M.J. Bowman – författare

The persistently increasing scale and complexity of government, of quasi­ public organizations, and of private organizations pose many problems in the economics of collective choice. Moreover, education as a quasi-public good has drawn ever more heavily on public budgets. Yet economic research into collective behavior with respect to education has been sparse (with the partial exception of recent work on teacher unions). In view of these trends, it was decided that the third conference under the Ford-sponsored UK. jUS. Pro­ gramme in the Economics of Education should make the high-risk effort of encouraging and bringing together studies relating to collective choice in education, with some emphasis on studies in educational finance. The con­ ference exploited opportunities for an exchange of ideas between economists in the United Kingdom and in the United States; there were special gains that could come from such an interchange. British and American economists do share a common inheritance that goes back to Benthamite utilitarianism and a common training in neo-classical economic theory even when one or both of these is challenged (which happens, of course, on both sides of the Atlantic). They share also a culture of political democracy despite important dissimilar­ ities in governmental structures and institutions. These commonalities and contrasts facilitate comparative testing of analyses developed in either setting.

On May 25, 1977 a small invited group of coastal oceanographers assembled at the Marine Sciences Research Center at Stony Brook for three days of intensive discussions in a cloistered setting. The purpose of this workshop was to "assess the state of the art, to ascertain priorities for future research and to formulate the theoretical, instrumen­ tal, experimental and logistical tools needed to attain those goals in the study of coastal oceanic* fronts. " Although the existence of oceanic fronts has been known for a long time, ocean frontology is experiencing rapid acceleration in the emergence of new concepts and methodology. The science is developing from the descriptive phase and many unsolved problems lie in the understanding and quantification of frontal dynamics. In turn, challenging questions need to be addressed on the controlling influence of the physics of fronts on the chemistry, biology, acoustics, and suspended particulate aggregations in these zones. Coastal fronts are very efficient at concentrating buoyant and suspended particulate matter inclUding toxic wastes; heavy metal concentrations in polluted coastal frontal zones have been measured to be as high as one to ten thousand times background. These zones are also regions of high biological productivity, and consequently frequented by both commercial and sports fishermen.

On May 25, 1977 a small invited group of coastal oceanographers assembled at the Marine Sciences Research Center at Stony Brook for three days of intensive discussions in a cloistered setting. The purpose of this workshop was to "assess the state of the art, to ascertain priorities for future research and to formulate the theoretical, instrumen­ tal, experimental and logistical tools needed to attain those goals in the study of coastal oceanic* fronts. " Although the existence of oceanic fronts has been known for a long time, ocean frontology is experiencing rapid acceleration in the emergence of new concepts and methodology. The science is developing from the descriptive phase and many unsolved problems lie in the understanding and quantification of frontal dynamics. In turn, challenging questions need to be addressed on the controlling influence of the physics of fronts on the chemistry, biology, acoustics, and suspended particulate aggregations in these zones. Coastal fronts are very efficient at concentrating buoyant and suspended particulate matter inclUding toxic wastes; heavy metal concentrations in polluted coastal frontal zones have been measured to be as high as one to ten thousand times background. These zones are also regions of high biological productivity, and consequently frequented by both commercial and sports fishermen.

The persistently increasing scale and complexity of government, of quasi­ public organizations, and of private organizations pose many problems in the economics of collective choice. Moreover, education as a quasi-public good has drawn ever more heavily on public budgets. Yet economic research into collective behavior with respect to education has been sparse (with the partial exception of recent work on teacher unions). In view of these trends, it was decided that the third conference under the Ford-sponsored UK. jUS. Pro­ gramme in the Economics of Education should make the high-risk effort of encouraging and bringing together studies relating to collective choice in education, with some emphasis on studies in educational finance. The con­ ference exploited opportunities for an exchange of ideas between economists in the United Kingdom and in the United States; there were special gains that could come from such an interchange. British and American economists do share a common inheritance that goes back to Benthamite utilitarianism and a common training in neo-classical economic theory even when one or both of these is challenged (which happens, of course, on both sides of the Atlantic). They share also a culture of political democracy despite important dissimilar­ ities in governmental structures and institutions. These commonalities and contrasts facilitate comparative testing of analyses developed in either setting.