The Survival Contest of Endozoochory: Conflicting Interests in a Frugivorous Avian‐Plant Mutualism

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beny Trabelcy ◽  
Ido Izhaki ◽  
Yoram Gerchman
Keyword(s):  
Conflicting Interests

Weiterentwicklung der «Waldpolitik 2020» aus Sicht der Schweizer Waldstakeholder

2016 ◽  
Vol 167 (4) ◽  
pp. 221-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Astrid Zabel ◽  
Eva Lieberherr
Keyword(s):  
Policy Process ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Sustainable Forest Management ◽  
Forest Policy ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
Expert Interviews ◽  
The Past ◽  
Conflicting Interests ◽  
Forest Act

Advancement of the Swiss Forest Policy 2020 from stakeholders' perspectives In light of the ending of the Swiss “ Forest Policy 2020”, this article assesses the goals, challenges and concerns of Swiss forest stakeholders in relation to forest policy post 2020. The data were collected through expert interviews and an online survey. The results show that securing an economically sustainable forest management and economically viable silvicultural businesses are key concerns for many stakeholders. Apart from these issues, several further and sometimes conflicting interests were mentioned. The study concludes that a debate on an adjustment of the weights given to goals in the Swiss Forest Policy 2020 may be commendable. However, there does not appear to be need for a complete change of course in order to address the stakeholders' needs and concerns. In terms of policy process, most stakeholders positively evaluated the past planning and development process of the Swiss Forest Policy 2020, but also provided suggestions for improvements. Finally, a network analysis revealed that the Swiss Federal Agency for the Environment, the Swiss Forest Owners Association and the Conference of Cantonal Foresters played a central role in the amendment of the Swiss Federal Forest Act. The analysis also showed that more stakeholders find each other as important than actually work together in a legislative process.

The automaticity of social behavior in situations of conflicting interests: Cooperation or self-interest?

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (12) ◽  
pp. 1897
Author(s):  
Changjiang LIU ◽  
Yue ZHANG ◽  
Fang HAO ◽  
Caimeng LIU ◽  
Xu DING ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Behavior ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Conflicting Interests

Biblical Philology and Hermeneutical Debate in the Dutch Republic in the Second Half of the Seventeenth Century

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jetze Touber
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Dutch Republic ◽  
Biblical Scholarship ◽  
The Enlightenment ◽  
Conflicting Interests ◽  
The Ideal ◽  
Held Back

Spinoza’s time was rife with conflicts. Historians tend to structure these by grouping two opposing forces: progressive Cartesio-Cocceian-liberals versus conservative Aristotelian-Voetian-Orangists. Moderately enlightened progressives, so the story goes, endorsed notions such as human dignity, toleration, freedom of opinion, but shied away from radicalism, held back by the conservative counterforce. Yet the drift was supposed to be inevitably towards the Enlightenment. This chapter tries to capture theological conflicts in the Dutch Republic of the Early Enlightenment in a triangular scheme, that covers a wider range of conflicting interests. Its corners are constituted by ‘dogmatism’ (Dordrecht orthodoxy), ‘scripturalism’ (Cocceianism), and ‘rationalism’ (theology inspired by Cartesianism, Spinozism, or any other brand of new philosophy). Dogmatics and rationalists battled in terms of philosophy, whereas the scripturalists and their respective opponents fought each other rather in the field of biblical scholarship. This multilateral conflict within Dutch Calvinism made the ideal of a unified church untenable.

Patents for Critical Pharmaceuticals: The AZT Case

1991 ◽  
Vol 17 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 145-180
Author(s):  
Evan Ackiron
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Incentive System ◽  
The Public ◽  
Incentive Programs ◽  
The Past ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Monopoly Pricing ◽  
Conflicting Interests ◽  
Necessary Evil ◽  
Near Future

Patents and other statutory types of market protections are used in the United States to promote scientific research and innovation. This incentive is especially important in research intensive fields such as the pharmaceutical industry. Unfortunately, these same protections often result in higher monopoly pricing once a successful product is brought to market. Usually this consequence is viewed as the necessary evil of an incentive system that encourages costly research and development by promising large rewards to the successful inventor. However, in the case of the AIDS drug Zidovudine (AZT), the high prices charged by the pharmaceutical company owning the drug have led to public outcry and a re-examination of government incentive systems.This Note traces the evolution of these incentive programs — the patent system, and, to a lesser extent, the orphan drug program — and details the conflicting interests involved in their development. It then demonstrates how the AZT problem brings the interest of providing inventors with incentives for risky innovative efforts into a sharp collision with the ultimate goal of such systems: ensuring that the public has access to the resulting products at a reasonable price. Finally, the Note describes how Congress and the courts have attempted to resolve these problems in the past, and how they might best try to solve the AZT problem in the near future.

L'etica nella professione forense

2009 ◽  
pp. 163-172
Author(s):  
Angelo Abignente
Keyword(s):  
Public Interests ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Professionals ◽  
Positive Law ◽  
Conflicting Interests ◽  
Discursive Participation ◽  
The Moment ◽  
The One ◽  
And Function ◽  
Role And Function

- The positive law tradition has hitherto had nothing to say about the legal profession's role and function, focusing more interest on questions of justice, of the legitimisation of power and of the genesis and organisation of normative material. This trend is now subject to a reversal promoted by new, neo-constitutionalist, narrativist, analytical and hermeneutic experiences, which no longer focuses attention on the moment when law is produced, but on the one when it is applied, reappraising and revitalising the function of the judge, of the attorneys and of other legal professionals. The attorney becomes an active protagonist, an intermediary not only between conflicting interests in a controversy, but also between opposing public interests, while the reappraisal of his role stimulates thinking about the ethical dimension of how the legal profession is practised. Referring to the theories of Habermas and of Alexy, the author treats the reasonable status of argumentation as the supreme ethical instance necessary for a decision that interferes in the sphere of another person's action. At the same time, however, the control of the reasonable status of the respective arguments on both sides is the ethical instance required of the attorneys taking part in the legal proceedings. It takes the form of compliance with the rules characteristic of the practical discourse, primarily the rule of free discursive participation that enables the onus of the argumentation to be explained. Ernesto de

scholarly journals Democracy and worker representation in the management of change: Lessons from Kurt Lewin and the Harwood studies

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (11) ◽  
pp. 1805-1830 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Desmond ◽  
Fiona Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Union Membership ◽  
Cautionary Tale ◽  
Common Cause ◽  
Management Of Change ◽  
Kurt Lewin ◽  
Conflicting Interests ◽  
Ethical Stance

This article revisits the famous Harwood studies overseen by Kurt Lewin to include the neglected union perspective that differs markedly from conventional accounts. We explain this discrepancy as arising from unitarist and pluralist views, which assume very different understandings of organization. The researchers framed the Harwood organization from a unitarist perspective as monolithic, assuming its members are bound by allegiance to a common cause represented by management. This helps explain their relative indifference to unions and framing of concepts in a manner conducive to management that was incomprehensible from a union perspective. From this we contend that the Harwood studies are best understood as a cautionary tale against the assumption of a monolithic view that equates the interest of management with that of the organization. This is especially relevant given the dominance of a unitarist perspective across several fields of organization today, when management are argued to be increasingly authoritarian and union membership in several countries approaches an all-time low. Recognizing that organization is a balance struck between partially conflicting interests represents a more ethical stance to forestall accusations of partisanship and manipulation and to build towards the establishment of a fairer and more sustainable workplace for all.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document