Read Online or Download OECD e-government studies PDF
Similar environmental policy books
The hunt for helpful biochemical compounds and genes in nature has been the focal point of overseas negotiations for greater than a decade, but debate at the phrases for entry to genetic assets, conventional wisdom and benefit-sharing is much from settled. This booklet examines the optimum estate rights constructions and institutional mechanisms for regulating bioprospecting for drug learn.
This booklet is a shining instance of engaged scholarship. Carmin and Agyeman target to enhance our knowing of, and skill to behave upon, environmental inequalities all over the world, and so they do so twofold goal properly. In my box of city and neighborhood making plans, the function of associations that the ebook highlights is more and more key, and that i see this publication as an outstanding contribution to my box in addition to to sociology, political technological know-how, anthropology, overseas experiences, ethnic reports, and environmental healthiness reviews.
Every one plant-pathogen interplay consists of a two-way molecular verbal exchange. On one hand, the pathogen perceives signs from the plant, secretes chemical arsenals to set up an infection courts, and produces metabolites that disrupt structural integrity, regulate mobile functionality, and avoid host defenses.
Worldwide meals rate spikes in 2008 and back in 2011 coincided with a surge of political unrest in low- and middle-income international locations. offended shoppers took to the streets in ratings of countries. In a few locations, nutrients riots became violent, pressuring governments and in a couple of circumstances contributed to their overthrow.
- Globalization and the Environment : Greening Global Political Economy
- A Climate of Injustice: Global Inequality, North-South Politics, and Climate Policy (Global Environmental Accord: Strategies for Sustainability and Institutional Innovation)
- Environmental Relations and Behavior
- The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World's Top Climate Expert
Extra resources for OECD e-government studies
In 2001, following a review of the public sector’s progress in developing e-government, the Ministry of Finance established both the Joint Board of e-Government and the Danish Digital Task Force to increase the focus being placed on overall e-government leadership, OECD E-GOVERNMENT STUDIES – DENMARK – ISBN 92-64-01234-6 – © OECD 2006 39 1. E-GOVERNMENT CONTEXT AND STRUCTURE planning and co-ordination. These bodies now work on e-government in close co-operation with the MVTU. The Danish political system is characterised by a culture of compromise and consensus, and there are good opportunities for public participation in the political process at both the national and local levels of government.
The project is under the leadership of the Joint Board of e-Government, which is a uniquely Danish arrangement for overall administrative steering of a national e-government programme. Chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Finance, the Board’s membership consists of the permanent secretaries of five other State government ministries and the managing directors of Local Government Denmark and the Danish Regions. The relationship between the Board and 44 OECD E-GOVERNMENT STUDIES – DENMARK – ISBN 92-64-01234-6 – © OECD 2006 1.
Instead, whole-of-government efforts are necessary to ensure that external barriers to e-government are reduced as far as possible. The results of the OECD survey show that, when asked to rate the importance of potential challenges to e-government implementation, survey respondents identified “external barriers” as the biggest challenge to e-government, slightly ahead of competition for resources (73%) and lack of planning within organisations (66%). 1). These results are corroborated by Statistics Denmark’s 2004 survey of public sector use of ICT, where budgetary difficulties were ranked as the biggest barrier to e-government (important for 83% of respondents) and legislative and regulatory issues were of lower importance (“major importance” for 10%, and “moderate importance” for 50%, of respondents).