Suchergebnisse

1. Introduction -- 2. An outline of the anatomy -- 3. Respiration, circulation and excretion -- 4. Feeding and digestion -- 5. Reproduction and growth -- 6. Endocrinology -- 7. An inventory of the sense organs -- 8. What an octopus sees -- 9. Touch and the role of proprioception in learning -- 10. Effectors and motor control -- 11. Learning and brain lesions: 1: Mainly tactile learning -- 12. Learning and brain lesions: 2: Visual learning -- References -- Author index.

When rebel groups engage incumbent governments in war for control of the state, questions of international recognition arise. International recognition determines which combatants can draw on state assets, receive overt military aid, and borrow as sovereigns—all of which can have profound consequences for the military balance during civil war. How do third-party states and international organizations determine whom to treat as a state's official government during civil war? Data from the sixty-one center-seeking wars initiated from 1945 to 2014 indicate that military victory is not a prerequisite for recognition. Instead, states generally rely on a simple test: control of the capital city. Seizing the capital does not foreshadow military victory. Civil wars often continue for many years after rebels take control and receive recognition. While geopolitical and economic motives outweigh the capital control test in a small number of important cases, combatants appear to anticipate that holding the capital will be sufficient for recognition. This expectation generates perverse incentives. In effect, the international community rewards combatants for capturing or holding, by any means necessary, an area with high concentrations of critical infrastructure and civilians. In the majority of cases where rebels contest the capital, more than half of its infrastructure is damaged or the majority of civilians are displaced (or both), likely fueling long-term state weakness.

Frederick Winslow Taylor developed a system of cost accounting while at the Midvale Steel Company (1878 to 1890). In their article on his contribution to the development of cost accounting, Chen and Pan suggest that Taylor has not received the credit he deserves. They also assert a close association between cost accounting and scientific management. Finally, Chen and Pan compare Taylor's work with a book published in 1885 by Metcalfe.
In this comment, Taylor's contribution is more critically evaluated. As he did nothing to promote cost systems, it is concluded that he has received the credit due to him. Metcalfe's book is also evaluated, and placed in the perspective of other publications of the period.

The influence of engineers on the development of cost accounting in the closing decades of last century has been well recognized. The influence of economists, the retarding effects of an obsession with industrial secrecy, and some curious effects of competition and the lack of it have not been fully explored. These matters are examined in this paper, together with some of the consequences of the efficiency movement, as seen in the costing system developed by Alexander Hamilton Church. The strengths and weaknesses of present-day cost accounting are related to this early period of development.

People have preferences for how their social environment is organized and governed. One influential explanation of variation in these preferences focuses on individual differences in sensitivity to threats. Recent research demonstrates that this relationship is a function not only of the degree of sensitivity (greater or lesser), but also of the danger in question (i.e. immigration or climate change) and the kind of potential harm it poses (i.e. physical pain or contamination). Since many political issues are not unambiguously of one kind, the structure of an individual's reactions to perceived political threats is also uncertain. We argue that future research should (i) use functional neuroimaging to test these structures and (ii) investigate the role of social learning in their transmission.

ABSTRACTA major onshore hydrocarbon terminal was constructed on coastal fields at Point of Ayr on the Welsh side of the Dee Estuary which is protected under national and international environmental legislation and conventions as a wetland of major importance ‐ especially for birds. A scheme is described which was implemented to increase the carrying capacity for waterfowl in an area of farmland adjacent to the terminal. The main method for enhancing the habitat involved bringing a core area of the farm to 'field capacity'(saturation with water) by surface wetting. Various potential water sources for the scheme were explored. The chosen system entailed the collection of rainwater runoff in a system of drains and reservoirs during the winter and the distribution of the water to bunded irrigation areas in the following autumn. The early successes of commissioning experiments are briefly described, and the key issues for further investigation are identified.