scholarly journals Air Travel in Small Communities: An Econometric Framework and Results

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dipasis Bhadra
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Weighted Least Squares ◽  
Local Area ◽  
The United States ◽  
Air Travel ◽  
United States Bureau ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Small Communities ◽  
Combining Data ◽  
Local Areas

In this paper, we examine the relationship between origin and destination (O&D) travel and local area characteristics for small communities. By combining data from Bureau of Transportation Statistics/United States Department of Transportation (BTS/DOT) on O&D travel with that of local area economic and demographic activities supplied by the United States Bureau of Economic Analyses (BEA), Department of Commerce, we specify a semi-log linear demand relationship for O&D travel in small communities. The resultant dataset covering the period 1999-2000 has more than 4,700 observations; 2,686 for communities without any small hubs, and 2,087 for communities with small hubs. Using a weighted least squares method, we estimate demand for air travel, defined by O&D pairs, for smaller communities. Our results indicate that average fare affects passenger demand negatively for both types of communities. Our results also confirm that local area income affects travel positively in both cases. However, the levels of travel tend to be affected by population differently; origin population affecting traffic negatively for smaller communities without any hub and positively for communities with small hubs. Presence of smaller hubs affects air travel positively; and market concentration of airlines affects O&D travel negatively. We demonstrate in this paper that factors affecting the economic framework are the ultimate factors driving the demand for air travel in the small communities in the long run. We also discuss approaches using our methodology for deriving bottom-up projections. These projections have distinct characteristics that may make them more useful for analyzing flow features, such as passenger and aircraft flows by local areas, determining and prioritizing infrastructure investment requirements by local areas, and determining revenue potential from these travels.

scholarly journals A Simple Method for Estimating the Number of Unconfirmed COVID-19 Cases in a Local Area that Includes a Confidence Interval: A Case Study of Whatcom County, Washington

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Swanson ◽  
Ronald E. Cossman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Local Area ◽  
The United States ◽  
Census Count ◽  
Established Method ◽  
Simple Method ◽  
Local Areas ◽  
Whatcom County

AbstractAlong with many other data problems affecting the unfolding of the COVID-10 pandemic in the United States, virtually nothing is known about the number of positive, unconfirmed cases, especially in local areas. We show that it is possible to estimate the number of positive, unconfirmed COVID-19 cases using a simple, long-established method employed by demographers to estimate a population in the absence of a census count. We go on to show how a confidence interval can be constructed around an estimate of positive, unconfirmed COVID-19 cases constructed from this method, using Whatcom County, Washington as a case study.

scholarly journals Farmers’ Market Fraud: California’s Approach and What It Means for Farmers’ Market Regulation

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan J. Marketich
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Meat Products ◽  
Local Area ◽  
The United States ◽  
Farmers Markets ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Market Regulation ◽  
Farmers Market

