Fair State Participation

Author(s):  
Alexandru Grigorescu
2004 ◽  
pp. 94-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Shastitko

Various ways of state participation in the mechanisms of transaction management are considered in the article. Differences between compensation and elimination of the market failures are identified. Opportunities and risks of non-regulatory alternatives usage as a mean of market failure compensation are described. Based on classification of goods correlated to relative cost of their useful characteristics evaluation (search, experience, merit) questions of institutional alternatives in three areas (political, financial and commodity) are examined.


2020 ◽  
pp. 47-62
Author(s):  
Andrei A. Yakovlev ◽  
Nina V. Ershova ◽  
Olga M. Uvarova

The paper analyzes the shifts in government priorities in terms of support of big and medium manufacturing enterprises amid 2008—2009 and 2014—2015 crises. Based on the data of 2009, 2014 and 2018 surveys of Russian manufacturing firms, using logit regressions we identify factors that affect the receipt of financial and organizational support at different levels of government. The analysis shows that in 2012—2013 the share of manufacturing firms that received state support shrank significantly as compared to 2007—2008; moreover, the support concentrated on enterprises that had access to lobbying resource (such as state participation in the ownership or business associations membership). In 2016—2017 the scale of state support coverage recovered. However, the support at all levels of government was provided to firms that carried out investment and provided assistance to regional or local authorities in social development of the region, while the factor of state participation in the ownership became insignificant. The paper provides possible explanation for these shifts in the criteria of state support provision in Russia.


2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2 (118)) ◽  
pp. 23-27
Author(s):  
VIKTOR A. NIKOLAEV ◽  
◽  
MARINA V. CHUVASHLOVA ◽  

2019 ◽  
Vol 99 (1) ◽  
pp. 803-811 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boumediene Hamzi ◽  
Eyad H. Abed

AbstractThe paper studies an extension to nonlinear systems of a recently proposed approach to the definition of modal participation factors. A definition is given for local mode-in-state participation factors for smooth nonlinear autonomous systems. While the definition is general, the resulting measures depend on the assumed uncertainty law governing the system initial condition, as in the linear case. The work follows Hashlamoun et al. (IEEE Trans Autom Control 54(7):1439–1449 2009) in taking a mathematical expectation (or set-theoretic average) of a modal contribution measure over an uncertain set of system initial state. Poincaré linearization is used to replace the nonlinear system with a locally equivalent linear system. It is found that under a symmetry assumption on the distribution of the initial state, the tractable calculation and analytical formula for mode-in-state participation factors found for the linear case persists to the nonlinear setting. This paper is dedicated to the memory of Professor Ali H. Nayfeh.


Author(s):  
Mariya Y Omelicheva ◽  
Lawrence P Markowitz

Abstract The post–Cold War environment has ushered in an era of threats from terrorism, organized crime, and their intersections giving rise to the growing literature on the so-called crime–terror nexus. This article takes stock of this literature, assesses its accomplishments and limitations, and considers ways to deepen it conceptually, theoretically, and empirically. To challenge assumptions informing the crime–terror studies and suggest avenues for future research, the article draws on ideas from the scholarship on political economies of violence. These insights are used to probe the (1) non-state actors that form the crime–terror nexus, (2) conditions under which the nexus is likely to emerge, and (3) varied effects of criminal–terrorist intersections. The article emphasizes the ties of criminal and terrorist groups to local politics, society, and economy, and relationships of competition, rather than cooperation, which often characterize these ties. The conditions under which these groups operate cannot be understood without considering the role of the state in criminal–terrorist constellations. The structure of resource economies influences both the preferences of terrorist groups for crime and the consequences of terrorist–criminal convergence, which are also mediated by state participation in crime.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document