No description available.

Communal land values can, on the one hand, be an integral part of the socio-cultural experience which tourists seek and enjoy while visiting Fiji. Partly inherited from the land, such values are still vital as basis of survival in rural Fiji. They are passive so they do not command a price and therefore largely considered free however, indigenous Fijian landowners tend to perceive that such values are an inseparable part of their land and may often expect that these ought to be paid for when land is taken up for development such as in tourism. This dilemma within the tourism system could underpin land conflicts between traditional landowners and tourism entrepreneurs. As tourists ultimately bear costs, the problem can be partially addressed by focusing on their willingness to pay for communal use of land. This research assesses the backpackers� willingness to pay (WTP) for communal values of land in Fiji, including their opinions, feelings, attitudes and perceptions. It uses a social, psychological-economic theoretical framework which postulates firstly, that backpackers will pay in order to maximise satisfaction and, that utilities from passive values can be derived and measured. Secondly, as backpackers search for authenticity, adventure and meeting local people they would tend to be self actualised and therefore willing to pay. A contingent valuation study was undertaken in Fiji from February to June 2003 with a relatively high participation and response rate. Semi-structured interviews were conducted from February to March, 2005 to elicit backpackers� knowledge, feelings, perceptions and attitudes regarding their willingness to pay for the communal use of land. A great majority of respondents were willing to pay. CV respondents were willing to pay an average of F$6.50 for the communal value of land but the younger, highly educated and long haulers would pay less. Though a high proportion of respondents were willing to pay because they valued the communal use of land, for the majority the main reason was financial. Interviewees were willing to pay for economic, psychological and egocentric reasons. The latter two were particularly based on their motivational satisfaction and understanding of the traditional land-based survival skills. Respondents� perceptions of communal values of land, incomes and psychological attitude were also major factors underlying why they were not willing to pay. In light of the study�s findings, it was suggested that the backpacker concept may need to be re-examined as they tended not to be necessarily as budget-minded and exploitative as generally depicted to be. Similarly, they tended to be self-actualising and also espousing motivations similar to those of mass tourists. It was also proposed that WTP can provide a basis for economically analysing the use of passive values of environmental tourism resources, such as land, which can facilitate the industry�s ability in decision making, and management. As an incentive, WTP for communal values of land can be crucial in enhancing and sustaining tourism in a land-scarce economy such as Fiji. In the interim, WTP for communal land use could also provide informed decisions to address current issues such as the Customary Fisheries Bill. Indeed, this pioneering study examines the very issues of passive values for traditionally owned resources which can be applied more broadly; not only in Fiji, but also in other parts of the Pacific.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin. / Typescript (carbon copy). "The writings of John R. Commons chronologically arranged, 1887-1945": leaves 479-536. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 456-46l).

Texte remanié de: Th. doct.--Sci. écon.--Lyon 2, 1994. Titre de soutenance : Action collective, travail, dynamique du capitalisme : fondements et actualité de l'économie institutionnaliste de J.R. Commons. / Bibliogr. p. 205-229.

This thesis deals with the role of House leaders in the organization and conduct of business in the Canadian Parliament. The position of House leader in the parliamentary parties has emerged out of a complexity of factors and pressures placed upon the parliamentary system during the last thirty years. It may now be said that House leaders form the primary communication channel between the political parties concerning the business of the Canadian House of Commons. The adversary system in parliament, reinforced by the traditional position of the opposition, requires that the parties cooperate in organizing the conduct of parliamentary business. The House leaders meet informally and privately to negotiate and to arrange the timing of debates and other matters. The House leaders perform other important duties within their parties. The Government House leader is responsible to the prime minister and cabinet for the overall management of the House, management of the government's legislative schedule, and assistance in the development of legislation. The contemporary Government House leader is also involved in long-range legislative planning. Opposition House leaders keep their parties informed about House activities and perform important strategy and organizational duties. All House leaders are involved in procedural debates and parliamentary reforms. House leaders are appointed from within the parliamentary party and any authority they possess for making interparty agreements comes from the party. That they are normally senior and respected members and have unique contacts with the other House leaders are factors which usually enhance their influence and persuasive powers over the party. The development of the position of House leaders has decreased the influence of party whips; yet the whips remain and the roles of House leaders and party whips may now be seen as complementary. House leaders naturally must operate within the formal rules of the House, and changes in these rules affect the role of the House leaders. The inability to develop a working time allocation mechanism for Commons legislative activity leaves informal communications between the House leaders as the crucial method of scheduling and limiting these debates. The role performed by House leaders has become more significant and it is now recognized that House leaders hold powerful positions in the Canadian House of Commons. As government business increases yet further in amount and complexity the role of House leaders may be expected to become still more significant in the Canadian parliamentary process. / Arts, Faculty of / Political Science, Department of / Graduate

No description available.

