text:
French village offers reward to decipher its 'Rosetta Stone'
Plougastel-Daoulas, France / Sat, May 11, 2019 / 01:04 am
French local councillor in charge of small heritage Michel Paugam poses on May 7, 2019 as he shows inscriptions composing indecipherable words on a rock in the Brittany village of Plougastel-Daoulas. The city launched a national call with a 2000 euros reward to anyone able to solve the mystery of those inscriptions propably made during the 18th century. (AFP/Fred Tanneau)
Lapped by the waves of the Atlantic and visible at only low tide, a mysterious rock inscription believed to be centuries old and so far undeciphered lurks outside a French village in Brittany.
The town hall in Plougastel-Daoulas in the Finistere region of Brittany in northwest France is now offering a 2,000-euro ($2,250) reward for anyone who can decrypt the sequence of letters and symbol.
Could the small boulder have been used for a love letter whose secret has remained untouched for centuries, or a proud note left by an eighteenth-century fort-builder? Or something even more mysterious?
Locally, the rock is sometimes compared to the Rosetta Stone, the great ancient Egyptian stele now in the British Museum whose inscription was partly deciphered by the French Egyptologist Jean-Francois Champollion.
The authorities in Plougastel-Daoulas hope that their competition will shed light on the enigmatic piece of history.
"This inscription is a mystery and it is for this that we are launching the appeal," said Veronique Martin, who is spearheading the search for a code-cracker.
The rock, which is around the size of a person, is accessed via a path from the hamlet of Illien ar Gwenn just to the north of Corbeau point.
The inscription fills the entirety of one of its sides and is mainly in capital letters but there are also pictures including a sailing boat. There are two dates, 1786 and 1787.
"These dates correspond more or less to the years that various artillery batteries that protected Brest and notably Corbeau Fort which is right next to it," she said.
On a first glance the inscription defies interpretation.
Read also: Exploring Todo customary village a 'to do' when visiting West Flores
"ROC AR B... DRE AR GRIO SE EVELOH AR VIRIONES BAOAVEL... R I OBBIIE: BRISBVILAR... FROIK...AL," read parts.
"There are people who tell us that it's Basque and others who say it's old Breton," said the mayor of Plougastel-Daoulas Dominique Cap.
"But we still have not managed to decipher the text," the mayor told AFP, adding the rock was first spotted around three-four years ago.
The appeal to crack the code has been made to linguists, historians, academics, students or simply people who enjoy code-breaking as a hobby.
A jury will then meet to choose the most plausible suggestion and award the prize.
"There are a lot of words, they're letters from our alphabet, but we can't read them, we can't make them out," said the municipal councillor in charge of local heritage Michel Paugam.
Topics : villageinscriptionRosetta-StoneFrancePlougastel-Daoulas
Books 10:51 am
Entertainment 12:39 pm
Food 02:25 pm


text:
Inglês (pdf)
South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences
versão On-line ISSN 2222-3436
S. Afr. j. econ. manag. sci. vol.20 no.1 Pretoria 2017
http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v20i1.1474
The impact of social grant dependency on smallholder maize producers' market participation in South Africa: Application of the double-hurdle model
Sikhulumile SinyoloI; Maxwell MudharaII; Edilegnaw WaleII
IEconomic Performance and Development, Human Sciences Research Council, South Africa
IIDiscipline of Agricultural Economics, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
BACKGROUND: Social grants have become an increasingly popular means of improving the welfare of poor households in South Africa and beyond. While the goals of these transfers are to alleviate current poverty as well as to improve human capital capacity, they also have unintended effects, positive or negative, on beneficiary households. A question that has not been adequately addressed in the literature is the role that social grants play in the efforts to commercialise smallholder farming.
AIM: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of social grant dependency on the incentives of smallholder maize producers to participate in the market.
SETTING: The study was done in the rural areas of four districts (Harry Gwala, Umzinyathi, Umkhanyakude and Uthukela) in the KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa.
METHODS: The study adopted a quantitative research design. A total of 984 households were randomly selected from the four districts, of which 774 had planted maize in the previous season. The analysis was done on the 774 farmers who had planted maize. The double-hurdle model was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: The results show a negative association between social grant dependency and market participation, suggesting that social grant-dependent households are more subsistent, producing less marketable surplus. Moreover, households with access to social grants sold less quantities of maize in the market, indicating reduced selling incentives.
CONCLUSION: The study indicates that social grants reduce the incentives of smallholder farmers to commercialise their production activities. The results suggest that, while policies aimed at reducing transaction costs would increase smallholder market participation, attention should be paid on how to reduce social grants' dis-incentive effects. To reduce spill over effects to unintended household members, the study recommends offering part of the grant as 'in-kind support', which is specific to the intended individual beneficiary.
There is a general consensus in the literature (e.g. Alene et al. 2008; Barrett & Swallow 2006; Carter & Barrett 2006; De Janvry, Fafchamps & Sadoulet 1991; Von Braun 1995) that promoting smallholder market participation is an important pathway towards poverty reduction, economic growth and development in developing countries. It has been argued that smallholder agriculture would contribute more to rural livelihoods if it breaks out of the subsistence trap into commercial agricultural production (Barrett & Swallow 2006; Hazell et al. 2010). As a result, the transition from semi-subsistence to commercialised agriculture has been a core theme of rural development initiatives for many years across the developing countries (Agwu, Anyanwu & Mendie 2012; Barrett 2008).
This also applies to South Africa, which, on the one hand, is characterised by large-scale producers well connected to markets and, on the other hand, has a smallholder farming sector that is unprofitable and is characterised by weak links to markets (Makhura, Kirsten & Delgado 2001; Ortmann & King 2010; Van der Heijden & Vink 2013). The general view is that smallholder farmers' market participation should be improved to reduce rural poverty and household food insecurity in South Africa (Chikazunga 2013; Khumalo 2013; Senyolo et al. 2009). Moreover, the high unemployment rates and limited prospects for labour absorption in the non-farm sector have led the South African government to prioritise the expansion of the smallholder sector as part of its broader job creation strategy [Aliber & Hall 2012; National Planning Commission (NPC) 2012]. According to Aliber and Hall (2012), an important element of such a strategy is that it should promote the graduation of subsistence producers so that they can earn an income as commercial smallholder producers.
Accordingly, the South African government has identified increased commercialisation of smallholder farming as key in reducing rural poverty as well as stimulating rural economic development [Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) 2012; NPC 2012]. For example, the New Growth Path sets target of establishing 300 000 additional market-oriented smallholder producers by 2020 [Department of Economic Development (DED) 2011]. In line with these targets, the DAFF has been implementing the Strategic Plan for Smallholder Support (SPSS), aimed at supporting the smallholder farmers to graduate to commercial status (DAFF 2012). Despite the concerted government efforts in the past, smallholder farmers' market participation has not significantly improved in South Africa (Hlongwane, Ledwaba & Belete 2014).
