On the Interplay of Ownership Patterns, Biodiversity, and Conservation in Past and Present Temperate Forest Landscapes of Europe and North America

Purpose of Review Ownership patterns and the associated management characteristics are related to forest structures, biodiversity patterns, and their conservation worldwide. A literature review on this topic is missing so far. We fill this gap with an emphasis on the temperate forests of Europe and North America. Mixed-ownership landscapes are the special focus of the analysis. In a first step, historical effects of ownership patterns on forest structure and biodiversity are elucidated. Second, connections between present-time forest ownership patterns and both forest structural and biodiversity patterns are analyzed. Finally, implications for integrative conservation management are evaluated with a special focus on mixed-ownership forest landscapes. Recent Findings Close linkages between ownership type-specific forest management and particular forest structural and biodiversity patterns are identified for past and current forest landscapes. Both in Europe and North America, publicly and privately owned forests show comparable lines of historical development but with a time shift. Forest reserves and ancient woodland with long ecological continuity appear to be mainly connected with public ownership. A high diversity of management approaches and cultural landscape habitats is characteristic of non-industrial small private forests. In mixed-ownership landscapes, a more diverse mosaic of habitats has developed than in mono-ownership landscapes. Summary We conclude that cross-boundary ecosystem management is crucial for effective conservation in present-day mixed-ownership landscapes. Integrative forest management that considers biodiversity and social-ecological aspects across ownerships is indispensable. We present a framework of implications for conservation management in mixed-ownership forest landscapes that build on each other and may enhance cross-boundary ecosystem management.

OwnKit: Ownership Inference for Java

<p>Object ownership allows us to statically control run-time aliasing in order to provide a strong notion of object encapsulation. Unfortunately in order to use ownership, code must first be annotated with extra type information. This imposes a heavy burden on the programmer, and has contributed to the slow adoption of ownership. Ownership inference is the process of reconstructing ownership type information based on the existing ownership patterns in code. This thesis presents OwnKit—an automatic ownership inference tool for Java. OwnKit conducts inference in a modular way: by only considering a single class at the time. The modularity makes our algorithm highly scalable in both time and memory usage.</p>

OwnKit: Ownership Inference for Java

<p>Object ownership allows us to statically control run-time aliasing in order to provide a strong notion of object encapsulation. Unfortunately in order to use ownership, code must first be annotated with extra type information. This imposes a heavy burden on the programmer, and has contributed to the slow adoption of ownership. Ownership inference is the process of reconstructing ownership type information based on the existing ownership patterns in code. This thesis presents OwnKit—an automatic ownership inference tool for Java. OwnKit conducts inference in a modular way: by only considering a single class at the time. The modularity makes our algorithm highly scalable in both time and memory usage.</p>

The Significant Factors in Industrial Conflict, with Special Reference to Three New Zealand Industries

<p>The scope of this study is broader than that of most others on industrial conflict and encompasses individual and employer-initiated forms of conflict as well as stoppages. Industrial conflict is a complex concept and there is consequently a need for an explicit ordering of ideas. Our theoretical discussion in Part 1 is aimed at providing a general framework for later empirical analysis. It begins with a conceptualization of industrial conflict which embraces many causes, settings, parties and forms. The more important of these forms are outlined before factors influencing the distribution of industrial conflict are surveyed. It ends with an investigation of the ways in which the economic effects of such conflict may be observed and to some extent measured. Three industries, meat freezing, building and construction, and waterfront, account for a disproportionate amount of industrial conflict in New Zealand and it is on these that the empirical analysis of this thesis centres. In order to understand the context of conflict in these industries, their economic, technical and organisational environments are outlined in Part 2. Part 3 contains the empirical investigation itself, beginning with the place of these three industries in the national perspective and then dealing with the industries in turn. In each case, both official statistics and material obtained by interviews and questionnaires are used to analyze conflict in detail and to evaluate possible factors shaping it. No simple conflict patterns are found. These industries are, for example, stoppage prone but all contain several units which are virtually stoppage free. But in each industry certain fundamental features are found to be influential in shaping the patterns. Of prime importance is the technology, although economic features, such as the nature of worker remuneration, ownership patterns and the level of throughput, are also important. These conclusions are summarised in Part 4 where it is noted that, while the three industries have features predisposing them toward conflict, our understanding of and command over these features can be improved.</p>

The Significant Factors in Industrial Conflict, with Special Reference to Three New Zealand Industries

