Towards a more diversified Canada: economic arguments for re-confederation

Abstract: In the ongoing Canadian debate on confederation, variations across the country are almost invariably viewed as conditions that must be removed or at best tolerated. This paper provides an alternative view and model of confederation that builds on portfolio notions of diversification. Here, instead of seeing regional differences as barriers to a strong confederation, we envision building solidly on these differences and encouraging regions to differentiate themselves. Canada's diverse regions might then realize futures that are most appropriate to their resource endowments and human aspirations and that at the same time improve the economic growth and growth-volatility characteristics of the nation as a whole. Regions might pursue their comparative advantages rather than having to forego their distinctness in striving for a “national mean” - a mean all too frequently defined by values at the centre of economic and political power. The ensuing discussion expands this argument and applies it using two specific examples: securities regulation and housing policy. The paper concludes with some suggestions for instituting a more differentiated, diversified and decentralized form of confederation. Sommaire: Dans le cadre du debat perpetuel sur la confédération au Canada, on con-sidère presque toujours que les variations qui existent à travers le pays doivent être éliminées ou, au mieux, tolérées. Dans cet article, on présente un autre modèle de confédération qui s'inspire de la notion de diversification du portefeuille. Au lieu d'envisager les differences régionales comme autant d'obstacles s'opposant à une confédération forte, on veut bâtir du solide sur ces differences et encourager les régions à se différencier entre elles. Les régions variées du Canada seraient alors à même de suivre le cherninement le mieux adaptéà leurs richesses naturelles et aux aspirations de leurs populations, tout en améliorant les paramétres de croissance et de volatilité de la croissance de la nation toute entiére. Les régions poursuivraient alors leurs avantages comparatifs, au lieu d'abandonner leurs traits distinctifs pour tendre vers une moyenne, nationale trop souvent tributaire de valeurs situées au centre du pouvoir économique et politique. On élargit ensuite cet argument et on l'applique au moyen de deux exemples concrets: la réglementation des valeurs mobilières et la politique sur le logement. En conclusion, l'article offre quelques suggestions pour quel'on adopte une confédération plus différenciée, plus diversifiée et plus décentralisée.     

Skin penetration assessment of less lethal kinetic energy munitions

The development of less-lethal technologies has provided law enforcement personnel with an alternative to lethal force. Although the less lethal projectile was produced to engender non-penetrating wounds, case studies show that there have been a number of reported penetrating injuries ranging from minor to significant in morbidity. The objective of this study was to determine the energy per unit area required to penetrate various regions of the body. Eight unembalmed postmortem human specimens were procured for this testing. Each specimen sustained a maximum of 25 impacts consisting of shots to the anterior and posterior thorax, abdomen, and legs. A 12-gauge, fin-stabilized, rubber rocket round was used as the impactor for all of the conducted tests. The energy density required for 50% risk of penetration varied from 23.99 J/cm2 for the location on the anterior rib (p = 0.000) to 52.74 J/cm2 for the location on the posterior rib (p = 0.001).     

Disputants' perspectives on the differences between mediation and arbitration

Conclusion Our study of grievance mediation in the coal industry expands existing knowledge about mediation in three important respects. First, we have shown that mediation can be as successful in resolving disputes when it is involuntary as when it is voluntary. Second, disputants with experience in both mediation and arbitration substantially prefer mediation to arbitration. Third, by combining the second conclusion with the results of other studies that show mediation is preferred over court adjudication, we suggest that mediation is generally preferred to adjudication, regardless of the particular type of adjudication—arbitration or court. Stephen B. Goldberg is Professor of Law at Northwestern University Law School, 357 East Chicago Ave., Chicago, Ill. 60610.Jeanne M. Brett is DeWitt W. Buchanan, Jr. Professor of Dispute Resolution and Organizations at the J. L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, Ill. 60208.This article is based in part upon research reported in Brett and Goldberg, 1983.