been placed on the use of preservatives by producers, retailers and others concerned in the milk and cream trade, that no preservative is to be added to milk in‐any case, that no preservative is to be added to cream which is sold as cream, and that the Regulations do not prohibit the sale of cream containing boric acid, borax, or a mixture of these preservative substances, or hydrogen peroxide, provided (1) that it is sold not as cream, but as preserved cream, and (2) that the vessel in which it is sold bears a declaration in the prescribed form, showing the amount and nature of the particular preservative added, the addition to cream of any other preservative substances than those mentioned being prohibited. It is further stated that the object of the Regulations in regard to cream is to secure that preserved cream sold in compliance with the Regulations shall be distinguished at all stages of sale from cream to which no preservative has been added, and that this distinction is important in the interests of the public generally, and particularly in the interests of children and invalids. The italics are ours. In view of this pronouncement by the Board it is pertinent to enquire as to the fate of the extraordinary recommendation made in one of the Board's recent official reports to the effect that a much larger maximum amount of preservative should be allowed in cream during the six warmer months of the year than during the other six months. If a maximum limit is fixed for any period it is plain that the presence of an amount of preservative in excess of that limit is regarded by the Board as capable of rendering the cream injurious to health—at any rate in so far as children and invalids are concerned. It follows, therefore, that the adoption of the recommendation referred to would result in the sale of cream which, on the Board's own showing, must be injurious to health, during the warmer months of the year. The recommendation in question has been put forward as an argument for the defence in cases of prosecution for the adulteration of cream with preservatives, and in view of its official or semi‐official nature, has created unnecessary difficulties for the prosecuting Authorities. It is true that in the Sessions Appeal case of Whale v. Bennett, the character of this recommendation was thoroughly exposed and that the proposal was effectively disposed of, but it is none the less serious and inconvenient that such a suggestion should have been allowed to appear in a Government Report. We hope that we may now be permitted to congratulate the Board on the fact that they have officially repudiated the recommendation in question. The circular letter urges Local Authorities administering the Food and Drugs Acts to see that the “Milk and Cream Regulations, 1912,” are enforced in their districts “by the administrative procedure authorised under the Regulations, and, should necessity arise, by the institution of proceedings under the public health enactments referred to in the note appended to the Regulations.” It is, however, admitted by the Board in this letter that the action taken under the Regulations is independent of the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts and does not affect the action which may be taken under those Acts and that it is open to the Authority “ on consideration of the report of a Public Analyst on a sample of milk or cream to take action either under the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts or under the Regulations,” but the Board considers that “it is generally desirable that in cases in which it appears that the Regulations have been infringed, such action as may be necessary should be taken under the Regulations rather than under the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts.” We are unable to agree with this view. The appeal cases of Cullen v. McNair and Whale v. Bennett have resulted in the decisive establishment of the fact that the presence of boric preservatives in cream to the extent mentioned in those cases renders the adulterated cream injurious to health, and, in all cases where samples of cream are found to contain such amounts of this adulterant, Local Authorities will be well advised to institute proceedings under the Third Section of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 1875. The Sixth Section of the Act of 1875 has been shown to be useless by the decision in the Sessions appeal case of Williams v. Friend, whereas under the Third Section notification of the presence of the amount of the adulterant affords no protection to the adulterator, and the law in this respect is not and cannot be over‐ridden by the “ Milk and Cream Regulations, 1912.” The principal blot on the Milk and Cream Regulations, 1912, is that under these Regulations any amount of an injurious preservative may be added with impunity to cream so long as the cream is sold as “ preserved cream ” and the amount of the preservative present is stated on the label—provisions which are perfectly worthless so far as the protection of the ordinary purchaser is concerned.

The purpose of this paper is to report the findings of a study that examined the development of an assessment framework for public involvement.

The paper has adopted a multi‐method approach that includes: a focused review of literature relating to tools that might be used to provide valid and reliable assessments of public involvement; key informant interviews with people with experience from various perspectives of efforts to involve the public in the planning and development of health services; and a detailed study of a specific public involvement initiative involving a range of “stakeholder” interviews.

The paper finds that there are uncertainty and a lack of consensus about how assessment of public involvement should be undertaken. The findings emphasise the need to recognise the diverse nature of public involvement, which may require assessment to be employed flexibly at each individual NHS Board level.

The paper is a small‐scale study, in which it was only possible to probe a limited number of stakeholders' views due to practical and time restrictions.

The paper adds value to the discussions taking place at Scottish Government level as to the best approach in assessing public involvement in health service decision making.

The purpose of this paper is to identify and explore the possible underlying reasons for the differences in approaches adopted by organisations regarding the inclusion or exclusion of explicit statements in relation to the personal commitment and contribution of their employees within their publicized CSR strategies.

The approach is based on a longitudinal study involving interviews with 47 UK National Health Service (NHS) managers between 2000 and 2009. Theoretical frameworks and literature related to CSR, organisation culture and institutional theory are drawn upon in an integrated manner to analyse and discuss the findings.

Although the majority of NHS managers report holding core altruistic values they believe the general public does not recognize this and views them negatively. It is suggested that a combination of direct and indirect strategies aimed at highlighting the socially responsible role of NHS managers and their overall commitment and contribution to the NHS would help challenge the existing negative public image of NHS managers.

The study is based on a relatively small number of London based NHS managers consisting mainly of managers occupying senior and middle management positions and who may not necessarily represent the views of all managers nationally.

Whilst issues related to CSR are of concern to a wide range of organisational stakeholders, there appears to be relatively limited research undertaken in the context of directly exploring issues of concern from the employee stakeholder perspective. Within the context of the aims of this paper, this paper addresses this relative gap. The paper is of interest to a wide range of readers including NHS and non‐governmental organisation (NGO) policy formulators and practitioners; academics and students.