This study aims to explore the ability of a multi-criteria decision making with analytical hierarchy process (MCDM-AHP) model to emulate the results of a cost benefit analysis (CBA) model in the context of offshore wind farm siting within the Swedish exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The research question addressed is whether the MCDM-AHP analysis produces similar results to the CBA analysis. In addition to this, the strengths and weaknesses of each model is explored. The MCDM-AHP model employs the spatial criteria in a more basic manner compared to the CBA model, simplifying the evaluation process while still explaining 89.5% of the variation in the CBA model and defining similar areas as suitable. Thus, it can be concluded that the MCDM-AHP model adequately emulates the CBA model within the context of offshore wind farm siting within the Swedish EEZ. However, it is crucial to note that the two models produce outputs on different scales. While the CBA model provides levelized cost of energy (LCOE) values that can be thresholded for investment viability comparisons, the suitability score generated by the MCDM-AHP model remains a relative and arbitrary score within the model. Both models entail uncertainties, limiting their usage beyond making general assumptions or identifying areas of interest. The findings reveal that the CBA model demonstrates greater robustness when confronted with changes in spatial input parameters compared to the MCDM-AHP model. This discrepancy is attributed to the iterative computation process and consideration of flat cost inputs in the CBA model, whereas the MCDM-AHP model represents a linear combination of various spatial parameters. However, the calculated LCOE values in the CBA model are highly sensitive to changes in modeling assumptions regarding external parameters, resulting in significant linear variations. The LCOE values obtained from the CBA model baseline case fall within a range of 52.1 - 98.9 EUR/MWh, which aligns with similar studies, validating the CBA model. Nonetheless, caution should be exercised when considering these results as an accurate representation of the real world due to inherent uncertainties in cost inputs and the LCOE measure. The strengths of the MCDM-AHP model lie in its robustness when the order of relative importance remains stable for key spatial evaluators. It is sensitive to significant changes in water depth and wind speed, which heavily influence its output. The model's simplicity allows for a quick overview of the problem, but it requires assumptions that introduce uncertainties. Validation of the MCDM-AHP model using existing and planned offshore wind farms within the Swedish EEZ was possible but limited by the arbitrary scale and limited validation areas. The comparison between the two models could be enhanced with more comprehensive spatial and economic data for an in-depth CBA model, which could serve as a ground truth for the MCDM-AHP model. Nevertheless, the comparison made in this study considers the CBA model to be closer to the truth, acknowledging the underlying assumptions that should be considered during evaluation. In conclusion, within the context of offshore wind farm siting, the MCDM-AHP model produces outputs that are similar to the CBA model.

Les biens d'usage public sont la catégorie centrale de la construction du droit administratif des biens. L'absence d'une analyse d'ensemble de la catégorie, en droit colombien, pousse à revoir les bases sur lesquelles elle repose et ses conséquences. Plus que toute autre catégorie juridique, les biens d'usage public sont tributaires de leur histoire, c'est dans l'étude de cette dernière que se trouvent les clés d'interprétation de tout le système. Le modèle utilisé par le code civil colombien a été calqué sur la division des biens publics, opérée par le droit espagnol colonial – inspirée à son tour du droit romain. Une mise à jour s'avère nécessaire. À partir de la notion de propriété publique, et de son régime constitutionnel, il est possible de construire une définition matérielle des biens d'usage public, permettant de comprendre les caractéristiques de l'usage public. Cela implique, aussi, une révision complète du régime juridique à la lumière de l'exploitation sociale et économique – valorisation – de la propriété publique. À une triple protection, celle de la propriété publique, du bien d'usage public et de l'usager, s'ajoute une nouvelle approche des occupations privatives. Cette idée d'exploitation sociale et économique anime un nouveau régime des titres habilitant l'occupation privative, des redevances pour occupation des biens d'usage public et des droits réels administratifs. / Regulation of public property available for public use is at the core of administrative law. The Colombian Civil Code has copied colonial Spanish law in the matter, which in turn was inspired by Roman law. However, the absence of an exhaustive and coherent regulation in Colombia has forced the interpreter to study its foundation and further developments to interpret it. An update of this legal system is, therefore, imperative. Beginning with the concept of public property and its constitutional regulation, it is poss ible to analyze the elements of its public use, which will allow proposing a definition of those assets. It is necessary to analyze the regulation of these public properties under the light of their social and economic value. The protection granted by the law to the concepts of public property, public use and public user, has to be assessed under the new approach of the administrative authorizations pertaining to such public property. This notion of social and economic value will also allow scholars/people to have a new vision of the regulation of administrative authorizations, the exclusive rights (in rem) they confer and the income they produce.

