Search

When attempting to manage a large social system, it is necessary to have an overview of how the society functions and how economic theories describe this functioning. Recent discussions of higher orders of cybernetics are helping to define a multi‐disciplinary, multi‐level point of view. Knowledge from several disciplines is needed—systems science, management, engineering, cognitive studies and the various social science disciplines all have contributions to make. In this paper, we apply cybernetic ideas to further develop economic theories. The paper also uses economics to illustrate ideas in cybernetics. Similar thinking can be applied to other disciplines thus advancing the unification of science. The paper illustrates a transdisciplinary approach to knowledge development. The implications of the paper are improved understanding among scholars from several disciplines. The intent is to expand the range of conceptual possibilities available for problem‐solving. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human milk (HM) is a highly evolutionary selected, complex biofluid, which provides tailored nutrition, immune system support and developmental cues that are unique to each maternal–infant dyad. In the absence of maternal milk, the World Health Organisation recommends vulnerable infants should be fed with screened donor HM (DHM) from a HM bank (HMB) ideally embedded in local or regional lactation support services. However, demand for HM products has arisen from an increasing awareness of the developmental and health impacts of the early introduction of formula and a lack of prioritisation into government‐funded and nonprofit milk banking and innovation. This survey of global nonprofit milk bank leaders aimed to outline the trends, commonalities and differences between nonprofit and for‐profit HM banking, examine strategies regarding the marketing and placement of products to hospital and public customers and outline the key social, ethical and human rights concerns. The survey captured information from 59 milk bank leaders in 30 countries from every populated continent. In total, five companies are currently trading HM products with several early‐stage private milk companies (PMCs). Products tended to be more expensive from PMC than HMB, milk providers were financially remunerated and lactation support for milk providers and recipients was not a core function of PMCs. Current regulatory frameworks for HM vary widely, with the majority of countries lacking any framework, and most others placing HM within food legislation, which does not include the support and care of milk donors and recipient prioritisation. Regulation as a Medical Product of Human Origin was only in place to prevent the sale of HM in four countries; export and import of HM was banned in two countries. This paper discusses the safety and ethical concerns raised by the commodification of HM and the opportunities policymakers have globally and country‐level to limit the potential for exploitation and the undermining of breastfeeding. Key messages: The number and scope of human milk (HM) profit‐making companies is increasing globallyCurrent regulatory frameworks for HM vary widelyProducts offered by private milk companies (PMCs) are generally more expensive than from HM banksSome PMCs are adopting marketing practices traditionally associated with breast milk substitute companies.The health benefits of HM‐based fortifiers compared to bovine milk‐based fortifiers are unclear and may be marginal [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies the relationship between land revenue systems and returns to agricultural labour in colonial India. I provide the first district‐level comparative estimates of agricultural labour returns relative to average income, on the basis of wage/income ratios for 1916. I then use those estimates to analyse the impact of the land revenue systems established by the British colonial authorities. Results show that districts with a larger proportion of non‐landlord land revenue systems presented higher relative wages, closer to the average income. This effect was mainly driven by differences in land concentration connected to the type of landownership introduced by land revenue systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increased interest in marine fish farming in the United States has led to a need for fundamental economic information on production of candidate species for commercialization in various production systems. Funding for the project targeted those species with potential for production in southern tier states in the United States. Sufficient technical data were found to develop comprehensive budget analyses to estimate growout production costs for four scales of production for each of 10 species with potential for production in ponds, 13 in recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS), and five in net pens. The choice of species/production system scenarios was based on evidence of successful production on farms or in research. Estimation of production costs with enterprise budgets can provide useful guidance to identify the types of improved efficiencies that have the greatest effect on economic viability even when commercial farm data are not available. Commercial farm data were used where available, but for most species, data were available only from studies conducted under research conditions. Per‐kg costs of production were lowest for net pen production, followed by ponds, with production costs in RAS two to five times greater than in ponds or net pens. Ponds and net pens generally exhibited greater efficiency of use of capital assets across species than did RAS that resulted in lower percentages of fixed costs and lower annual costs per kg of fish