This diploma thesis focuses on free content licenses used on internet and on extending of options which provides the classical copyright protection. It compares various kinds of licenses, their advantages in actual usage and at the same time disadvantages of specific licenses when using for particular works. The aim of this thesis is to evaluate the usage of specific licenses which are used for freely provided content and possibly to extend the version of these licenses to such, which would better reflex to the needs of current trends. Another objective is to evaluate current state of the use of licences on the Czech internet and to compare it to the world trends.

Institutions, the rules of the game that shape repeated human interactions, clearly play a critical role in helping groups avoid the inefficient use of shared resources such as fisheries, freshwater, and the assimilative capacity of the environment. Institutions, however, are intimately intertwined with the human, social, and biophysical context within which they operate. Scholars typically are careful to take this context into account when studying institutions and Ostrom's Institutional Design Principles are a case in point. Scholars have tested whether Ostrom's Design Principles, which specify broad relationships between institutional arrangements and context, actually support successful governance of shared resources. This article further contributes to this line of research by leveraging the notion of institutional design to outline a research trajectory focused on coupled infrastructure systems in which institutions are seen as one class of infrastructure among many that dynamically interact to produce outcomes over time.

Using the theoretical work of Hardt and Negri???s Empire and Beck???s Risk Society, I define current experiences of modernity as ???pathological???. The term ???pathological modernity??? is used because it portrays a modernity dominated by ???spirals of crisis??? that are aggravated by the solutions proposed to solve them. Like the ???war on terror??? and environmental degradation, I argue that many crises facing the world today reflect the characteristics of capital as they globalised, branded, hybridised, boundless and endless. ???Pathological modernity??? has various dimensions including a Cartesian logic underscored by an ???eternal truth???, free-market fundamentalism, certainty in decision making, and a scientism which believes all challenges can be overcome. Additional dimensions include an operational form of biopower, pathological reflexivity, and a frontier disposition that continually encloses non-commodified spaces (or commons) creating a crisis of scarcity. Despite its dominance, pathological modernity is being challenged on many fronts. Amongst these is the ???counter-globalisation??? movement (CGM). A heterogenous movement, it represents a qualitatively different form of globalisation and logic that brings it into conflict with pathological modernity. Using participatory research I investigate this movement grounding it within Hardt and Negri???s (2004) ???multitude???. Extending Hardt and Negri???s descriptions, I propose that the multitude ???works in common??? to establish new commons in both the physical and cultural spheres. Concentrating on the ???cultural commons??? I argue that these represent a new form of biopolitics and promote abundance where scarcity once existed. The four cultural commons identified are hope, trust, safety and intellect. Based on the work of Marcel Mauss, I argue that the reciprocal, free and open exchange and sharing of these cultural commons creates ???authentic??? communities based on openness, alterity and abundance. While the CGM works to establish new commons, pathological modernity encloses and commodifies them, turning hope into material aspirations; trust into anxiety; safety into security; and intellect into intellectual property.

Using the theoretical work of Hardt and Negri???s Empire and Beck???s Risk Society, I define current experiences of modernity as ???pathological???. The term ???pathological modernity??? is used because it portrays a modernity dominated by ???spirals of crisis??? that are aggravated by the solutions proposed to solve them. Like the ???war on terror??? and environmental degradation, I argue that many crises facing the world today reflect the characteristics of capital as they globalised, branded, hybridised, boundless and endless. ???Pathological modernity??? has various dimensions including a Cartesian logic underscored by an ???eternal truth???, free-market fundamentalism, certainty in decision making, and a scientism which believes all challenges can be overcome. Additional dimensions include an operational form of biopower, pathological reflexivity, and a frontier disposition that continually encloses non-commodified spaces (or commons) creating a crisis of scarcity. Despite its dominance, pathological modernity is being challenged on many fronts. Amongst these is the ???counter-globalisation??? movement (CGM). A heterogenous movement, it represents a qualitatively different form of globalisation and logic that brings it into conflict with pathological modernity. Using participatory research I investigate this movement grounding it within Hardt and Negri???s (2004) ???multitude???. Extending Hardt and Negri???s descriptions, I propose that the multitude ???works in common??? to establish new commons in both the physical and cultural spheres. Concentrating on the ???cultural commons??? I argue that these represent a new form of biopolitics and promote abundance where scarcity once existed. The four cultural commons identified are hope, trust, safety and intellect. Based on the work of Marcel Mauss, I argue that the reciprocal, free and open exchange and sharing of these cultural commons creates ???authentic??? communities based on openness, alterity and abundance. While the CGM works to establish new commons, pathological modernity encloses and commodifies them, turning hope into material aspirations; trust into anxiety; safety into security; and intellect into intellectual property.