Suchergebnisse

of Review 42 -- 1. Introduction -- 1.1 Coverage and Arrangement of Subjects -- 1.2 Previous Coverage -- 1.3 Recent Changes -- 1.4 Some Specific Points -- 2. Organisation and Functions of Local Authorities -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 England and Wales -- 2.3 Scotland -- 2.4 Isles of Scilly -- 2.5 Northern Ireland -- 3. Financial Statistics: General Considerations -- 3.1 Important Characteristics -- 3.2 The Publication of Local Authority Financial Statistics -- 3.3 The Structure of Local Authority Accounts -- 3.4 Northern Ireland -- 4 Financial Statistics: Expenditure -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Revenue (or current) Expenditure -- 4.3 Capital Expenditure -- 4.4 Local Authority Expenditure in Context of Public Expenditure -- 4.5 Northern Ireland -- 5 Financial Statistics: Rates -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 Rate Income -- 5.3 Rate Poundage and Average Rate Payment -- 5.4 Rate Collection -- 5.5 Rate Rebates -- 5.6 Northern Ireland -- 6 Financial Statistics: Government Grants -- 6.1 Introduction -- 6.2 Specific and Supplementary Grants -- 6.3 Rate Rebate Grants -- 6.4 Rate Support Grant -- 6.5 Northern Ireland -- 7 Financial Statistics: Borrowing and Debt -- 7.1 Introduction -- 7.2 Borrowing -- 7.3 Outstanding Debt -- 7.4 Net Financial Transactions -- 7.5 Northern Ireland -- 8 Financial Statistics: Miscellaneous Income -- 8.1 Introduction -- 8.2 Rate Fund Services -- 8.3 Housing Revenue Account -- 8.4 Trading Services -- 8.5 Special Funds -- 8.6 Superannuation Funds -- 8.7 Northern Ireland -- 9 Rateable Values and Penny Rate Products -- 9.1 Rateable Values -- 9.2 Penny Rate Product -- 9.3 Northern Ireland -- 10 Manpower Earnings and Hours -- 10.1 Manpower -- 10.2 Earnings and Hours -- 10.3 Northern Ireland -- 11 Elections -- 11.1 Incidence of Elections -- 11.2 Electoral Statistics -- 11.3 Election Results -- 11.4 Northern Ireland -- 12 Public Protection -- 12.1 Police -- 12.2 Fire -- 12.3 Probation -- 12.4 Administration of Justice and Public Protection Items -- 12.5 Consumer Protection (including Trading Standards) -- 12.6 Northern Ireland -- 13 Transport -- 13.1 Highways and Transportation (England and Wales) -- 13.2 Highways and Transportation (Scotland) -- 13.3 Ports -- 13.4 Airports -- 13.5 Northern Ireland -- 14 Environmental Services -- 14.1 Definition and Scope -- 14.2 Environmental Health (England and Wales) -- 14.3 Refuse Collection (England and Wales) -- 14.4 Refuse Disposal (England and Wales) -- 14.5 Cemeteries and Crematoria (England and Wales) -- 14.6 Scotland -- 14.7 Northern Ireland -- 15 Miscellaneous -- 15.1 Museums, Art Galleries and Library Services -- 15.2 Direct Labour Organisations -- 15 3 Smallholdings -- 15.4 Surveys -- 15.5 Northern Ireland -- 16 Complaints -- 16.1 Great Britain -- 16.2 Northern Ireland -- 17 Conclusion -- 17.1 Recent Developments -- 17.2 Shortcomings -- 17.3 Suggestions -- Quick Reference List Contents -- Quick Reference List -- Quick Reference List Key to Publications -- List of Appendices -- Appendices.

