Search results

The Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act was passed in April, 1935. The circumstances of the immediately preceding years had precipitated a condition of acute distress throughout wide sections, if not over the entire area, of the three Prairie Provinces. The immediate cause of the distress was the persistence over a period of years of low returns to farm producers, the result of a combination of physical and price factors. Within the area to which the Act has been applied, the dominant factor was probably inadequate precipitation, but the situation as it appeared in 1935 would have been substantially different without the aggravating condition of low prices for the principal farm products. Under the condition of reduced gross revenue the rigidity of certain elements of expense became an important factor contributing to farm and community distress.An analysis of the causes of the condition of the distressed areas of the Prairie Provinces suggests: that the lands of the dry areas are physically less productive than could have been anticipated with the knowledge available at the time of their settlement and development; that the price of the principal product, wheat, may be expected to be lower than it was, or was expected to be at that time; and that there remains a considerable measure of uncertainty regarding the "normal" level of physical productivity, the annual variations in physical productivity, and the future prices of agricultural products. But local differences are also significant. Even within the areas to which the Act has been applied, there is considerable diversity of physical conditions, and of the combination of resources and organization of production. In addition, errors of judgment respecting physical productivity and price were not uniformly involved throughout. As a result of these diversities the incidence and effects of drought and of price decline have been appreciably different in different localities.

PurposeThe purpose of this editorial is to introduce this special issue on "International trade union networks, European works' councils and international labour regimes".Design/methodology/approachThe editorial provides an overview and introduces the papers which make up the special issue.FindingsThese papers allow us to consider the social, political and institutional dimensions of grass roots organising across countries and continents.Originality/valueThe issue adds new insights into the topic in addition to the more typical focus on institutional levels of union engagement.

The domains of the public and private are different. Analysis of management which obscures their distinctive characteristics will miss the significance of each domain. This paper seeks to analyse the values, institutional conditions and management tasks which are unique to the public domain. It is argued that the distinctive challenge for the public domain derives from the duality of publicness: the need to enable citizens in their plurality to express their contribution to the life of the community and out of that plurality, to enable a process of collective choice and the government of action in the public interest to take place.

The domains of the public & private are different. Analysis of management that obscures their distinctive characteristics will miss the significance of each domain. Here, in an analysis of the values, institutional conditions, & management tasks unique to the public domain, it is argued that the distinctive challenge for this domain derives from the duality of publicness: the need to enable citizens in their plurality to express their contribution to the life of the community &, out of that plurality, to enable a process of collective choice & a government of action in the public interest. HA