Search results

Extant literature in supply chain management tends to address a portion of the product flow to make food accessible to clients in need. The authors present a broader view of food insecurity and present nuances relevant to appreciate the complexities of dealing with this social problem.

The authors conducted an inductive study to reveal the deep meaning of the context as managers of nonprofit organizations (NPO) define and address food insecurity. The focus was on a delimited geographic area for capturing interactions among NPOs which have not been described previously.

This study describes the role of supply chains collaborating in unexpected ways in the not-for-profit context, leading to interesting insights for the conceptual development of service ecosystems. This is relevant because the solution for the food insecure stems from the orchestration of assistance provided by the many supply chains for social assistance.

The authors introduce two concepts: customer sharing and customer release. Customer sharing enables these supply chains behave like an ecosystem with no focal organization. Customer release is the opposite to customer retention, when the food insecure stops needing assistance.

The authors describe the use of customer-centric measures of success such improved health measured. The solution to food insecurity for an individual is likely to be the result of the orchestration of assistance provided by several supply chains.

The authors started asking who the client is and how the NPOs define food insecurity, leading to discussing contrasts between food access and utilization, between hunger relief and nourishment, between assistance and solution of the problem, and between supply chains and ecosystems.

With the present issue the British Food Journal attains its majority. For the last twenty‐one years the Journal has devoted its pages to matters directly or indirectly relating to the repression of adulteration and to the efficient and proper administration of the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts and the Public Health Acts. If the Journal has in any way contributed to the efficient and proper administration of these Acts, it has performed a real public service, the magnitude of which can best be appreciated by those whose daily work brings them in contact with these matters. The policy of the Journal remains the same to‐day as it was when the Journal was established. Correct and reliable reports of food adulteration cases and cases of fraudulent trading form one of the main features of the Journal, but it is not intended to be, and has never been, an organ solely concerned with the directly‐visible aspect of these matters as revealed by the reports of legal proceedings and by official reports submitted to the Authorities.

Austrian economist Ludwig Mises’s central role in the socialist calculation debates has been consensually acknowledged since the early 1920s. Yet, only recently Nemeth, O’Neill, Uebel, and others have drawn particular attention to Mises’s encounter with logical empiricist Otto Neurath. Despite several surprising agreements, Neurath and Mises certainly provide different answers to the questions “what is meant by rational economic theory” (Neurath) and whether “socialism is the abolition of rational economy” (Mises). Previous accounts and evaluations of the exchange between Neurath and Mises suffer from attaching little regard to their idiosyncratic uses of the term “rational.” The paper at hand reconstructs and critically compares the different conceptions of rationality defended by Neurath and Mises. The author presents two different resolutions to a detected tension in Mises’s deliberations on rationality: the first is implicit in Neurath’s, O’Neill’s, and Salerno’s reading of Mises and faces several interpretational problems; the author proposes a divergent interpretation. Based on the reconstructions of Neurath’s and Mises’s conceptions of rationality, the author suggests some implications with respect to Viennese Late Enlightenment and the socialist calculation debates.

The connotations, associations, custom and usages of a name often give to it an importance that far outweighs its etymological significance. Even with personal surnames or the name of a business. A man may use his own name but not if by so doing it inflicts injury on the interests and business of another person of the same name. After a long period of indecision, it is now generally accepted that in “passing off”, there is no difference between the use of a man's own name and any other descriptive word. The Courts will only intervene, however, when a personal name has become so much identified with a well‐known business as to be necessarily deceptive when used without qualification by anyone else in the same trade; i.e., only in rare cases. In the early years, the genesis of goods and trade protection, fraud was a necessary ingredient of “passing off”, an intent to deceive, but with the merging off Equity with the Common Law, the equitable rule that interference with “property” did not require fraudulent intent was practised in the Courts. First applying to trade marks, it was extended to trade names, business signs and symbols and business generally. Now it is unnecessary to prove any intent to deceive, merely that deception was probable, or that the plaintiff had suffered actual damage. The equitable principle was not established without a struggle, however, and the case of “Singer” Sewing Machines (1877) unified the two streams of law but not before it reached the House of Lords. On the way up, judical opinions differed; in the Court of Appeal, fraud was considered necessary—the defendant had removed any conception of fraud by expressingly declaring in advertisements that his “Singer” machines were manufactured by himself—so the Court found for him, but the House of Lords considered the name “Singer” was in itself a trade mark and there was no more need to prove fraud in the case of a trade name than a trade mark; Hence, the birth of the doctrine that fraud need not be proved, but their Lordships showed some hesitation in accepting property rights for trade names. If the name used is merely descriptive of goods, there can be no cause for action, but if it connotes goods manufactured by one firm or prepared from a formula or compsitional requirements prescribed by and invented by a firm or is the produce of a region, then others have no right to use it. It is a question of fact whether the name is the one or other. The burden of proof that a name or term in common use has become associated with an individual product is a heavy one; much heavier in proving an infringement of a trade mark.

A great meeting was held at the Albert Hall on July 30th to call for the internment of all aliens of enemy blood. Mrs. DACRE FOX presided, and read the resolution which it was proposed to put to the meeting, as follows :—

Describes how the opinions about Wilhelm Roscher and his work developed during the century following his death in the USA. Possible reasons for the changes are explored. Special attention is given to the more favourable reception of Roscher in the USA as opposed to the UK. A central point is that his influence and importance in the USA changed as time passed and with the development of professional economics. Suggests new reading of Cunningham′s essay. Attention is drawn to some of Roscher′s works in English that have been neglected. Some problems of periodization in the history of economic thought are investigated. Several conventional judgements are challenged and possibilities for further research suggested.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce librarians, faculty, and other interested individuals to contemporary German literature in English translation.

German‐language authors born in 1950 or later and listed on the Contemporary Living Authors Comprehensive List developed by the German vendor Otto Harrassowitz are searched in OCLC's WorldCat database to determine the existence of English translations. A bio‐bibliographical list is then developed featuring all contemporary German‐language authors who have achieved an English language translation of at least one of their literary works.

Of the approximately 1,400 writers on Harrassowitz's comprehensive list, a surprisingly large number of almost 80 authors of the younger generation (born in 1950 or later) have been translated into English.

This bio‐bibliography of contemporary German belles lettres (of the younger generation) in English translation is the first of its kind. It can be used by librarians to check their current library holdings and to expand their collections of German literature in English translation.

It appears that of late the consumption of bread has fallen in this country; and I find that a scheme of advertising the necessity for eating more bread has been decided upon by the Association of Millers, and is now in operation.