A range of constraints and barriers reducing smallholder producers' market participation levels have been identified, with most of the studies highlighting the negative impact of transaction costs in this regard (Biénabe & Vermeulen 2011; Hlongwane et al. 2014; Jari & Fraser 2013; Makhura 2001; Van der Heijden & Vink 2013). However, the question that has not been adequately addressed is the impact of social grants on the incentives of smallholder farmers to commercialise their production activities. South Africa has social grants that benefited an average of over 16 million of the poor each month in 2014 (South Africa Social Security Agency 2014). Most smallholder farming households are beneficiaries of at least one of the different social grants. Even though the social grants are targeted to specific vulnerable groups such as the young, old or chronically sick among poor households, they generally benefit households as a whole (Abel 2013; Klasen & Woolard 2008).
On the one hand, social grants can be an important complement to the smallholders' commercialisation agenda, as the extra income may relieve the credit and liquidity constraints of farm households, enabling them to overcome the transaction costs they face (Barrientos 2012; Bezu & Holden 2008; Boone et al. 2013; Tirivayi, Knowles & Davis 2016). On the other hand, the economic theory predicts that social grants may induce negative behavioural changes and entrench a culture of dependency and entitlement, undermining the incentives of farmers to commercialise their production activities (Barrett 2006; Devereux 2001; Gibson 2015; Lentz, Barrett & Hoddinott 2005). The theoretical rationale is that increased household income because of unearned income like social grants, reduces the marginal benefit that households obtain from undertaking further income-generating activities such as farming (Binger & Hoffman 1998).
Descriptive statistics and anecdotal evidence from several studies in South Africa (e.g. Aliber & Hall 2012; Aliber & Hart 2009; Tshuma 2012; White & Killick 2001) have highlighted the potential negative effect of social grants on smallholder farming activities. Tshuma (2012) reported that many smallholder farmers are reducing the area under cultivation, even for subsistence purposes, as they depend more on social grants for their income. This has resulted in social grants becoming the greatest source of income for the majority of rural households in South Africa, surpassing that of smallholder agriculture by far (Tshuma 2012). However, the understanding of the linkages between smallholder market participation and social grants has not been based on in-depth empirical analyses. Recent reviews of empirical literature on the potential linkages between social cash transfers and smallholder agriculture (e.g. Bastagli et al. 2016; Tirivayi et al. 2016) have indicated that the research on the issue is currently thin and the results are of a mixed nature. Most of the studies (Boone et al. 2013; Covarrubias, Davis & Winters 2012; Radel et al. 2016; Todd, Winters & Hertz 2010), mainly in Latin American and sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries, evaluated the direct and indirect impact of social transfers on agriculture and focussed on agricultural outcomes such as asset accumulation, input use, output and labour allocation. While literature generally showed the positive role of social transfers in improving the productive capacity of beneficiaries, little is known about whether social cash transfers have positive or negative effects on the smallholder market participation.
Understanding the linkages between social transfers and smallholder commercialisation is important to improve the policy coherence between social protection and smallholder agriculture, as called upon in recent literature (e.g. Boone et al. 2013; FAO 2016; Tirivayi et al. 2016). Increased policy coherence would ensure that social cash transfers do not reduce the incentives for the poor to work themselves out of poverty through smallholder farming, which is the main income-generating activity in rural areas (Gibson 2015; Maluccio 2010). Few studies, if any, have explicitly and systematically articulated the theoretical linkage and examined the empirical relationship between the two variables in South Africa and beyond. This study, therefore, seeks to address this pertinent question by focussing on smallholder maize producers' market participation. Maize was chosen because it is the most important grain crop in South Africa, and is the main crop grown by smallholder farmers (Akpalu, Hassan & Ringler 2010; Biénabe & Vermeulen 2011; D'Haese et al. 2013).
The remainder of this article is organised into three sections. The next section presents the research methodology, introducing the theoretical framework, the study area, the sampling techniques adopted and the empirical models employed. The penultimate section presents results and their discussions, while the conclusions and implications for policies are contained in the final section.
Survey design and data
The sample was randomly drawn from four purposively chosen districts across the KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) province: Harry Gwala, Umzinyathi, Umkhanyakude and Uthukela. These districts have a significant number of rural communities engaged in farming activities and are among the poorest in terms of average household incomes (Stats SA 2012). The KZN province is characterised by high poverty levels and lack of economic opportunities, particularly in rural areas. Social grants and smallholder farming play important roles in the livelihoods of the rural dwellers.
The lists of farmers were obtained from the extension offices of the respective districts, which also helped direct the enumerators to the selected farmers' homesteads. A total of 984 households were randomly selected from the four districts, of which 774 had planted maize in the previous season. The analysis was done on the 774 farmers who had planted maize in the last season. Data were collected between June and November 2014 using a pretested structured questionnaire. The questionnaire was administered by trained and experienced enumerators who had good knowledge of the rural farming systems and who could speak the local isiZulu language.
The questionnaire included information on basic household head characteristics, measures of household wealth endowment (such as household assets, livestock and land) and household income sources or amounts. The questionnaire also captured the crop production and marketing behaviour of the households, asking questions about types of crops the household planted in the previous season, quantities harvested and sold. Furthermore, the questionnaire captured farmers' membership to associations as well as their access to institutional support such as market access, social grants, credit and extension.
Conceptual framework and variables
The households' decision on whether or not to participate in the maize market was considered under the random utility framework (McFadden 1974) and the theory of farm household decision-making under imperfect markets (De Janvry et al. 1991). The random utility framework postulates that the smallholder maize farmers will decide to participate in the market if the perceived utility or net benefit from participation is greater than in the case without participation. The theory of farm household decision-making under imperfect markets indicates that a household's market participation is mainly a function of market transaction costs. According to De Janvry et al. (1991), market failure is household specific, not commodity-specific. This is because households who participate in the market are those with market gains that are higher than the transaction costs, while those with market gains less than the transaction costs will not participate.
Even though in some cases markets do not even exist (missing markets), the majority of the cases of market failure in developing countries are because of high transaction costs (Alene et al. 2008; De Janvry et al. 1991; Goetz 1992; Key, Sadoulet & De Janvry 2000; Omamo 1998). In South Africa, these transaction costs are because the smallholder farmers are located in rural areas which are remote and far away from major consumers of farm products. Moreover, the rural areas are characterised by poor infrastructure, inadequate information and thin credit markets. As explained in De Janvry et al. (1991) and other recent studies (e.g. Alene et al. 2008; Mather, Boughton & Jayne 2013), the household's market participation is influenced by its economic position and institutional environment. The model estimated in this study included proxies for transaction costs, wealth endowment and human capital. Table 1 shows the variables that were considered and their descriptions.
