When Mutual Benefit Corporations Should Not Bother to Seek Recognition

2021 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 3-3
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Benefit ◽  
Benefit Corporations

Clinical Science in the 1990s

1990 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
M. J. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Medical Research ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Molecular Level ◽  
Short Interval ◽  
Clinical Science ◽  
Molecular Medicine ◽  
Mutual Benefit ◽  
Real Progress ◽  
General Journal

From this issue, Clinical Science will increase its page numbers from an average of 112 to 128 per monthly issue. This welcome change — equivalent to at least two manuscripts — has been ‘forced’ on us by the increasing pressure on space; this has led to an undesirable increase in the delay between acceptance and publication, and to a fall in the proportion of submitted manuscripts we have been able to accept. The change in page numbers will instead permit us now to return to our exceptionally short interval between acceptance and publication of 3–4 months; and at the same time we shall be able not only to accept (as now) those papers requiring little or no revision, but also to offer hope to some of those papers which have raised our interest but come to grief in review because of a major but remediable problem. Our view, doubtless unoriginal, has been that the review process, which is unusually thorough for Clinical Science, involving a specialist editor and two external referees, is most constructive when it helps the evolution of a good paper from an interesting piece of research. Traditionally, the papers in Clinical Science have represented some areas of research more than others. However, this has reflected entirely the pattern of papers submitted to us, rather than any selective interest of the Editorial Board, which numbers up to 35 scientists covering most areas of medical research. Arguably, after the explosion during the last decade of specialist journals, the general journal can look forward to a renaissance in the 1990s, as scientists in apparently different specialities discover that they are interested in the same substances, asking similar questions and developing techniques of mutual benefit to answer these questions. This situation arises from the trend, even among clinical scientists, to recognize the power of research based at the cellular and molecular level to achieve real progress, and at this level the concept of organ-based specialism breaks down. It is perhaps ironic that this journal, for a short while at the end of the 1970s, adopted — and then discarded — the name of Clinical Science and Molecular Medicine, since this title perfectly represents the direction in which clinical science, and therefore Clinical Science, is now progressing.

For Mutual Benefit: Studying Women and Social Psychology

1986 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 339-340
Author(s):  
Brenda Major
Keyword(s):  
Social Psychology ◽  
Mutual Benefit

Complexity and the Art of Public Policy

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Colander ◽  
Roland Kupers
Keyword(s):  
Social Systems ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
Government Control ◽  
Institutional Structures ◽  
Policy Models ◽  
Benefit Corporations ◽  
Evolving System ◽  
Societal Problems ◽  
Modern Analytical ◽  
Policy Solutions

Complexity science—made possible by modern analytical and computational advances—is changing the way we think about social systems and social theory. Unfortunately, economists’ policy models have not kept up and are stuck in either a market fundamentalist or government control narrative. While these standard narratives are useful in some cases, they are damaging in others, directing thinking away from creative, innovative policy solutions. This book outlines a new, more flexible policy narrative, which envisions society as a complex evolving system that is uncontrollable but can be influenced. The book describes how economists and society became locked into the current policy framework, and lay out fresh alternatives for framing policy questions. Offering original solutions to stubborn problems, the complexity narrative builds on broader philosophical traditions, such as those in the work of John Stuart Mill, to suggest initiatives that the authors call “activist laissez-faire” policies. The book develops innovative bottom-up solutions that, through new institutional structures such as for-benefit corporations, channel individuals’ social instincts into solving societal problems, making profits a tool for change rather than a goal. It argues that a central role for government in this complexity framework is to foster an ecostructure within which diverse forms of social entrepreneurship can emerge and blossom.

Hukum Denda dalam Keuangan Publik Islam di Indonesia

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-328
Author(s):  
Fathul Aminudin Aziz
Keyword(s):  
Islamic Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Mutual Benefit ◽  
State Budget ◽  
The People ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Government

Fines are sanctions or punishments that are applied in the form of the obligation to pay a sum of money imposed on the denial of a number of agreements previously agreed upon. There is debate over the status of fines in Islamic law. Some argue that fines may not be used, and some argue that they may be used. In the context of fines for delays in payment of taxes, in fiqh law it can be analogous to ta'zir bi al-tamlīk (punishment for ownership). This can be justified if the tax obligations have met the requirements. Whereas according to Islamic teachings, fines can be categorized as acts in order to obey government orders as taught in the hadith, and in order to contribute to the realization of mutual benefit in the life of the state. As for the amount of the fine, the government cannot arbitrarily determine fines that are too large to burden the people. Penalties are applied as a message of reprimand and as a means to cover the lack of the state budget.

Psychological Stability

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Sugden
Keyword(s):  
Market Economy ◽  
Equality Of Opportunity ◽  
Mutual Benefit ◽  
General Belief ◽  
Over Time

Chapter 8 asks what properties a market economy must have if it is to be psychologically stable—that is, if it is to reproduce a general belief that its governing principles are fair. I argue that, because of the division of knowledge and because the opportunities open to each person depend on how other people choose to use their opportunities, full equality of opportunity is not compatible with a market economy. Psychological stability has to rest on continuing expectations of mutual benefit, defined relative to a baseline that evolves over time and that cannot be justified in terms of abstract principles of fairness. However, if the market is to be recommended to each individual separately, each individual must be able to expect to share in the benefits that markets create. Maintaining such expectations typically requires redistributive mechanisms.

The Introduction of a Daily Telephone Advice Service: How is it Used and is it Worth the Effort?

1998 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.J. Trevett ◽  
J.R. Martin ◽  
W.A. Ross ◽  
E. Macfarlane
Keyword(s):  
Medical Advice ◽  
Patient Needs ◽  
Mutual Benefit ◽  
Telephone Advice ◽  
Advice Service

Improving access to medical advice by telephone may reduce unnecessary consultations, limit interruptions through the day and provide a more flexible service to meet patient needs. We advertised and introduced a daily advice line for patients and found that it was used appropriately and to mutual benefit.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document