Suchergebnisse

Wenn es um Nutzer qualitativ-sozialwissenschaftlicher Datenarchive geht, werden unter diesen Begriff meist nur diejenigen subsumiert, die Sekundäranalysen planen bzw. durchführen. Darüber hinaus bietet sich jedoch eine Ausweitung des Nutzer-Begriffs auf alle Gruppen und Individuen an, die in regulärem und kontinuierlichem Austausch mit Archiven und ähnlichen Serviceeinrichtungen stehen. Ich identifiziere deshalb in diesem Beitrag zunächst insgesamt sechs Kategorien von Nutzern: Datenproduzenten und potenziell Archivierungswillige; diejenigen, die Daten archivieren; diejenigen, die an der Wiederverwendung von Daten interessiert sind; diejenigen, die tatsächlich Daten wieder verwenden; diejenigen, die in der Vergangenheit bereits Daten wieder verwendet haben; und diejenigen, die das Archivieren von Daten erlernen wollen. Daran anschließend diskutiere ich die für die jeweilige Nutzergruppen spezifischen Serviceanforderungen. Ich versuche dabei zu zeigen, dass gut geführte, entwicklungsoffene und evaluierte Support-Programme wesentlich dazu beitragen können, dass Datenarchive den Nutzerbedürfnisse einen Schritt voraus sein und ihr je spezifisches Profil entwickeln können. Gelingt dies, so entsteht eine ausgezeichnete Basis für Reputation, für eine solide Förderung, eine verbesserte Kultur des Sharing und der Wiederverwendung von Daten, für qualitative hochwertige Datenbestände und deren Dokumentation, sowie für die Förderung neuer Produkte und von transnationalen Initiativen.

AbstractSeveral scholars have pointed out a shift from classic secondary associations to tertiary organizations based on passive support in Western countries. This development necessitates a better understanding of passive support within social science and voluntary sector management, on which strong opinions are expressed in the literature. This article attempts to contribute to the empirical basis for such opinions. We suggest that the current anxieties concerning the future of democracy if activity rates drop may be exaggerated.

The analysis of the causes of political support for political institutions has been focused either on one-case studies that stress the relevance of individual variables or cross-national studies that stress the role of institutions. In this article, the authors suggest that to understand the logic of political support, it is necessary to combine both types of explanations. Using evidence from 17 European countries of the 2002 to 2003 European Social Survey data set, the authors show that the effect of the performance of the institution on political support is higher in majoritarian democracies, where the attribution of responsibility for policy outcomes is clear, than in proportional democracies. They also show that the effect of ideology on political support depends on the type of democracy: Those citizens ideologically far from the government will show higher levels of political support in proportional democracies than in majoritarian ones.

The Countercyclical Support Facility Support Program (CSF) for Bangladesh was intended to help the country cope with the effects of the global crisis by supporting aggregate demand and more spending on social safety net programs (SSNPs) that would give women and vulnerable populations greater access to social services. The program was to be implemented from October 2009 to December 2010. The CSF took effect on 6 November 2009 and the loan of $500 million from the ordinary capital resources of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) was disbursed in a single tranche on 10 November 2009. The loan carried a term of 5 years, including a grace period of 3 years, an interest rate equal to the sum of the London interbank offered rate and 2.0%, and other terms and conditions laid down in the loan agreement. The CSF program was approved together with the Public Expenditure Support Facility Program (PESF) for Bangladesh to make the most of the positive synergy resulting from policy complementarity and funding additionality. This progress report describes macroeconomic developments in Bangladesh from October 2009 to November 2010, and outlines the impact and benefits of the CSF. It reflects the results of reviews made through regular communication between the government and ADB, and the findings of the inception and review missions. The CSF and the PESF shared implementation arrangements, with the Ministry of Finance (MOF) as executing agency, 10 ministry divisions or agencies as implementing agencies, and a program steering committee under the finance secretary, MOF, taking stock of economic and fiscal developments, as well as the progress of the government's countercyclical development expenditure program.

The Countercyclical Support Facility Support Program (CSF) for Bangladesh was intended to help the country cope with the effects of the global crisis by supporting aggregate demand and more spending on social safety net programs (SSNPs) that would give women and vulnerable populations greater access to social services. The program was to be implemented from October 2009 to December 2010. The CSF took effect on 6 November 2009 and the loan of $500 million from the ordinary capital resources of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) was disbursed in a single tranche on 10 November 2009. The loan carried a term of 5 years, including a grace period of 3 years, an interest rate equal to the sum of the London interbank offered rate and 2.0%, and other terms and conditions laid down in the loan agreement. The CSF program was approved together with the Public Expenditure Support Facility Program (PESF) for Bangladesh to make the most of the positive synergy resulting from policy complementarity and funding additionality. This progress report describes macroeconomic developments in Bangladesh from October 2009 to November 2010, and outlines the impact and benefits of the CSF. It reflects the results of reviews made through regular communication between the government and ADB, and the findings of the inception and review missions. The CSF and the PESF shared implementation arrangements, with the Ministry of Finance (MOF) as executing agency, 10 ministry divisions or agencies as implementing agencies, and a program steering committee under the finance secretary, MOF, taking stock of economic and fiscal developments, as well as the progress of the government's countercyclical development expenditure program.

The cost of supporting multi‐million‐pound military systems and equipment during the "in‐service" phase is now often well in excess of two‐thirds of the total cost of ownership. The management approach used to predict, budget, validate and control overall support costs is known as integrated logistic support (ILS). Explains the military approach to "designing for support", how this is integrated into the operational requirement, and the benefits which accrue. This leads to an analytical process known as logistic support analysis (LSA), which is integrated into a dynamic "supportability database" known as the logistic support analysis records (LSAR). It then becomes the definitive repository for information on all support activities, including provisioning and technical documentation, and continues "live" in the in‐service phase "supporting the design". Under a US Department of Defense initiative, using electronic data interchange (EDI), known as CALS ‐ which was computer‐aided acquisition and logistics support, and has now been redefined as "continuous acquisition and life‐cycle support" ‐ the UK Ministry of Defence is currently fielding an Interim Defence Standard 00‐60, which it is promoting as a contender for a NATO and ISO Standard on ILS. The final edition will be a standard for contracting for ILS, provisioning, technical documentation and CALS using EDI.

Financial aid by business corporations to the colleges and universities is sound business policy. It is an opportunity for them, as well as a responsibility. It is not a charity but an investment in their own future. Its basic legality has been settled by the courts. It should be handled separately from their ordinary con tributions and donations. It should be based on policy determined at their high est levels of authority; and should be regarded as a continuing function of their business management. Business concerns should accept a reasonable share of financial aid to higher education but not exclusive support. They should pick the institutions with care and then keep "hands off" their internal affairs.