Le patriotisme économique relève davantage du discours politique que d’un concept juridique. Il fait référence aux comportements des citoyens, des entreprises et des États. Celui des États peut en substance être défini comme la défense par ces derniers de leurs entreprises stratégiques. Ainsi précisée, cette notion se traduit en pratique par l’institution de dispositifs nationaux de contrôle des investissements étrangers, par la stabilisation de l’actionnariat des entreprises stratégiques au travers des prises de participations des fonds stratégiques d’investissement, ou encore, par l’octroi de droits exclusifs ou spéciaux. De tels comportements peuvent contrarier les principes de la libre circulation - capitaux, établissement - et de la libre concurrence. Ces principes souffrent cependant de tempéraments qui laissent une certaine marge de manœuvre aux États, laquelle est cependant étroite. Cette étroitesse conduit ces derniers à être sans cesse inventifs pour défendre leurs entreprises. Le droit des sociétés offre de ce point de vue des outils pertinents pouvant servir ce dessein. Mais, la protection des entreprises stratégiques en dehors des exceptions ou dérogations prévues par le traité, qui traduit la persistance des replis nationaux, n’est pas sans relever les limites de l’opposition systématique aux patriotismes économiques nationaux. De plus, une telle faculté risque de fragiliser l’achèvement du marché intérieur. Pour ces raisons, il importe pour les autorités de l’Union européenne, d’engager une dynamique permettant de mieux prendre en compte les préoccupations patriotiques des États. Agrégée à un concept cohérent, à savoir le patriotisme économique européen, une telle démarche consisterait à instaurer une politique d’investissement commune qui sache conjuguer ouverture aux capitaux étrangers et préservation des secteurs stratégiques. Mais, l’efficacité d’une telle politique est relative. C’est pourquoi, on doit lui adjoindre un cadre autonome de contrôle des investissements en provenance des pays tiers. / Economic patriotism is more a political speech than a legal concept. It refers to behaviors of citizens, companies and governments. Concerning States, this concept can essentially be defined as defense of strategic companies. In practice, this notion is reflected by the institution of national systems of foreign investments control, by stabilizing the shareholding of companies through strategic investment funds, or by granting exclusive or special rights. These behaviors can antagonize the European Union law. However, this law allows exceptions that offer opportunities to States. But the flexibility of States is close. This narrowness leds them to be constantly inventive to defend their strategic companies. Business law allows such an approach. But the protection of strategic companies without the exceptions or derogations permitted by the treaty, which reflects the persistence of domestic markets partitioning, is not without showing the limits of systematic opposition to national economic patriotisms. In addition, such a power may weaken the completion of the internal market. For these reasons, it is important for the authorities of the European Union, to initiate a dynamic that can permit to take better account of the States patriotic concerns. Aggregate to a coherent concept, namely the european economic patriotism, such an approach will permit to establish a common investment policy that can combine openness to foreign investments and preservation of strategic sectors. But, the effectiveness of such a policy is relative. That’s why, it’s crucial to add to it an autonomous control framework for investments coming from non-member countries.

員工持股計畫是由財經律師Louis Kelso所創，在美國已行之多年，廣為美國企業所採。最早的員工持股計畫是一種為了和平地從資本家手中移轉資本給員工、縮減貧富差距的工具。為了使這個計畫可以持續有效地運作下去，立法者將員工持股計畫為退休金計畫的一種，使員工必須長期持有股票，直到退休。然而在實務運作上，員工持股信託經常被運用為防止敵意併購的工具。尤有甚者，某些公司內部人會利用員工持股計畫為自己取得大量資金、移轉投資風險,但仍可保留對於公司的控制力。這些行為都有可能對股東及員工造成不利的影響，但在現行法制下，只能仰賴司法者透過判決保護這些經濟及資訊上的弱勢族群。 在台灣，員工持股計畫雖然已廣為許多企業所採用，但是發展了將近20年，只能成為另一種員工持有股票的工具。員工擁有的股票數量並不足以使其在股東會上贏得一個受公司內部人重視的地位，也不足以倚賴這些股票作為退休金之用。這種規模上的差異是台美員工持股計畫最關鍵的不同點。小規模雖然使員工持股計畫帶來的優勢少了許多，但相對地也減低許多代理成本，至今未有員工持股計畫侵害大量員工利益的事件爆發。然而這不表示員工持股計畫在台灣就是個可以被忽略的問題，若能在未來建立一套有效率的立法制度，使員工持股計畫的規模擴大，員工將可因此享受到更多公司盈餘，並且使其退休生活受到保障。相對地，參考美國員工持股計畫的問題後，也可以預先設想未來可能發生的弊端，未雨綢繆。本文相信，一個有效率的員工持股計畫，可以實現解決貧富不均的理想。 / Employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) which is created by Louis Kelso is brought to practice for many years. Many enterprises use it as their retirement pension plan. The earliest employee stock ownership plan to transfer the capital frome capitalists to labors and reduce the disparity between the rich and the poor.In order to make the plan work out continueously and effectively, the legislator devise ESOP as a pension fund which makes employee own stock chronically until they retires. However, in practice, ESOP is usually exercised for preventing hostile takeover. Moreover, some company insiders may use ESOP TTO get a great deal of capital and transfer the investment risk, but still own the controlling power to their company. This behaviors will cause some harmful effects to the shareholders and the employees, but in the current legal system,the only one we can depend is the judge who can protect the minority in the economic and the information. ESOP is exercised by many enterprises in Taiwan. But after 20 years, it can only become one of the tools which assist employees to acquire company stocks.The number of shares which employees owns can’t make them have a posi-tion which let the company insiders take account in the shareholder committee and have enough amounts for their retirement pensions.This disparity in scale is the keypoint what is different between Tiwan and the U.S. ESOP. Althoygh small scale makes the adventage of ESOP decrease, it reduce lots of agency costs. To this day, there’re not any events which injure the interests of employees by ESOP. Never-theless, it doesn’t mean that ESOP in Taiwan is a issue which can be neglected. If we can establish an efficient legal system and extend the scale of ESOP, employees can obtain more company interests and have a security of their retirement life.In the opposite, after researching the problem of the U.S. ESOP, we can assume the culpably misconduct which will happen in the future and repair the house before it rains。Ｉ believe that a efficient ESOP can realize the ideal to solve the problem of uneven distribution of the wealth.