The table presents the household head demographics (age, gender and household size), wealth endowment (farm size, asset values, livestock size, etc.), human capital (education level and farming experience), social capital (farmer groups membership) and farmer support services (access to extension, agricultural training, credit and markets) that were included in the model. District dummies were also included to capture the district-specific attributes that result in spatial variations in the political, social and agro-climatic environment of these districts which impact market participation. The quantities of maize produce harvested and sold as well as prices were based on the recall by the farmers. Even though the individual prices the households faced were collected, the average ward price was used as an explanatory variable in the model, following previous studies such as Alene et al. (2008) and Komarek (2010). This is because if household specific prices were used, those households with zero sales would have been excluded from the analysis. Total household income included the incomes that the household received from different sources, such as employment, remittances, social grants, farming, micro-businesses, and arts and culture.
It was also hypothesised that access to social grants will have a negative effect on the smallholder market participation. This is because increased income from social grants may entrench a culture of dependency and entitlement among beneficiary households (Abel 2013; Bertrand, Mullainathan & Miller 2003; Samson et al. 2004), reducing incentives by households to engage in income-generating activities. The influence of social grants was captured using two variables: a dummy variable showing whether or not a household has access to social grants and a proportional variable showing the contribution of social grants to total household income. The proportion variable captured the level of household dependency on social grants.
The double-hurdle model
The maize output marketing decision was modelled as a two-step decision process: (1) the household decides whether or not to participate in the market and (2) the household decides on the volume of transactions. The double-hurdle model (Cragg 1971) was used to model this two-step decision process, following several other market studies (e.g. Holloway, Barrett & Ehui 2005; Komarek 2010; Mabuza, Ortmann & Wale 2014; Mather et al. 2013; Ndoro, Mudhara & Chimonyo 2014). This model was chosen over the Heckman sample selection model, which has been used by many studies (e.g. Alene et al. 2008; Bwalya, Mugisha & Hyuha 2013; Geoffrey et al. 2013; Goetz 1992; Sebatta et al. 2014). The Heckman approach addresses the statistical challenge posed by cases in which market sales equal zero as a missing data problem. However, the issue of zero market sales does not represent missing values as a zero amount of maize output sold is a valid economic choice to be explained (Mather et al. 2013). The double-hurdle model produces more superior estimates than the Heckman model when one is dealing with true zeros (Dow & Norton 2003).
According to the double-hurdle model, a farmer faces two hurdles while deciding on maize market participation: whether or not to participate in the market and how much maize to sell in the market. This approach distinguishes between fixed transaction costs, which influence only the first decision of participation, and variable transaction costs, which can influence both decisions (Key et al. 2000). For example, distance to the market was considered in both decision stages because farmers nearer to the market incur less information cost, thus reducing fixed costs, and they also incur lower transport costs, reducing variable costs. Similarly, association membership was considered in both stages because group members may have higher access to information as they exchange information and experience. On the other hand, individual members would incur less variable costs (transport costs and risks) as they share these with other group members. However, access to different information sources only mitigates the costs of accessing information, which are fixed costs, but not the variable transaction costs.
The double-hurdle model integrates and simultaneously estimates the probit model to determine the probability of maize market participation and the truncated normal model for the level of market participation. The binary variable of maize market participation (w), assumed to follow a probit model, was specified as follows:
where P is the probability, w is the binary variable of market participation, Φ is the cumulative normal distribution, x is the vector of household characteristics that includes an indicator of access to social grants and γ are the coefficients to be estimated.
The level of maize market participation, y*, assumed to have a truncated normal distribution with parameters that vary freely from those in the probit model was estimated as follows:
where y* represents the quantity of maize output sold in tons; x is the vector of household characteristics that included indicators of grant access and dependency, εi is the error term and β's are parameters that were estimated.
A log-likelihood test was done to justify the use of the double-hurdle model over the Tobit model. Based on the log-likelihood values obtained from a separate estimation of the probit, truncated regression and Tobit models, the likelihood ratio statistic (λ) was computed as follows:
where LLprobit, LLtrunc and LLtobit are the likelihood values from the probit, truncated regression and Tobit models, respectively. The test statistic has a χ2 distribution with degrees of freedom equal to the number of independent variables (including the intercept) (Greene 2003). The Tobit model is rejected in favour of the double-hurdle model if λ exceeds the appropriate χ2 critical value, as was the case in this study (Burke 2009; Mabuza et al. 2014).
As social grants are not a random intervention but a targeted intervention, it was suspected that the estimated model may be affected by selection bias. Selection bias may occur because farmers with higher intrinsic motivation and ability are more likely to have more income and assets, meaning that they are less likely to qualify to benefit from social grants. These motivated farmers are also more likely to participate in the maize market, resulting in selection bias. The probit model (Equation 1) was first estimated using the Heckman selection probit model (heckprob command in Stata), with access to social grants as the selection variable. The likelihood ratio test of independent equations was done to indicate if there was evidence of selection bias at the conventional 10% significance level. The test showed that there was no evidence of selection bias.
Moreover, Hausman test (Hausman 1978) was conducted to test for potential endogeneity of dependency on social grants in the model. This is because it is possible that causality might flow from market participation to dependency on social grants, as increased market participation results in increased farm income. The increased farm income would result in decreased dependency on social grants, ceteris paribus. The test was implemented by firstly regressing social grants dependency on the exogenous explanatory variables as follows:
where GD means dependency on social grants, z is the vector of exogenous variables, γ are the estimated coefficients and ui is the residual term.
The second step involved obtaining the residuals (ui) and then adding these residuals in the truncated regression equation (Equation 2). A statistically significant estimated coefficient of the residuals would mean endogeneity problems, while a statistically insignificant estimate (as was the case in this study) means no evidence of the endogeneity problem. The potential endogeneity of other variables such as prices and assets (Boughton et al. 2007; Mather et al. 2013), was not tested. Therefore, the estimated coefficients of these variables should be interpreted as associations, not as causality relationships.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Human and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee of the University of KwaZulu-Natal (Reference number: HSS/0027/015D) and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Empirical results and discussions
Table 2 shows the socio-economic characteristics of the respondents per their market participation status. The moderate proportion of maize market participators is comparable to other studies in rural South Africa. For example, Biénabe and Vermeulen (2011) reported a figure of 43% maize market participants in the Limpopo province.
Table 2 also shows some significant differences in wealth and institutional or organisational support between market participants and non-participants. Households participating in the maize market had bigger family sizes, were richer in assets and had more farm income. The market participants had more access to extension and information and were members of associations. Moreover, the market participants had less access to social grants and received less of their income from social grants, that is, they were less dependent on social grants. The table also shows that the market participants were nearer to markets, had higher maize output and were more productive in maize production.
Empirical results
Table 3 presents the results from the double-hurdle model. The likelihood ratio test of independent equations found no evidence of selection bias (χ2 [1] = 0.37, p = 0.54) at the conventional 10% significance level. The Hausman tests found no evidence of endogeneity between social grant dependency and market participation level (F = 0.49, p = 0.48) at the conventional 10% significance level. The double-hurdle model was chosen instead of the Tobit model because the log-likelihood test showed that it performed better than the Tobit model (λ = 622 exceeded the χ2 [23] critical value = 35). This implies that the decision to participate in the market and the volume of maize sold in the market are governed by separate processes. The probit model correctly predicted 80% of the participation outcomes, and the Wald test highly rejected the hypothesis that all regression coefficients are jointly equal to zero. This indicates that the model fits the data reasonably well.
