No description available.

No description available.

Daniel Butt develops an account of corrective responsibilities borne by beneficiaries of injustice. He defends the consistency model. I criticize the vagueness in this model and present two interpretations of benefit from injustice (BFI) responsibilities: obligation and natural duty. The obligation model falls prey to the involuntariness objection. I defend a natural duties model, discussing how natural duties can be circumstantially perfected into directed duties and showing how the natural duties model avoids the involuntariness objection. I also address objections from structural injustice and demandingness.

This paper takes a dive into understanding if funding extra diversity initiatives at Claremont McKenna College currently spurred on by students are worth the cost to the institution. Resources like that of Claremont McKenna’s C.A.R.E. Center (Civility, Access, Resources, and Expression) and funding for representative student organizations place large pressures on the institution’s available budget and there is not much proof that they will pay off in the long-run. In this paper, financial costs for supporting diverse students on campus are aggregated and compared to the possible financial benefits that may come of their consequential use. Results show that there is a largely positive societal benefit to the use of these resources at a fraction of the cost to the institution. These findings derive from CMC cost data; however, results imply similar conclusions across secondary education institutions nationwide.

The kinetic energy in river streams, tidal currents, or other artificial water channels has been used as a feasible source of renewable power through different conversion systems. Thus, hydrokinetic energy conversion systems are attracting worldwide interest as another form of distributed alternative energy. Because these systems are still in early stages of development, the basic approaches need significant research. The main challenges are not only to have efficient systems, but also to convert energy more economically so that the cost-benefit analysis drives the growth of this alternative energy form. One way to view this analysis is in terms of the energy conversion efficiency per unit cost. This study presents a detailed assessment of a prototype hydrokinetic energy system along with power output costs. This experimental study was performed using commercial low-cost blades of 20 in diameter inside a tank with water flow speed up to 1.3 m/s. The work was divided into two stages: (a) a fixed-pitch blade configuration, using a radial permanent magnet generator (PMG), and (b) the same hydrokinetic turbine, with a variable-pitch blade and an axial-flux PMG. The results indicate that even though the efficiency of a simple blade configuration is not high, the power coefficient is in the range of other, more complicated designs/prototypes. Additionally, the low manufacturing and operation costs of this system offer an option for low-cost distributed power applications.

Employees' benefits from the income taxes point of view Employee benefit can be defined as a certain advantage given to the employee by his employer on top of his salary. It is a voluntary fulfillment of the employer to which he is not obliged according to any law. Benefits represent significant motivator for current employees as well as attraction for new applicants. Benefits can be provided either in monetary or non-monetary form. The form of the benefit is usually crucial for the determination of its tax treatment on both employer's and employee's side. On the employee's side it has to be determined whether the benefit is taxable or tax exempt. On the employer's side it has to be determined whether the relating costs are tax deductible or not. The Income Taxes Act states explicitly that certain non-monetary benefits are tax non- deductible (e.g. gifts, expenses in the form of possibility to use cultural, leisure, medical, educational or sports facilities). In other cases the tax deductibility may be limited (e.g. contributions to alimentation provided by third parties including meal vouchers). On the other hand, non-monetary form is often one of the conditions for tax exemption for the employee (e.g. education, alimentation, soft drinks or possibility to use sports or medical facilities). The exemption...

No description available.

