Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Foreword -- Acknowledgements -- Brief Contents -- Detailed Contents -- List of Abbreviations -- 1. Introduction - Purchasing Uncertain or Indefinite Requirements in Public Procurement: Overview and Paradoxes -- 1.1. Variety of Arrangements, Commonality, and a Substantive Definition -- 1.2. Reasons and Objectives, Potential Benefits and Associated Risks -- 1.3. Amplitude and Complexity of the Phenomenon, but Limited Attention So Far -- 1.4. Brief Diagnosis: Current Trends and Desirable Future Directions -- 1.5. Direct and Indirect Coverage of the Monograph, Plus Wider Relevance -- 1.6. Approach and Organisation of the Monograph -- PART I: PURCHASING UNCERTAIN OR INDEFINITE REQUIREMENTS IN SELECTED PUBLIC PROCUREMENT SYSTEMS OR INSTRUMENTS -- 2. The UNCITRAL Model Law on Public Procurement -- 2.1. Procurement Context -- 2.2. Relevant Arrangements -- 2.3. Conclusions -- 3. Procurement in World Bank Financed Projects -- 3.1. Procurement Context -- 3.2. Framework Agreements -- 3.3. Conclusions -- 4. The United States Federal Procurement System -- 4.1. Procurement Context -- 4.2. Relevant Arrangements -- 4.3. Conclusions -- 5. EU Law, Selected EU Member States, and the UK -- 5.1. Scoping and Organisation -- 5.2. Relevant Procurement Contexts -- 5.3. Relevant Arrangements in EU Directives and Specific Approaches in Selected Member States -- 5.4. Arrangements Contemplated in the UK Post-Brexit Procurement Reform -- 5.5. Conclusions -- PART II: DEVELOPING A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE REGULATION, POLICY, AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ARRANGEMENTS FOR PROCUREMENT OF UNCERTAIN OR INDEFINITE REQUIREMENTS -- 6. A Transversal Perspective on Procurement of Uncertain or Indefinite Requirements Across Public Procurement Systems and Instruments -- 6.1. Arrangements Identified: Nuances of a Phenomenon, Rather than Separate Concepts.

This study traces the Romanian communist regime's attempts to extinguish private property in housing. The author analyzes the homeowners' resistance through law, the subsequent remaking of private property, and the hybrid legal culture of property in early communist Romania.

chapter 1 Unstable Social Conformity within "Normal" Behavior -- chapter 2 Th eories of Personality and the Equivocation of "Normalcy" -- chapter 3 Stress, Coping, and Social Conformity -- chapter 4 Conformists versus Nonconformists -- chapter 5 Th e "Normal" Psychopath -- chapter 6 Social Conformity in a Polarized Society.

Questioning mechanisms such as Prime Minister's Questions in the United Kingdom and Question Time in Australia are notoriously adversarial. Much less is known about whether and how questioning facilitates conflict in other legislatures. This question is particularly important given the criticism that excessive adversarialism may hinder the performance of accountability, and hence may be detrimental to the work of legislatures. Building on legislative studies literature, this article presents the first comparative study of conflict in oral parliamentary questions; in so doing, it explores patterns of conflictual remarks in questions addressed to prime ministers in Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom and Ireland. It posits that institutional culture, party discipline, government and opposition status and the authority of the Speaker are key factors in explaining the performance of conflict, and that rules of procedure alone are not enough to curb the manifestation of conflict in legislatures where questioning is a known opportunity for criticism.

This paper compares the practice of holding prime ministers to account in four case studies: Australia, Canada, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. Using text analysis, as well as research on prime ministerial responsibilities, it investigates oral questions asked in parliamentary procedures where prime ministers are questioned together with ministers (Question Period in Canada and Question Time in Australia) versus procedures where they are questioned individually (PMQs in the United Kingdom and Oral Questions to the Taoiseach in Ireland), and explores the degree to which they are questioned for matters that are within their remit. It argues that the practice of prime ministerial accountability is decisively shaped by procedural features such as whether written notice is required for questions, as well as by the broader role of the questioning mechanism in the political system, and less by the collective or individualised nature of questioning.

This paper compares the practice of holding prime ministers to account in four case studies: Australia, Canada, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. Using text analysis, as well as research on prime ministerial responsibilities, it investigates oral questions asked in parliamentary procedures where prime ministers are questioned together with ministers (Question Period in Canada and Question Time in Australia) versus procedures where they are questioned individually (PMQs in the United Kingdom and Oral Questions to the Taoiseach in Ireland), and explores the degree to which they are questioned for matters that are within their remit. It argues that the practice of prime ministerial accountability is decisively shaped by procedural features such as whether written notice is required for questions, as well as by the broader role of the questioning mechanism in the political system, and less by the collective or individualised nature of questioning.