Table 3 shows that increasing dependency on social grants (GRANTPROP) was associated with decreasing probability of participation in the maize market. In other words, households who depended more on social grants were less likely to decide to enter the maize produce market compared with those who depended less on social grants. This result, coupled with the insignificant estimated coefficient of access to social grants (GRANTACESS) in the market participation model, imply that the decision to enter the maize market is not dependent on access to social grants per se but on the importance of social grant income to total household income. This suggests that the social grant-dependent households are more subsistent, mostly producing for themselves and producing less marketable surplus. This is in line with Mabugu et al. (2014), who found that social grant recipient households were more likely to be subsistent-oriented as the extra income from subsistence farming activities is generally minimal and thus does not disqualify the household from accessing the social grants.
The significant and negative estimated coefficient of access to social grants (GRANTACESS) in the maize marketed model suggests that households with access to social grants sell less maize quantities in the market than those without, ceteris paribus. This result implies that access to social grants, instead of helping households overcome the variable transaction costs, decreases incentives to sell more maize produce by the market participants. A plausible explanation for this result is that social grant recipient households are producing mostly for subsistence purposes, and enter the maize market targeting to raise a certain amount of income needed to maintain a desired consumption level. Therefore, increasing household income through social grants decreases the need to sell more maize produce in the market. This result applies to both the highly and lowly social grant-dependent households, as dependency on social grants (GRANTPROP) was not significant in the maize supply model.
The results suggest that, while social transfers may increase the productive capacity of rural households, as has been reported in the literature (e.g. Boone et al. 2013; Covarrubias et al. 2012; Todd et al. 2010), they are dis-incentives for these households to commercialise their farming activities. This result is consistent with studies such as those of Radel et al. (2016) and Todd et al. (2010) who found that beneficiaries of cash transfers in Mexico were more likely to engage in semi-subsistence farming, even though they harvested more on average. The results support evidence from descriptive and anecdotal reports in South Africa (e.g. Aliber & Hart 2009; Mabugu et al. 2014), describing a potential dis-incentive effect of social grants on smallholder market participation.
Age (AGE) was positively related to market participation, implying that older farmers were more likely to participate in the market. This could be because older farmers would have developed greater market contacts and trust that would allow them to trade at lower transaction costs. This result is contrary to the majority of literature (e.g. Alene et al. 2008; Geoffrey et al. 2013), which has reported that increasing age is associated with decreasing chances of market participation as older farmers are less receptive to new ideas and are more risk-averse than younger farmers. The implication here is that the effect of increased contacts and/or networks dominates the risk aversion associated with older farmers, resulting in a positive relationship between age and market participation.
The negative estimated coefficient of GENDER implies that female-headed households are more likely to sell more maize quantities in the market than male-headed households. This result is inconsistent with expectations and a number of studies in the past (e.g. Boughton et al. 2007; Geoffrey et al. 2013; Hlongwane et al. 2014). The expectation was that male-headed households would be more likely to sell more because of their advantages in bargaining, negotiating and enforcing contracts. The result, which is in line with a few studies such as Boniphace, Fengying and Chen (2014), suggests that female-headed households are not at risk of exclusion in the market for staples such as maize. While female-headed households may have disadvantages in the male-dominated high-value cash crop markets (Boughton et al. 2007), the result implies that female-headed households have advantages in the low-value food crop markets.
The results show that households headed by more educated heads (EDUCAT) were more likely to participate in the maize market. This result is consistent with a priori expectations and other studies (e.g. Geoffrey et al. 2013). The explanation is that more educated people are able to understand and interpret market information better, resulting in less transaction costs. However, once the decision to participate in the market is made, education level had no significant impact. This implies that while education helps reduce fixed transaction costs such as search costs, it has no significant impact on the variable transaction costs such as transportation costs.
Increasing farm size (LAND) was found to be associated with higher chances of selling maize as well as selling more quantities of maize. This is because land is an important production factor that enables households to produce a surplus for the market. The result is also consistent with previous market participation studies (e.g. Alene et al. 2008; Boniphace et al. 2014; Boughton et al. 2007; Jagwe, Machethe & Ouma 2010; Makhura et al. 2001) that have highlighted the critical role that access to land plays in motivating smallholder farmers to produce for the markets. Increasing asset value (ASSETS) was also found to be associated with increased likelihood of market participation. This is in line with the literature (e.g. Barrett & Swallow 2006; Boughton et al. 2007) which has shown the importance of assets in enabling smallholder farmers to produce a surplus necessary for participating in markets as sellers. Moreover, asset ownership facilitates access to credit and technology adoption, and wealthier households are more likely to undertake riskier activities such as market participation because of their capacity to bear risks.
The results also demonstrate the importance of increasing production levels (MZOUTPUT) in market participation. The households who produced more maize were more likely to participate in the market than households producing less. After the decision to participate in the market was made, those with higher output were likely to sell more. The explanation is that as market participation requires the smallholder farmers to produce a marketable surplus, those households with higher production levels are likely to have more than enough for family consumption. This result is in agreement with other market participation studies (e.g. Bwalya et al. 2013; Geoffrey et al. 2013; Komarek 2010).
Consistent with a priori expectations informed by economic theory and literature (e.g. Boughton et al. 2007; Jagwe et al. 2010; Key et al. 2000; Komarek 2010), the study found a positive relationship between the maize producer price (MZPRICE) and both the decision to sell maize and quantity sold. This indicates that the producer price provides incentives for households to participate and sell more maize in the market, implying rational economic behaviour by smallholder farmers. However, it must be noted that many smallholder farmers sell their produce right after harvest to satisfy their immediate cash requirements, and their capacity to wait and take advantage of higher prices is low. As such, this result should be interpreted as indicating that smallholder farmers are responsive to price changes, at least in the short term.
The results also show that access to extension (EXTENSION) was associated with increased chances of participating in the market. Extension officers remain the main sources of agricultural market information among the rural households, and contact with extension agents keeps the farmers updated with information regarding market locations, prices and potential buyers and/or sellers. Training (TRAINING) was also found to have a positive impact on the decision to participate in the market, implying that focussed farmer training may increase the chances of households participating in the market. While group membership (GROUP) was insignificant in the market participation model, it was significant in the maize supply model. This implies that group membership played a less significant role as a channel of information exchange but a significant role as a means of sharing variable costs such as transport costs among the sampled households. This is consistent with previous studies (e.g. Alene et al. 2008).