Land disputes are increasing in East Asia as economic and demographic growth intensifies the demand for farmland and urban spaces. Nowhere is this more evident than in China and Vietnam. Reforms that brought Socialist Asia into the globalized economy and returned private property have also sparked intense competition between farmers and residents with outsiders, such as private developers and government agencies. From a legal perspective, the proliferation of land disputes is puzzling, because it is occurring at the same time as governments in China and Vietnam are clarifying property rights and improving formal dispute resolution institutions, such as the courts. Rather than promoting uniformity, order, and predictability, this paper shows that law reforms have produced mixed results. Land claims and property rights often conflict, producing unpredictable and multi-layered dispute resolution processes. Highly ambiguous and contested patterns of land access persist in these countries. Consequently, courts and administrative agencies such as grand mediation struggle to use property rights to find lasting solutions to land disputes. This paper draws on a body of empirical studies to explore why state laws and institutions struggle to gain the upper hand in many land cases. ; preprint

For many decades, global discourse about legal development has been dominated by Western notions of rule of law and liberal democracy. The gradual shift of economic power from the West to North East Asia over the last 40 years, and to China more recently, presents a new and distinctive challenge to Western domination over global development discourse. To explore this phenomenon, we argue that it is necessary to abandon, or at least suspend, the belief that 'global culture,' which developed out of the European Enlightenment and diffused worldwide through imperialism and imitation, is an irresistible socializing force. We need to consider the possibility that 'global culture,' which now includes North East Asian influences, does not invariably produce local variations of Western or North East Asian legal development in socialist Asia. These models are important but may not be the only reference points for legal development elsewhere in Asia. ; preprint

ABSTRACTThe article reports research on informed opinion as to linkage between Bakke and the discretionary use of race in private employment practice. Of particular concern is the legal parallel between the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Title 6 as applied in Bakke and Title 7 as it relates to Kaiser Aluminum v. Weber and to other employment cases. The principal research entailed Q‐methodology, a technique allowing respondents to produce and present a structured attitude (mind set) with regard to an issue or controversy. Focus of the study was upon 1) respondent values or norms as to race in employment; 2) opinions as to the impact of Bakke upon race in employment; and 3) perceptions of Bakke as portent of things to come. Responses were made in the Fall of 1978. Respondents were from groups indicating interest in Bakke, together with university teachers in relevant fields. Factor analysis of responses revealed three principal attitudes. One attitude (Factor I) strongly affirms race‐conscious affirmative action, including quotas, sharply condemned the Supreme Court for abrogating (in Bakke) its responsibility for protecting minority rights, and saw Bakke as a portent of unwelcome things. Factor II condemns any consideration of race in programs of admission or employment, predicted some beneficial legacy of Bakke, but was most critical of its deference to racial considerations. Factor III is pragmatic and was supportive of the Supreme Court Bakke decision, from which it projected beneficial consequences. Factor III accepts the discretionary use of race while rejecting quotas. Survey research conducted by others reveals that a public majority holds opinions most congruent with Factor III. In the employment area specifically, a majority rejects quotas but endorses minority training programs. The 1979 Weber decision gives a limited sanction to voluntary quotas, but does not exceed the range of tolerance set by a public permissive in this particular policy area.

A Q-sort procedure was used to obtain agreement/disagreement rating of 56 statements concerning the US Supreme Court's Bakke case from a sample of informed Rs in 1978. Factor analysis of responses reveals three principal attitudinal factors. One factor involves strong affirmation of race-conscious affirmative action, including quotas, & unfavorable response to the Supreme Court's decision regarding Bakke. A second factor condemned any consideration of race in admission or employment programs, predicted beneficial effects from Bakke, but strongly condemned its deference to racial considerations. A third factor was pragmatic & supported the Bakke decision, projecting beneficial consequences from it. Survey research by various investigators reveals public majority attitudes most congruent with the third factor rejecting quotas but endorsing minority training programs. Accordingly, the 1979 Kaiser Aluminum v. Weber decision gives a limited sanction to voluntary quotas, but does not exceed the range of tolerance set by a public that is permissive in this policy area. 1 Figure. Modified HA.