The impact of grants in the agriculture sector in Albania: a counterfactual approach

The objective of this study is to measure the impact of the national subsidy scheme on the olive and fruit sector in two regions of Albania, Shkodra and Fier. From the methodological point of view, we use a non- parametric approach based on the propensity score matching. This method overcomes problem of the missing data, by creating a counterfactual scenario. In the first step, the conditional probability to participate in the program was computed. Afterwards, different matching estimators were applied to establish whether the subsidies have affected sectors performance. One of the strengths of this study stays in the data. Cross-sectional primary data was gathered through about 250 interviews.. We have not found empirical evidence of significant effects of government aid program on production. Differences in production found between beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries disappear after adjustment by the conditional probability of participating into the program. This suggests that subsidized farmers would have performed better than the subsidized households even in the absence of production grants, revealing program self-selection. On the other hand, the scheme has affected positively the farm structure increasing the area under cultivation, but yields has not increased for beneficiaries compared to non beneficiaries. These combined results shed light on the reason of the missed impact. It could be reasonable to believe that the new plantation, in particular in the case of olives, has not yet reached full production. Therefore, we have reasons to believe on positive impacts in the future. Concerning some qualitative results, the extension of area under cultivation is strongly conditioned by the small farm size. This together with a thin land market makes extremely difficult the expansion beyond farm boundaries.

Clinical outcome and biological characteristics of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia patients treated with nilotinib front-line

The present work reports the outcome of the GIMEMA CML WP study CML0811, an independent trial investigating nilotinib as front-line treatment in chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Moreover, the results of the proteomic analysis of the CD34+ cells collected at CML diagnosis, compared to the counterpart from healthy donors, are reported. Our study confirmed that nilotinib is highly effective in the prevention of the progression to accelerated/blast phase, a condition that today is still associated with high mortality rates. Despite the relatively short follow-up, cardiovascular issues, particularly atherosclerotic adverse events (AE), have emerged, and the frequency of these AEs may counterbalance the anti-leukemic efficacy. The deep molecular response rates in our study compare favorably to those obtained with imatinib, in historic cohorts, and confirm the findings of the Company-sponsored ENESTnd study. Considering the increasing rates of deep MR over time we observed, a significant proportion of patients will be candidate to treatment discontinuation in the next years, with higher probability of remaining disease-free in the long term. The presence of the additional and complex changes we found at the proteomic level in CML CD34+ cells should be taken into account for the investigation on novel targeted therapies, aimed at the eradication of the disease.

Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Retrofit Options to Support Decision Making

How to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of repair/retrofit intervention vs. demolition/replacement and what level of shaking intensity can the chosen repairing/retrofit technique sustain are open questions affecting either the pre-earthquake prevention, the post-earthquake emergency and the reconstruction phases. The (mis)conception that the cost of retrofit interventions would increase linearly with the achieved seismic performance (%NBS) often discourages stakeholders to consider repair/retrofit options in a post-earthquake damage situation. Similarly, in a pre-earthquake phase, the minimum (by-law) level of %NBS might be targeted, leading in some cases to no-action. Furthermore, the performance measure enforcing owners to take action, the %NBS, is generally evaluated deterministically. Not directly reflecting epistemic and aleatory uncertainties, the assessment can result in misleading confidence on the expected performance. The present study aims at contributing to the delicate decision-making process of repair/retrofit vs. demolition/replacement, by developing a framework to assist stakeholders with the evaluation of the effects in terms of long-term losses and benefits of an increment in their initial investment (targeted retrofit level) and highlighting the uncertainties hidden behind a deterministic approach. For a pre-1970 case study building, different retrofit solutions are considered, targeting different levels of %NBS, and the actual probability of reaching Collapse when considering a suite of ground-motions is evaluated, providing a correlation between %NBS and Risk. Both a simplified and a probabilistic loss modelling are then undertaken to study the relationship between %NBS and expected direct and indirect losses.