As expected, and in line with the literature (Bwalya et al. 2013; Hlongwane et al. 2014), farmers who stay further away from the markets (MKTDIST) had less chances of participating in the market than those who stay nearer. This is because market information published in formal channels, such as newspapers, is not very relevant to farmers in rural areas as these channels mainly report national figures. The isolated nature of rural areas means that the local market situation could be very different from the national situation. As such, farmers have to physically go to the local market places to gather such relevant information. The insignificant estimated information access variable (INFORM) confirms this to be the case in the study areas, as increasing diversity of information sources was not very useful as the information may not be contextually relevant. Consequently, the farmers located further from the market incur higher search costs than those nearer to the market.
However, once the farmer has decided to participate, increasing distance was associated with increasing quantity of maize produce sold. This indicates that the higher transport costs that the farmers who stay farther incur make them strive to meet a certain supply threshold to make profits. The farmers who stay farther sell more to make the same amount of money compared to the ones who stay closer because of the additional transaction costs. This is in line with other studies (e.g. Boughton et al. 2007). Households where the heads have non-farm employment (EMPLOYED) were less likely to participate than those where heads were unemployed. This may be because households where heads are employed depend on wages for income and only practice farming for subsistence. The results also show that owners of non-farm businesses (BUSINESS) sold more in the market than non-business owners. This may be because the non-farm business owners have established more contacts or networks, resulting in declining transaction costs.
The significant district dummies show that farming households from both Umkhanyakude and Umzinyathi were more likely to participate in the market than those in Harry Gwala district. In contrast, smallholder farmers in Uthukela district were less likely to participate compared to the Harry Gwala smallholder farmers. These district dummies capture the political, social and agro-climatic variations in these areas that impact on market participation but were not captured in the model. A possible explanation of the higher maize participation rates in Umkhanyakude than in Harry Gwala districts is that the Umkhanyakude district has higher maize potential (i.e. higher chances of producing a surplus) as well as near-by market centres for farmers to sell their maize. The culture of selling maize seems to have been inculcated among smallholder farmers in Umkhanyakude, particularly in and around the Jozini town. While Harry Gwala district has equally high potential in maize production, particularly in the Ubuhlebezwe local municipality, access to the market is a major problem because of poor roads. For example, the main road joining one of the high potential smallholder maize producing areas of Hlokozi and the nearest main town Ixopo is mostly a gravel road, which becomes impassable during the rainy season.
A plausible explanation for the higher market participation rates in the Umzinyathi district than in Harry Gwala is that because the high temperatures and low rainfall make it difficult for many households to produce crops, then for those who can produce a surplus there is a ready market from the surrounding communities. The lower maize market participation rates in the Uthukela district than in the Harry Gwala district may be because the rural areas in Uthukela are isolated and far from bigger urban centres.
Using the double-hurdle model on a sample of 774 maize producing households, the study concluded that social grants reduce the incentives of smallholder farmers to commercialise their production activities. The study results indicated that dependency on social grants was associated with decreased chances of maize market participation. Moreover, households with access to social grants were likely to sell less maize quantities compared with households with no access to social grants. In other words, the smallholder farmers who have access to and are highly dependent on social grants are less likely to be market-oriented, and to sell less maize on the market, respectively.
The fact that social grant-dependent households were more likely to produce only for subsistence purposes and depend on social grants for income suggests that social grants were spilling over to the undeserving household members, reducing recipient households' incentives to engage in income-generating farming activities. The study findings suggest that the implementation of social welfare programmes among developing countries, such as South Africa, may have negative implications on the drive to increase commercialisation levels of smallholder farmers. In South Africa, this presents challenges in meeting the government's target of establishing 300 000 additional market-oriented smallholder producers by 2020. While this study is not advocating for the removal of social support from poor households, it highlights the need to re-look at how these two interventions (social grants and smallholder commercialisation) may be synchronised in such a way that they complement each other as options for rural livelihoods. A policy option is to offer part of the grant as 'in-kind support', which is specific to the intended individual beneficiary, instead of cash which is fungible. This will help in reducing spillover effects and dis-incentives of recipient households to engage in economic activities.
The study results also suggest that female-headed households may be successfully included in the market for staples. Although there are concerns elsewhere that women are likely to remain subsistence farmers because of their exclusion from the market, this study indicates that there is potential of reversing that trend if women are encouraged to produce and sell staples such as maize. The study results also imply that policies aimed at reducing both fixed and variable transaction costs (such as improved road infrastructure and institutional support like extension, training and organising farmers into groups) should be prioritised to increase both rates and levels of smallholder participation in the maize markets.
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
This article was conceived by S.S. He designed the data collection tools and coordinated the data collection process. S.S. also analysed the data and wrote the initial draft of this article. M.M. and E.W. contributed valuable supervision, guidance, insights and comments on every stage (project conception, data collection, analysis and write-up) of producing this article. They also edited different draft versions of this article.
Abel, M., 2013, Unintended labour supply effects of cash transfer programmes: Evidence from South Africa's old age pension, University of Cape Town, Cape Town. [ Links ]
Agwu, N.M., Anyanwu, C.I. & Mendie, E.I., 2012, 'Socio-economic determinants of commercialization among smallholder farmers in Abia State, Nigeria', Greener Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2, 392-397. [ Links ]
Akpalu, W., Hassan, R.M. & Ringler, C., 2010, Climate variability and maize yield in South Africa. IFPRI Research Brief 15-10, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC. [ Links ]
Alene, A.D., Manyong, V.M., Omanya, G., Mignouna, H.D., Bokanga, M. & Odhiambo, G., 2008, 'Smallholder market participation under transactions costs: Maize supply and fertilizer demand in Kenya', Food Policy 33, 318-328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.12.001 [ Links ]
Aliber, M. & Hall, R., 2012, 'Support for smallholder farmers in South Africa: Challenges of scale and strategy', Development Southern Africa 29, 548-562. https://doi.org/10.1080/0376835X.2012.715441 [ Links ]