<p>The scope of this study is broader than that of most others on industrial conflict and encompasses individual and employer-initiated forms of conflict as well as stoppages. Industrial conflict is a complex concept and there is consequently a need for an explicit ordering of ideas. Our theoretical discussion in Part 1 is aimed at providing a general framework for later empirical analysis. It begins with a conceptualization of industrial conflict which embraces many causes, settings, parties and forms. The more important of these forms are outlined before factors influencing the distribution of industrial conflict are surveyed. It ends with an investigation of the ways in which the economic effects of such conflict may be observed and to some extent measured. Three industries, meat freezing, building and construction, and waterfront, account for a disproportionate amount of industrial conflict in New Zealand and it is on these that the empirical analysis of this thesis centres. In order to understand the context of conflict in these industries, their economic, technical and organisational environments are outlined in Part 2. Part 3 contains the empirical investigation itself, beginning with the place of these three industries in the national perspective and then dealing with the industries in turn. In each case, both official statistics and material obtained by interviews and questionnaires are used to analyze conflict in detail and to evaluate possible factors shaping it. No simple conflict patterns are found. These industries are, for example, stoppage prone but all contain several units which are virtually stoppage free. But in each industry certain fundamental features are found to be influential in shaping the patterns. Of prime importance is the technology, although economic features, such as the nature of worker remuneration, ownership patterns and the level of throughput, are also important. These conclusions are summarised in Part 4 where it is noted that, while the three industries have features predisposing them toward conflict, our understanding of and command over these features can be improved.</p>

Common Ownership Patterns in the European Banking Sector—The Impact of the Financial Crisis1

We provide a description of ownership patterns in the top 25 European banks for the period 2003–2015, where we especially focus on the global financial crisis. Investment managers, such as Blackrock, are dominant in terms of number of blockholdings in different banks, maintaining fairly stable “common ownership” networks throughout our sample. However, the financial crisis led to capital injections by governments in several banks in trouble, which in turn led to a jump in holdings by governments, which typically are “non-common owners” (i.e., they hold only shares in only one bank). This jump translated into these investors temporarily being the top investor with a large share, and non-common owners being the majority among large shareholders. A brief comparison with US banks uncovers large ownership differences between the European and US banking sectors. We briefly discuss what these ownership patterns might imply for competition, stability and performance in the banking industry.

Effects of ownership patterns on cross-boundary wildfires

Understanding ownership effects on large wildfires is a precursor to the development of risk governance strategies that better protect people and property and restore fire-adapted ecosystems. We analyzed wildfire events in the Pacific Northwest from 1984 to 2018 to explore how area burned responded to ownership, asking whether particular ownerships burned disproportionately more or less, and whether these patterns varied by forest and grass/shrub vegetation types. While many individual fires showed indifference to property lines, taken as a whole, we found patterns of disproportionate burning for both forest and grass/shrub fires. We found that forest fires avoided ownerships with a concentration of highly valued resources—burning less than expected in managed US Forest Service forested lands, private non-industrial, private industrial, and state lands—suggesting the enforcement of strong fire protection policies. US Forest Service wilderness was the only ownership classification that burned more than expected which may result from the management of natural ignitions for resource objectives, its remoteness or both. Results from this study are relevant to inform perspectives on land management among public and private entities, which may share boundaries but not fire management goals, and support effective cross-boundary collaboration and shared stewardship across all-lands.

Listed public–private enterprises: stock market information, agency costs and productive efficiency outcomes

PurposeThis paper addresses the social value of commercial enterprises that are jointly owned by a government and private sector investors and where the shares are listed on a stock exchange: thus, “listed public–private enterprises” (LPPEs). The theoretical part of the paper addresses how differences in ownership patterns influence the behavior and performance of LPPEs.Design/methodology/approachWe develop a conceptual taxonomy, drawing on the empirical evidence on the behavior and performance of public–private hybrid enterprises and on the application of agency theory to that evidence. The taxonomy discussion predicts how different ownership patterns affect enterprise productive efficiency and the ability of governments to achieve social goals through LPPEs. We review the empirical literature on government enterprise ownership and on the concentration of private share ownership to deduce how these matter for owner and managerial behavior and productive efficiency. We review the literature that considers the informational content that listing of an enterprise's shares on a stock exchange can provide to enterprise owners, managers and other domestic audiences with a policy interest. We employ a social welfare perspective to derive policy implications as to when the LPPE governance structure is most appropriate.FindingsWe show how the monitoring and performance weaknesses of state ownership are offset by some private ownership, particularly when combined with listing on a stock exchange. We demonstrate the effects of different governance structures on enterprise productive efficiency. We find that the LPPE structure is particularly appropriate as an alternative to nationalization or to full privatization and regulation of natural monopoly public utilities, and as an alternative to full private ownership and taxation of non-renewable natural resource extractive enterprises.Originality/valueThis paper explicitly addresses the question of why and how the combination of government ownership, private investor ownership and listing on an exchange is socially valuable in providing information on productive efficiency to governments.