Telecommunications and Internet Services: The digital side of the TTIP. Paper No. 8 in the CEPS-CTR project ‘TTIP in the Balance’ and CEPS Special Report No. 112/July, 17 July 2015

In the overall negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the digital chapter appears to be growing in importance. This is due to several factors, including the recent Datagate scandal that undermined trust between the negotiating parties and led to calls to suspend the US-EU Safe Harbour agreement as well as the furious debate currently ongoing in both legal systems on key issues such as policies to encourage broadband infrastructure deployment, network neutrality policies and the application of competition policy in cyberspace. This paper explores the current divergences between the two legal systems on these key issues and discusses possible scenarios for the ultimate agreement to be reached in the TTIP: from a basic, minimal agreement (which would essentially include e-labelling and e-accessibility measures) to more ambitious scenarios on network neutrality, competition rules, privacy and interoperability measures.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Challenges and Opportunities for Consumer Protection. Paper No. 11 in the CEPS-CTR project ‘TTIP in the Balance’ and CEPS Special Report No. 115/July 2015

This paper examines options for regulatory cooperation in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and assesses the challenges and opportunities posed by regulatory cooperation for consumer protection. It looks at existing approaches to regulatory cooperation by referencing a range of case studies. Based on established practice and on the European Commission’s recently published proposal on regulatory cooperation, we discuss a possible approach that could be adopted in the TTIP. Against the significant potential gains from improved regulatory cooperation, one must set the significant challenges of reconciling the different regulatory philosophies of the US and the EU as well as some differences in their respective approaches to cooperation. In broad terms, this analysis finds that regulatory powers on both sides of the Atlantic will not be significantly affected by the TTIP, but suggests that European and American legislators will need to ensure that their priorities shape the TTIP regulatory cooperation agenda and not the other way around.

TTIP’s Hard Core: Technical barriers to trade and standards. Paper No. 13 in the CEPS-CTR project ‘TTIP in the Balance’ and CEPS Special Report No. 117/August 2015

Michelle Egan and Jacques Pelkmans provide an overview of the TBT chapter in TTIP and the various issues between the US and the EU in this area, which in turn requires extensive expositions of domestic regulation in the US and the EU. TBTs, outside heavily regulated sectors such as chemicals, automobiles or medicines (which have separate chapters in TTIP), can be caused by divergent (voluntary) standards, technical regulations and conformity assessment. Indeed, in all three the US and the EU have long experienced frictions with considerable trading costs. The 1998 Mutual Recognition Agreement about conformity assessment only succeeded in two out of six sectors. The US and European standardisation traditions differ and this paper explains why it is so hard, also economically, to realise convergence. However, the authors reject the unproductive ‘stand-off’ between US and EU negotiators on standardisation and suggest to clarify the enormous economic ‘installed base’ of prominent US standards in the world economy and build a solution from there. As to technical regulation, the prospect of converging regulation (via harmonisation) is often dim, but equivalence (given similar levels of regulatory protection) can be an option.

Quantifying Non-Tariff Measures for TTIP. Paper No. 12 in the CEPS-CTR project ‘TTIP in the Balance’ and CEPS Special Report No. 116/July 2015

This paper provides an overview of methods employed to quantify non-tariff measures (NTMs) and then analyses their differences and looks at what these mean for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations. The authors find several similarities in the approaches taken. Because all studies conclude that NTMs matter, they argue that policy-makers are right to focus on ‘regulatory cooperation’ in TTIP. Given the significant differences in NTMs across sectors, policy-makers are urged to dive deep into sector-specific elements of NTMs and focus on those sectors where the largest potential gains can be made (i.e. where NTMs are highest, such as in agriculture, automobiles, steel, textiles and insurance services). An area identified for further research is the fact that unlike trade taxes (i.e. tariffs), regulatory barriers to trade are not generally targeted as the primary policy objective, but rather stem from other strategic policy concerns such as consumer safety and/or social and environmental protection. This element should be further investigated.

Television report [on USDA'S television research project under title II, Research and Marketing Act]

Cover title.

A project for canals of irrigation and navigation from the River Soane in south Behar; with plans and estimates.

Mode of access: Internet.

Final country reports from the seven European country groups participating in the 1952 project for young farm leaders and technicians.

With cooperation of U. S. Department of Agriculture and land-grant colleges.

Report on the exploratory series of tests on longitudinal distribution of stresses in reinforcing bars. A cooperative project between the American Iron and Steel Institute and Cornell University.

"Not for public release."

A conceptual scheme and decision-rules for the selection and organization of home economics curriculum content : (Wisconsin Home Economics Curriculum and Evaluation Project) /

Includes bibliographical references (p. 38).

Project plan for the sampling and analysis of polychlorinated biphenyls in the Lake Calumet area of southeast Chicago.

Cover title: Southeast Chicago air quality: a plan for the evaluation of PCB's.