Aliber, M. & Hart, T.G.B., 2009, 'Should subsistence agriculture be supported as a strategy to address rural food insecurity?', Agrekon 48, 434-458. https://doi.org/10.1080/03031853.2009.9523835 [ Links ]
Barrett, C.B., 2006, Food aid's intended and unintended consequences. Background paper for FAO State of Food and Agriculture 2006, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. [ Links ]
Barrett, C.B. 2008. 'Smallholder market participation: Concepts and evidence from eastern and southern Africa', Food Policy 33, 299-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.10.005 [ Links ]
Barrett, C.B. & Swallow, B.M., 2006, 'Fractal poverty traps', World Development 34, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.06.008 [ Links ]
Barrientos, A., 2012, 'Social transfers and growth: What do we know? What do we need to find out?' World Development 40, 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.05.012 [ Links ]
Bastagli, F., Hagen-Zanker, J., Harman, L., Barca, V., Sturge, G. & Schmidt, T., 2016, Cash transfers: What does the evidence say? A rigorous review of programme impact and the role of design and implementation features, Overseas Development Institute, London. [ Links ]
Bertrand, M., Mullainathan, S. & Miller, D., 2003, 'Public policy and extended families: Evidence from pensions in South Africa', World Bank Economic Review 17, 27-50. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/lhg014 [ Links ]
Bezu, S. & Holden, S., 2008, 'Can food-for-work encourage agricultural production?' Food Policy 33, 541-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.06.004 [ Links ]
Biénabe, E. & Vermeulen, H., 2011, 'Improving smallholders' market participation: Insights from a business scheme for maize in Limpopo Province, South Africa', Development Southern Africa 28, 493-507. https://doi.org/10.1080/0376835X.2011.605567 [ Links ]
Binger, B.R. & Hoffman, E., 1998, Microeconomics with calculus, Addison-Wesley Publishers Inc., Boston, MA. [ Links ]
Boniphace, N.S., Fengying, N. & Chen, F., 2014, 'An analysis of factors affecting smallholder rice farmers' level of sales and market participation in Tanzania: Evidence from national panel survey data 2010-2011', Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development 5, 185-204. [ Links ]
Boone, R., Covarrubias, K., Davis, B. & Winters, P., 2013, 'Cash transfer programs and agricultural production: The case of Malawi', Agricultural Economics 44, 365-378. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12017 [ Links ]
Boughton, D., Mather, D., Barrett, C.B., Benfica, R., Abdula, D., Tschirley, D. et al., 2007, 'Market participation by rural households in a low-income country: An asset-based approach applied to Mozambique', Faith and Economics 50, 64-101. [ Links ]
Burke, W.J., 2009, 'Fitting and interpreting Cragg's tobit alternative using Stata', The Stata Journal 9, 584-592. [ Links ]
Bwalya, R., Mugisha, J. & Hyuha, T., 2013, 'Transaction costs and smallholder household access to maize markets in Zambia', Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics 8, 328-336. https://doi.org/10.5897/JDAE12.134 [ Links ]
Carter, M.R. & Barrett, C.B., 2006, 'The economics of poverty traps and persistent poverty: An assets-based approach', Journal of Development Studies 42, 178-199. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380500405261 [ Links ]
Chikazunga, D., 2013, 'Determinants of smallholder farmers' participation in modern food markets: The case of tomato supply chains in Limpopo', in S. Greenberg (ed.), Smallholder and agro-food value chains in South Africa: Emerging practices, emerging challenges, pp. 15-22, Institute of Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), Cape Town. [ Links ]
Covarrubias, K., Davis, B. & Winters, O., 2012, 'From protection to production: Productive impacts of the Malawi social cash transfer scheme', Journal of Development Effectiveness 4, 50-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/19439342.2011.641995 [ Links ]
Cragg, J.G., 1971, 'Some statistical models for limited dependent variables with application to the demand for durable goods', Econometrica 39, 829-844. https://doi.org/10.2307/1909582 [ Links ]
D'Haese, M., Vink, N., Nkunzimana, T., Van Damme, E., Van Rooyen, J., Remaut, A.-M. et al., 2013, 'Improving food security in the rural areas of KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa: Too little, too slow', Development Southern Africa 30, 468-490. https://doi.org/10.1080/0376835X.2013.836700 [ Links ]
De Janvry, A., Fafchamps, M. & Sadoulet, E., 1991, 'Peasant household behaviour with missing markets: Some paradoxes explained', The Economic Journal 101, 1400-1417. https://doi.org/10.2307/2234892 [ Links ]
Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF), 2012, Strategic plan for smallholder support, DAFF, Pretoria. [ Links ]
Department of Economic Development (DED), 2011, The New Growth Path: Framework. DED, Pretoria, viewed 25 August 2015, from http://www.economic.gov.za/communications/publications/new-growth-path-series [ Links ]
Devereux, S., 2001, Social pensions in Namibia and South Africa, IDS Discussion Paper 379, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton. [ Links ]
Dow, W. & Norton, E., 2003, 'Choosing between and interpreting the heckit and two-part models for corner solutions', Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology 4, 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025827426320 [ Links ]
FAO, 2016, Strengthening coherence between agriculture and social protection to combat poverty and hunger in Africa: Framework for analysis and action, FAO, Rome. [ Links ]
Geoffrey, S.K., Hillary, B.K., Lawrence, K.K. & Mary, M.C., 2013, 'Determinants of market participation among small-scale pineapple farmers in Kericho county, Kenya', Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development 4, 59-66. [ Links ]
Gibson, J., 2015, 'Expanded social protection may do more harm than good: A pessimistic review', Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies 2, 652-659. https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.106 [ Links ]
Goetz, S.J., 1992, 'A selectivity model of household food marketing behaviour in Sub-Saharan Africa', American Journal of Agricultural Economics 74, 444-452. https://doi.org/10.2307/1242498 [ Links ]
Greene, W.H., 2003, Econometric analysis, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. [ Links ]
Hausman, J.A., 1978, 'Specification tests in econometrics', Econometrica 46, 1251-1271. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913827 [ Links ]
Hazell, P., Poulton, C., Wiggins, S. & Dorward, A., 2010, 'The future of small farms: Trajectories and policy priorities', World Development 38, 1349-1361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.06.012 [ Links ]
Hlongwane, J.J., Ledwaba, L.J. & Belete, A., 2014, 'Analyzing the factors affecting market participation of maize farmers: A case study of small-scale farmers in greater Giyani local municipality of the Mopani district, Limpopo province', African Journal of Agricultural Research 9, 895-899. [ Links ]
Holloway, G., Barrett, C.B. & Ehui, S., 2005, 'Bayesian estimation of the double hurdle model in the presence of fixed costs', Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development 1, 17-28. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2633551 [ Links ]
Jagwe, J., Machethe, C. & Ouma, E., 2010, 'Transaction costs and smallholder farmers' participation in banana markets in the Great Lakes Region of Burundi, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo', African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 6, 302-317. [ Links ]
Jari, B. & Fraser, G.C.G., 2013, 'An analysis of institutional and technical factors influencing agricultural marketing amongst smallholder farmers in the Kat River Valley, Eastern Cape Province, South Africa', African Journal of Agricultural Marketing 1, 16-23. [ Links ]
Key, N., Sadoulet, E. & De Janvry, A., 2000, 'Transactions costs and agricultural household supply response', American Journal of Agricultural Economics 82, 245-259. https://doi.org/10.1111/0002-9092.00022 [ Links ]
