On compliance of business processes with business contracts

This paper addresses the problem of ensuring compliance of business processes, implemented within and across organisational boundaries, with the constraints stated in related business contracts. In order to deal with the complexity of this problem we propose two solutions that allow for a systematic and increasingly automated support for addressing two specific compliance issues. One solution provides a set of guidelines for progressively transforming contract conditions into business processes that are consistent with contract conditions thus avoiding violation of the rules in contract. Another solution compares rules in business contracts and rules in business processes to check for possible inconsistencies. Both approaches rely on a computer interpretable representation of contract conditions that embodies contract semantics. This semantics is described in terms of a logic based formalism allowing for the description of obligations, prohibitions, permissions and violations conditions in contracts. This semantics was based on an analysis of typical building blocks of many commercial, financial and government contracts. The study proved that our contract formalism provides a good foundation for describing key types of conditions in contracts, and has also given several insights into valuable transformation techniques and formalisms needed to establish better alignment between these two, traditionally separate areas of research and endeavour. The study also revealed a number of new areas of research, some of which we intend to address in near future.

Wildlife damage, insurance/compensation for farmers and conservation: Sri Lankan elephants as a case

The interference with agriculture has been recognised as the main cause for the current conflict between farmers and wild elephants in Sri Lanka, as elsewhere in the Asian elephant range. Thus compensating farmers for the damages caused by elephants is essential, if this endangered species is to survive in the long run. This paper explores the practicality of establishing an improved publicly funded insurance/compensation scheme to recompense farmers for the elephant damages. It does so by analysing results from two contingent valuation surveys undertaken in Sri Lanka. We find that possible public support of farmers plus urban dwellers significantly exceeds the financial requirement of the insurance scheme proposed in this study for perpetuity. The article also shows that it is often inappropriate from an economic viewpoint to analyse crop insurance as if it only involves the insurance of a private good because important positive externalities can arise from ‘crop’ damages by wildlife, e.g. elephants. The use of agricultural land by some species is essential for their long-term survival and this is often positively valued by the community as a whole.