This thesis is developed in the context of investigating the health co-benefit of decarbonisation. Health co-benefit refers to the collateral benefit which arises from decarbonisation policies external to the main intended benefit of climate change mitigation via the reduction of Greenhouse Gases (GHG). Health co-benefit of this kind often arises via the corresponding reduction in air pollutants when GHG is reduced. This is because GHG and air pollutants such as particulate matter are often derived from the same source - the combustion of fossil fuels which drive economic activities. Existing literature in the health co-benefit of decarbonisation fail to give consider the effect of socio-economic variables such as income and education on the expected health co-benefits, and this is where the thesis begins. The backdrop of health co-benefit modelling and the need to incorporate socioeconomic considerations provide the impetus to develop a health economics model. However, in many ways this health economic model deviates from the health co-benefit studies methodologically and instead follows the tradition of the Health Capital Model developed by Grossman (1972). This is due to the micro-economic nature of this health economic model which employs standard economic theory and technique of optimisation, which differs from the fundamentally empirically driven approach of health co-benefit studies. The health economic model developed here is an opportunity to address some of the short-comings of the Health Capital Model. The health co-benefit background however provides some concrete context and inspiration for the application of the theoretical insights which can be drawn from this model. The main contribution of the model develop in this thesis from the theoretical point of view lies in the division of the lifecycle analysis of health into two distinct but related phases of childhood and adulthood. The two phases are specified with different assumptions reflecting the differing characteristics of childhood and adulthood. The most important distinction between the two phases is the manner in which investment in health capital (using time and goods resources) enters the modelling framework. In the childhood phase, health investment augments or increases the existing stock of health capital, while during the adulthood phase health investment prevents the decline of health but does not increase its stock. I believe this better reflects the biological behaviour of health over one's life than the HCM which implicitly assumes that new stock of health and existing stock are perfectly substitutable. In my model, this substitutability is possible only during the childhood corresponding with the body and mental development. On the other hand, during adulthood when them body no longer grows, health investment may only preserve health. After developing the model, I went about to test it empirically. I used the Understanding Society youth questionnaire to test the child model and the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS) to test the adulthood model. Due to the way that optimisation problem was specified, the terminal end time conditional in the optimal control model became another endogenous variable. This variable is treated empirically as the life expectancy at the national level. I find that in general the empirical data strongly supports the theoretical propositions of my model. It should be noted here that since the main contribution of this thesis is in theoretical development, the empirical efforts were designed primarily with the intention of validating the propositions of the model, and not really for direct policy application. This is also reinforced by the use of ordered logit models where the coefficients of the independent variables on the dependent variable generally have no meaning, where we only concentrate on the signs of the relationship. Having successfully developed the model, it is applied in two policy settings. Firstly, through reformulation of the model gives the inclusion of socio-economic variables in the measure of Relative Risk (RR) a theoretical grounding. We utilised the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) data to compute RR across 180 countries in the world and regressed with World Bank data on ambient particulate matter pollution as well as GDP per capita. The former variable represents the exogenous rate of depreciation while the latter socio-economic variables, particularly income. I find that the RR is negatively associated with the GDP per capita at the national level. Using the estimated coefficients with the help of Professor Crawford-Brown we attempted to forecast how GDP per capita will interact with the health co-benefits of decarbonisation under a range of future scenarios. The second application of the model is in its use to predict the inequality implications of decarbonisation policy. This is performed by taking the second order partial derivative of an endogenous variable such as health, as will be described in detail later. This approach is sufficiently flexible to accommodate the prediction of inequality over range of policies and variables. The inequality implications and predictions according to this model are not tested empirically here. However, they are perhaps the most fruitful area for future research.

The value of statistical life is an estimate of the monetary benefits of preventing an anonymous death. Society's willingness to pay to eliminate private health risks determines agencies' value-of-statistical-life estimates. Most estimates ignore society's willingness to pay to eliminate others' health risks. There are two possible reasons. First, altruism does not exist: Peter is not willing to pay to save Paul's life. The second possible reason is a bit more complicated. Certain economists argue that increasing benefit estimates to account for altruism involves double-counting. The purpose of this thesis is to evaluate these possibilities. Accounting for altruism, it turns out, is not double-counting if altruism is paternalistic. Furthermore, I empirically demonstrate that people are willing to pay to reduce others' health risks. Thus, the two justifications for ignoring altruism are, seemingly, unfounded, which indicates that analysts should increase the value of statistical life to account for altruism.

Water flowing in streams has value for various types of recreationists and is essential for fish and wildlife. Since water demands for offstream uses in the arid west have been steadily increasing, increasing instream flows to enhance the recreational experience might be in conflict with established withdrawals for uses such as agriculture, industries and households. It is the intent of this study to contribute to an economic assessment of the tradeoff between maintaining instream flow for river recreation use and offstream uses; that is, to develop and apply a method to measure costs and benefits of water used for recreation on a river. Since market prices are not observable for instream flows, the estimation economic value of instream flow would present well known difficulties. The household production function theory was used to build the theoretical model to measure economic value of instream flow. Policy implication are discussed with emphasis on application of the information to water management decisions.