Khumalo, L.D., 2013, 'Big business for small farmers: The case of Venda avocado growers', in S. Greenberg (ed.), Smallholder and agro-food value chains in South Africa: Emerging practices, emerging challenges, pp. 29-37, Institute of Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), Cape Town. [ Links ]
Klasen, S. & Woolard, I., 2008, 'Surviving unemployment without state support: Unemployment and household formation in South Africa', Journal of African Economies 18, 1-51. https://doi.org/10.1093/jae/ejn007 [ Links ]
Komarek, A., 2010, 'The determinants of banana market commercialisation in Western Uganda', African Journal of Agricultural Research 5, 775-784. [ Links ]
Lentz, E., Barrett, C.B. & Hoddinott, J., 2005, Food aid and dependency: Implications for emergency food security assessments, IFPRI Discussion Paper No. 12-2, IFPRI, Washington, DC. [ Links ]
Mabugu, R., Chitiga, M., Fofana, I., Abidoye, B. & Mbanda, V., 2014, 'Assessing the general equilibrium effects of social grants in South Africa', 17th Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis "New Challenges in Food Policy, Trade and Economic Vulnerability", Dakar, Senegal, June 18-20, 2014. [ Links ]
Mabuza, M.L., Ortmann, G. & Wale, E., 2014, 'Effects of transaction costs on mushroom producers' choice of marketing channels: Implications for access to agricultural markets in Swaziland', South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences 2, 207-219. [ Links ]
Makhura, M.T., 2001, 'Overcoming transactions costs barriers to market participation of smallholder farmers in the Northern Province of South Africa', PhD thesis, University of Pretoria. [ Links ]
Makhura, M.T., Kirsten, J. & Delgado, C., 2001, 'Transaction cost and smallholder participation in the maize market in the Northern Province of South Africa', Seventh Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Maize Conference, Nairobi, February 11-15, 2001. [ Links ]
Maluccio, J.A., 2010, 'The impact of conditional cash transfers on consumption and investment in Nicaragua', The Journal of Development Studies 46, 14-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380903197952 [ Links ]
Mather, D., Boughton, D. & Jayne, T.S., 2013, 'Explaining smallholder maize marketing in southern and eastern Africa: The roles of market access, technology and household resource endowments', Food Policy 43, 248-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.09.008 [ Links ]
Mcfadden, D., 1974, 'The measurement of urban travel demand', Journal of Public Economics 3, 303-328. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(74)90003-6 [ Links ]
National Planning Commission (NPC), 2012, Our future-make it work: National Development Plan 2030, NPC, Pretoria, viewed 09 October 2013, from http://www.info.gov.za/issues/national-development-plan [ Links ]
Ndoro, J.T., Mudhara, M. & Chimonyo, M., 2014, 'Cattle commercialization in rural South Africa: Livelihood drivers and implications for livestock marketing extension', Journal of Human Ecology 45, 207-221. [ Links ]
Omamo, S.W., 1998, 'Farm-to-market transaction costs and specialisation in small-scale agriculture: Explorations with a non-separable household model', The Journal of Development Studies 35, 152-163. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220389808422568 [ Links ]
Ortmann, G.F. & King, R.P., 2010, 'Research on agri-food supply chains in Southern Africa involving small-scale farmers: Current status and future possibilities', Agrekon 49, 397-417. https://doi.org/10.1080/03031853.2010.526428 [ Links ]
Radel, C., Schmook, B., Haenn, N. & Green, L., 2016, 'The gender dynamics of conditional cash transfers and smallholder farming in Calakmul, Mexico', Women's Studies International Forum. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2016.06.004 [ Links ]
Samson, M., Lee, U., Ndlebe, A., Quene, K.M., van Niekerk, I., Gandhi, V., et al., 2004, The social and economic impact of South Africa's social security system, Economic Policy Research Institute, Cape Town. [ Links ]
Sebatta, C., Mugisha, J., Katungi, E., Kashaaru, A. & Kyomugisha, H., 2014, 'Smallholder farmers' decision and level of participation in the potato market in Uganda', Modern Economy 5, 895-906. https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2014.58082 [ Links ]
Senyolo, G.M., Chaminuka, P., Makhura, M.N. & Belete, A., 2009, 'Patterns of access and utilization of output markets by emerging farmers in South Africa: A factor analysis approach', African Journal of Agricultural Research 4, 208-214. [ Links ]
South Africa Social Security Agency (SASSA), 2014, First quarter statistical report on social grants, SASSA, Pretoria. [ Links ]
Stats SA, 2012, Census 2011 Municipal report - KwaZulu-Natal, Statistics South Africa, Pretoria, viewed 09 March 2015, from http://www.statssa.gov.za/Census2011/Products/KZN_Municipal_Report.pdf [ Links ]
Tirivayi, N., Knowles, M. & Davis, B., 2016, 'The interaction between social protection and agriculture: A review of evidence', Global Food Security 10, 52-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2016.08.004 [ Links ]
Todd, J.E., Winters, P.C. & Hertz, T., 2010, 'Conditional cash transfers and agricultural production: Lessons from the Oportunidades experience in Mexico', The Journal of Development Studies 46, 39-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380903197945 [ Links ]
Tshuma, M.C., 2012, 'A review of the poverty and food security issues in South Africa: Is agriculture the solution?', African Journal of Agricultural Research 7, 4010-4020. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR12.056 [ Links ]
Van der Heijden, T. & Vink, N., 2013, 'Good for whom? Supermarkets and small farmers in South Africa: A critical review of current approaches to increasing access to modern markets', Agrekon 52, 68-86. https://doi.org/10.1080/03031853.2013.778466 [ Links ]
Von Braun, J., 1995, 'Agricultural commercialization: Impacts on income and nutrition and implications for policy', Food Policy 20, 187-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-9192(95)00013-5 [ Links ]
White, H. & Killick, T., 2001, African poverty at the millennium, causes, complexities and challenges. Strategic Partnership with Africa, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-4867-1 [ Links ]
Sikhulumile Sinyolo
sksinyolo@gmail.com
Received: 09 Sept. 2015
Accepted: 23 Mar. 2017
AOSIS Publishing
15 Oxford Street, Durbanville, Cape Town, Western Cape Province, ZA, 7550,
publishing@aosis.co.za

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Levada Center director Lev Gudkov says he will appeal the ruling.
A court in Moscow has fined the independent national pollster Levada Center for refusing to register as a "foreign agent."
The court ruled on October 26 that the Levada Center had to pay a fine of 300,000 rubles ($4,800).
Lev Gudkov, the head of the Levada Center, said he will appeal the ruling.
In September, Russia's Justice Ministry branded the pollster a foreign agent.
The Levada Center is one of Russia's largest nongovernmental polling and research organizations. It has published surveys that have irked Russian authorities.
A Russian law adopted in 2012 requires any nongovernmental organization that receives funding from abroad and engages in political activity to formally register as a "foreign agent."


Five Star Bath Solutions Franchising | The entrepreneurial freedom of owning your own bath remodeling franchise!
* See franchise disclosure document. Individual performance may vary. Fill out the form below to learn more.
From our birthplace in Canada to our expansion into the United States, Five Star Bath Solutions is focused on being the premier bath remodeling company in the home remodeling industry. Our mission is to design and build dream bathrooms through expertise and trust. We provide bath solutions for everyone and every need.
At Five Star Bath Solutions, we understand that bathing areas deserve to be customized to customers and their lifestyles. We're proud to be one of the fastest growing bath remodeling franchises in the world!