The United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) defines a farmers’ market as “a multi-stall market at which farmer-producers sell agricultural products directly to the general public at a central or fixed location, particularly fresh fruit and vegetables (but also meat products, dairy products, and/or grains).”[1] The recent resurgence in the popularity of farmers’ markets represents a return to days past where local producers were the predominant source for fresh produce and agricultural goods. With the most farmers’ markets of any state,[2] California has a large interest in the success of its farmers’ markets. In furtherance of this interest, California endeavors to protect its farmers’ markets from fraud.[3] Prior to 2015, California had one of the strictest farmers’ market regulatory programs in the United States.[4] Even so, the California legislature decided that more needed to be done in order to prevent farmers’ market fraud and on September 26, 2014 enacted Assembly Bill 1871 (“A.B. 1871”).[5]            The primary function of this Note is to analyze A.B. 1871 and develop an understanding of the California model for regulation of farmers’ markets. This model will be compared to the approaches taken by New York and Michigan (states with the second and third most farmers’ markets)[6] to develop a greater understanding of the various approaches to farmers’ market regulation. The goal of this Note is to serve as a policy guide for farmers’ market regulation. Following this introduction, this Note will proceed in six parts. Part I will discuss the recent history of farmers’ markets with a particular emphasis on the economic and social impact that farmers’ markets have on the communities in which they operate. Part II addresses the nature of farmers’ market fraud and some general ways that states and farmers’ market vendors and operators combat fraud. Part III will provide a comprehensive analysis of A.B. 1871 and its components. Part IV will provide a comparative analysis of the regulatory approaches taken by New York and Michigan. Part V outlines four general factors for states to consider before enacting statewide regulations for farmers’ markets. Finally, Part VI concludes with guidance on state policy regarding regulation of farmers’ markets.[1] What is a Farmers’ Market?, USDA Food & Nutrition Serv., (May 27, 2015), http://www.fns.usda.gov/ebt/what-farmers-market. This Note will adhere to this definition of “farmers’ market,” and any reference to “farmers’ market,” unless specifically stated otherwise, is intended to reference this definition.  [2] National Farmers Market Directory, USDA Agric. Mktg. Serv., http://search.ams.usda.gov/farmersmarkets/ (last visited February 1, 2015). As of January 2015, California had over 760 farmers’ markets registered with the USDA. The USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (“AMS”) collects farmers’ market information and numbers through voluntarily submitted data. Id.[3] For the purposes of this Note, farmers’ market “fraud” indicates whenever a vendor sells something that the vendor did not produce, cultivate, or harvest himself/herself and/or a vendor misrepresents something as being from a local area.  A discussion on the nature of farmers’ market fraud is contained infra, Part II.[4] Samuel R. Wiseman, Emerging Issues in Food Law: Fraud in the Market, 26 Regent U.  L. Rev. 367, 386 (2013-2014) (discussing California’s previous system of farmers’ market regulation).[5] A.B. 1871, 2014 Cal. State Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2014).[6] National Farmers Market Directory, supra note 2.

Photovoltaics in the United States Department of Defense

1996 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. F. Hoelscher ◽  
R. Ducey ◽  
G. D. Smith ◽  
L. W. Strother ◽  
C. Combs
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Department Of Defense ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Department ◽  
States Department

The US Bureau of Efficiency: Not RIP in 1933?

Public Voices ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 44
Author(s):  
Mordecai Lee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Bureau ◽  
Efficient Management ◽  
The Us ◽  
Ongoing Support ◽  
Full Day

The United States Bureau of Efficiency (BOE), which had been established in 1916, was abolished in 1933 when President Hoover signed an omnibus appropriation bill on his last full day in office. Given Hoover's commitment to businesslike and efficient management and his ongoing support for the work of the Bureau throughout his presidency, what if he had acted differently and prevented its abolition? This fictional public administration history explores how Hoover could have kept BOE in existence and, if he had, how six of his successors might have treated the agency as part of their administrations.

scholarly journals Exotic Haemaphysalis longicornis (Acari: Ixodidae) in the United States: Biology, Ecology, and Strategies for Management

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany L Schappach ◽  
Rayda K Krell ◽  
Victoria L Hornbostel ◽  
Neeta P Connally
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Vector Competence ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Haemaphysalis Longicornis ◽  
Life Stages ◽  
Department Of Agriculture ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Significant Public Health ◽  
Multiple Pathogens

Abstract The Asian longhorned tick (ALT), Haemaphysalis longicornis Neumann (Acari: Ixodidae), is a three-host tick that was first detected outside of United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) quarantine in Hunterdon County, New Jersey, in 2017 and subsequently found in another 14 states. In its native Asia, and where it has become established in Australia and New Zealand, ALTs feed on a variety of hosts and are economically important livestock pests and competent vectors of multiple pathogens to humans and other animals. The degree to which ALT will become a persistent livestock pest or competent vector for introduced or existing pathogens in the United States is yet unclear. Because of its vast host availability, ability to reproduce asexually, known vector competence, and the presence of multiple life stages on hosts, the expansion of ALT establishment in the United States is expected, and is a significant public health and veterinary concern. In this paper, we discuss the biology, geographical distribution, life cycle and seasonal activity, reproduction, identification, medical and veterinary implications, management options, and future concerns in the United States.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document