produced. All five species evaluated for net pen production were estimated to be profitable, including redfish, Sciaenops ocellatus (also known as red drum), striped bass, Morone saxatilis, cobia, Rachycentron canadum, red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, and seriolids (generic budget for almaco jack, Seriola rivoliana, California yellowtail, Seriola lalandi, and greater amberjack, Seriola dumerili), four in ponds (redfish, hybrid drum, ♀Pogonias cromis × ♂Sciaenops ocellatus, black sea bass, Centropristis striata, and cobia), but none of the RAS scenarios showed profitability at average yields (kg/cubic meter) reported in the literature. Comprehensive data on growout production of marine finfish species in the United States is generally lacking, and there is a strong need for production trials conducted under near‐commercial conditions with an endpoint of market‐sized fish. Production trials should be conducted in ponds (≥0.1 ha), net pens, and RAS tanks of a size that simulate commercial production conditions. Adequate production trial databases would provide opportunities to develop economic optimization models that would provide useful guidance for prospective producers. Average yields (kg/cubic meter) in RAS will need to be much greater than currently reported in the research literature for RAS production to be economically sustainable. Net pen production appears to be profitable in the United States, but effective permitting procedures are not in place. Providing research support for the US redfish sector that has developed effective production and marketing models could serve as a foundation for developing additional species and offer opportunities for diversification on marine finfish farms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Feed conversion ratio (FCR) is widely used as a measure of feed use efficiency in commercial aquaculture production and research. Surprisingly, little work has focused on the factors that affect FCR in plankton‐based, commercial ponds despite the widespread use of FCR as a production metric. Proposals to use FCR as a numeric standard for environmental regulation (mandatory or voluntary) raise questions as to whether FCR meets the reliability and consistency requirements of a good metric, and whether it would lead to desired behavioral changes. This article summarizes FCR data from university research verification programs conducted on US catfish farms and databases developed from commercial farm records. The relevant research literature is synthesized with respect to factors that affect FCR. US catfish is used as a case study because pond‐level data from verification trials (Extension/research‐led on‐farm trials of best available science) and commercial farm records are available. While specific to US catfish production, the analysis provides insights into factors affecting FCR that likely apply to other pond‐based aquaculture species. Commercial verification of pond data showed (1) significant variation in FCR (coefficients of variation from 1% to 47%) among ponds with similar stocking, feeding, and aeration rates; (2) significant effects of survival on FCR; and (3) no significant effects on FCR of yield, feed type, management, or production system. Improvements in FCR would occur with improved survival that requires improved management of federally protected fish‐eating bird populations and development of additional, effective vaccines for diseases. FCRs were found to not exhibit the degree of reliability and consistency required for use as an effective metric or numeric standard for regulatory purposes. Use of FCR for mandatory or voluntary regulation is unlikely to lead to behavioral changes by farmers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: This study aimed to systematically compare the effectiveness, safety, and costs of different anti‐Parkinson drugs (APDs). Methods: This is a multi‐center study that retrospectively analyzed the data of 8420 outpatients with PD from 2014 to 2019 across 30 tertiary hospitals in China. The effectiveness was evaluated by changes in total dosages of APDs, normalized by levodopa equivalent dose (LED) and presented as ΔLEDs; levodopa equivalent dose cost (LEDc) represented the daily cost of APDs; and newly added diagnostics were represented as APDs‐related adverse events. Results: A total of 384 patients with eligible medical records for three consecutive years were enrolled. Patients treated with carbidopa/levodopa or levodopa/benserazide had significantly lower mean ΔLEDs than other groups (p < 0.01), followed by pramipexole and selegiline. The piribedil group had the highest ΔLEDs, with mean differences of 112.56–355.04 mg compared to other groups (p < 0.01). Meanwhile, LEDc in the levodopa/benserazide, carbidopa/levodopa, and piribedil groups were significantly lower than those in pramipexole or selegiline groups ($0.088–0.135/day for levodopa/benserazide; $0.070–0.126/day for carbidopa/levodopa; $0.112–0.138/day for piribedil; $0.290–0.332/day for pramipexole; $0.229–0.544/day for selegiline; p < 0.01). Patients with piribedil had more adverse events, with an incidence rate of 35.7%, followed by levodopa/benserazide (25.6%), selegiline (23.5%), carbidopa/levodopa (23.3%), and pramipexole (16.4%). Pramipexole showed a lower incidence rate of adverse events than piribedil, including neuropsychiatric symptoms (p = 0.006), headache/dizziness (p = 0.016), and gastrointestinal symptoms (p = 0.031). Conclusions: Carbidopa/levodopa or levodopa/benserazide might exhibit better clinical improvement with less medical cost, while piribedil presented less clinical improvement but a higher risk of headache/dizziness, gastrointestinal, and neuropsychiatric symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]