2001 Women's Rowing Team, U-M Rowing

Front Row: Tamara McBratney, Danielle Scaglione, Helen Dalis, Fazeela Siddiqui, Cori Cunningham, Carissa Bragg, Student Manager Lisa Durham

Second Row: Petra Juzwishin, Brooke Goodwin, Kate Maxim, Justin Goble, Alison Hickey, Rachel Brunelle, Julie Brescoll, Caroline Gregory

Third Row: Hannah Fenster, Heather Mandoli, Katie Reynolds, Liz Glenn, Sophie Roberge, Erin Kopicki, Emy Bury, Liz Nelson

Fourth Row: Pam Reid, Kristin Rosella, Kristine Johns, Elizabeth Kreger, Laurel Donnell-Fink, Angela Bierhuizen, Bernadette Marten, Sera Coppolino

Top Row (L-R): Jenny Bryant, Christina Ceo, Amy Anstandig, Christina Meyer, Kate Johnson, Emily Goodwin, Melanie Duncan

Decision support system for project selection

The evaluation and selection of industrial projects before investment decision is customarily done using marketing, technical, and financial information. Subsequently, environmental impact assessment and social impact assessment are carried out mainly to satisfy the statutory agencies. Because of stricter environment regulations in developed and developing countries, quite often impact assessment suggests alternate sites, technologies, designs, and implementation methods as mitigating measures. This causes considerable delay to complete project feasibility analysis and selection as complete analysis requires to be taken up again and again until the statutory regulatory authority approves the project. Moreover, project analysis through the above process often results in suboptimal projects as financial analysis may eliminate better options as more environment friendly alternative will always be cost intensive. In this circumstance, this study proposes a decision support system which analyses projects with respect to market, technicalities, and social and environmental impact in an integrated framework using analytic hierarchy process, a multiple attribute decision-making technique. This not only reduces duration of project evaluation and selection, but also helps select an optimal project for the organization for sustainable development. The entire methodology has been applied to a cross-country oil pipeline project in India and its effectiveness has been demonstrated. © 2008, IGI Global.

Project risk management:a combined analytic hierarchy process and decision tree approach

Time, cost and quality achievements on large-scale construction projects are uncertain because of technological constraints, involvement of many stakeholders, long durations, large capital requirements and improper scope definitions. Projects that are exposed to such an uncertain environment can effectively be managed with the application of risk management throughout the project life cycle. Risk is by nature subjective. However, managing risk subjectively poses the danger of non-achievement of project goals. Moreover, risk analysis of the overall project also poses the danger of developing inappropriate responses. This article demonstrates a quantitative approach to construction risk management through an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and decision tree analysis. The entire project is classified to form a few work packages. With the involvement of project stakeholders, risky work packages are identified. As all the risk factors are identified, their effects are quantified by determining probability (using AHP) and severity (guess estimate). Various alternative responses are generated, listing the cost implications of mitigating the quantified risks. The expected monetary values are derived for each alternative in a decision tree framework and subsequent probability analysis helps to make the right decision in managing risks. In this article, the entire methodology is explained by using a case application of a cross-country petroleum pipeline project in India. The case study demonstrates the project management effectiveness of using AHP and DTA.

Organisational learning - a critical systems thinking discipline

Original Paper European Journal of Information Systems (2001) 10, 135–146; doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000394 Organisational learning—a critical systems thinking discipline P Panagiotidis1,3 and J S Edwards2,4 1Deloitte and Touche, Athens, Greece 2Aston Business School, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK Correspondence: Dr J S Edwards, Aston Business School, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK. E-mail: j.s.edwards@aston.ac.uk 3Petros Panagiotidis is Manager responsible for the Process and Systems Integrity Services of Deloitte and Touche in Athens, Greece. He has a BSc in Business Administration and an MSc in Management Information Systems from Western International University, Phoenix, Arizona, USA; an MSc in Business Systems Analysis and Design from City University, London, UK; and a PhD degree from Aston University, Birmingham, UK. His doctorate was in Business Systems Analysis and Design. His principal interests now are in the ERP/DSS field, where he serves as project leader and project risk managment leader in the implementation of SAP and JD Edwards/Cognos in various major clients in the telecommunications and manufacturing sectors. In addition, he is responsible for the development and application of knowledge management systems and activity-based costing systems. 4John S Edwards is Senior Lecturer in Operational Research and Systems at Aston Business School, Birmingham, UK. He holds MA and PhD degrees (in mathematics and operational research respectively) from Cambridge University. His principal research interests are in knowledge management and decision support, especially methods and processes for system development. He has written more than 30 research papers on these topics, and two books, Building Knowledge-based Systems and Decision Making with Computers, both published by Pitman. Current research work includes the effect of scale of operations on knowledge management, interfacing expert systems with simulation models, process modelling in law and legal services, and a study of the use of artifical intelligence techniques in management accounting. Top of pageAbstract This paper deals with the application of critical systems thinking in the domain of organisational learning and knowledge management. Its viewpoint is that deep organisational learning only takes place when the business systems' stakeholders reflect on their actions and thus inquire about their purpose(s) in relation to the business system and the other stakeholders they perceive to exist. This is done by reflecting both on the sources of motivation and/or deception that are contained in their purpose, and also on the sources of collective motivation and/or deception that are contained in the business system's purpose. The development of an organisational information system that captures, manages and institutionalises meaningful information—a knowledge management system—cannot be separated from organisational learning practices, since it should be the result of these very practices. Although Senge's five disciplines provide a useful starting-point in looking at organisational learning, we argue for a critical systems approach, instead of an uncritical Systems Dynamics one that concentrates only on the organisational learning practices. We proceed to outline a methodology called Business Systems Purpose Analysis (BSPA) that offers a participatory structure for team and organisational learning, upon which the stakeholders can take legitimate action that is based on the force of the better argument. In addition, the organisational learning process in BSPA leads to the development of an intrinsically motivated information organisational system that allows for the institutionalisation of the learning process itself in the form of an organisational knowledge management system. This could be a specific application, or something as wide-ranging as an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementation. Examples of the use of BSPA in two ERP implementations are presented.