Fill out the form below to learn more about owning your own bath remodeling franchise.
The most trusted bath remodeling franchisor in the industry.
Want to own a Five Star Bath Solutions franchise?
Fill out the form below and a member of the Five Star team will reach out to you!
In what location (city,state) are you looking to invest in a franchise?


text:
/**
 * Week view
 */

var
  _ = require('underscore'),
  Backbone = require('backbone');

var
  Week = require('../collections/week'),
  WeekDayView = require('./weekday');

module.exports = Backbone.View.extend({

  render : function () {
    this.$el.empty();
    _.each(this.collection.models, function (item) {
      this.$el.append(this.renderWeekDay(item).el);
    }, this);

    return this;
  },

  renderWeekDay : function (item) {
    var weekDayView = new WeekDayView({
      model : item
    });

    return weekDayView.render();
  }

});

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


From the moment you enter, this totally renovated north corner condo will take your breath away. Enjoy sweeping views of the beach and the Gulf of Mexico from your private balcony. Inside your condo, the contemporary décor creates the perfect atmosphere to relax and unwind. The spacious living area has plenty of room to gather with friends and family. Or if you prefer, curl up with a good book in the separate sitting area. Care to dine in for the night? The state of the art, fully equipped kitchen will awaken your inner chef. Other amenities include a washer and dryer, flat screen TV's in the living room as well as both bedrooms and wireless internet service.
We loved the condo! The view is amazing! Location was perfect. Anything we needed was in the condo. When we booked, we did not realize there were just 15 units in the building, but we really liked having only 15 units.
Wonderful to hear!!! :-) We are so glad you were comfortable and had all that you needed in this premier condo at The Trillium and we hope to see you back for another visit soon!
Always love staying at Trillium! Resort Rentas is the best company to rent through! Always professional and friendly!
Thank you so much for your kind words about our staff and company, we really appreciate that!!! :-) We love that you love the Trillium and enjoyed your time in this premier condo!! Thank you for choosing to stay with us and we look forward to your next visit to Madeira Beach!!
Vacation returns to same unit.
We have reserved this unit several times and is always EXCELLENT. One time we could not make the reservation date and gave to our best friend and his wife. They too could not stop talking and complementing the units.
That is awesome, what a nice thing to share with your friends!! :-) So glad you all enjoyed this premier condo on Madeira Beach and we look forward to having you back for more visits!!!
Great unit. Very well decorated and clean.
Awesome, so glad you enjoyed it!!! :-) Thank you for staying in the premier condo on Madeira Beach with us and we hope to have you back for another visit.
Very clean unit. A few steps to the ocean.wish the bedrooms were also on the ocean side due to the fact the street noise was quite loud with the roar of motorcycles well into the early morning hours. Very helpful and nice at the office when picking up the key to the unit. Many restaurants near by.
Thank you for your feedback from your recent stay at The Trillium! We are so glad to hear you enjoyed this premier condo on Madeira Beach, it really is a nicely updated unit!!! For bedrooms on the beach side you may look into staying in a "B" unit here as the center units in the building will have the floor plans that have the bedrooms on the Gulf side. :-) We have a number of "premier" options in the A, B and C units here! Thank you for choosing to stay with us and we look forward to your next visit.
Very impressed with Resort Rentals staff. Our complaint about internet connection was addressed very quickly as without connection no phone! Never did get entry intercom to work. A bit concerned about extension cord running under carpet. Overall it was an exceptional stay and would definitely come back again. Enjoyed the sunsets!
Thank you for your feedback from this condo; we have passed this over to the owners for review. We are so sorry for any issues you may have experienced but thank you for calling us so that we could get things resolved for you! :-) We love to hear you had a good stay and enjoyed our BEAUTIFUL sunsets, Madeira Beach is a great spot to catch them!! :-) Thank you for choosing to stay with us and we hope to see you back for another beach getaway soon!
Very good. Easy reservation process and perfect location on the beach. Condo was very comfortable.
Television reception was not great (especially in the master bedroom). Dishwasher also needs to be re-seated or adjusted.
Thank you for your post! We will be sure to take a look at the items you have listed here, thank you for letting us know! We do apologize if those things were not up to par and we will be sure to have this adjusted. Outside of those items, we are glad to see that you were happy in this premier condo and that you loved the beach location, it really is just AWESOME!!! :-) Thank you for staying with us and we hope to see you back on Madeira Beach soon!!
Although the place and the view was amazing the high dinning room chairs were difficult to climb for our son and the pool size was too small and crowded. Otherwise, it was perfect.
For the price, the condo was good, nice view. Kitchen had everything we needed.
Very noisy compared to indian rocks beach area. Pool was ok. Needs some care. Key's were very hard to use on the main door and the condo. Called the rental on call (was nice) and was addressed on the next week day. But the locks basically need replaced.
Thank you for your post and feedback, we really appreciate this! We are sorry for any troubles you had with the locks but thank you for calling to let us know so we could have it looked at. We hate to hear Madeira Beach was not the same feeling for you as Indian Rocks, they do have a different dynamic but we are sorry if it was not the right fit for you. We are glad you enjoyed the condo and views, the owners of this unit really did a lovely job with the updates inside! :-) Thank you for staying with us and we hope you will return to our area for another beach vacation in the future.
Awesome!! Glad you enjoyed your time on Madeira Beach in this premier condo; it really is an awesome unit and we are glad you like it! Thank you for staying with us and we look forward to your return visit!
Words can't describe the experience we have had at 5C year after year. We consider this our home away from home. It is impeccable each time we stay, the location couldn't be better, and the property management company is second to none. We have been staying in this particular unit for years and hope to continue to do so as our kids get older and have their own kids. This is the ultimate family retreat!
This is SO awesome to hear!! :-) We love that this premier condo at the Trillium is your "home away from home" and we too hope that you and your family will come for many, many more years to create wonderful memories for all! Thank you so much for being a repeat guest with us, we truly value you and look forward to having you back again next summer!
The condo was wonderful...very spacious, great views, and a closet full of beach items, When you look out the glass doors all you see is ocean. TV's were big and had a stereo sound system with the living rooom one. Bed was very comfortable and the AC worked well.
Resort Rentals was wonderful. As you can already see, the website gives you fantastic information and I can confirm the photos are up to date. Checking in/out was a breeze and the folks there acted like we were long lost family.
The condo is someone else's home of course and sometimes things break. The dishwasher broke while we were there, but RR got their maintenance guy there promptly and RR followed up with a phone call.
Highly recommend the property. Enjoy your wondeful week on the beach!
Thank you so much for this awesome post!! :-) We are just thrilled that you had such a pleasant experience in this premier condo at The Trillium!! :-) We do apologize for any issues the dishwasher brought to you but thank you so much for contacting us so that we could get that addressed for you. Thank you so much for staying with us and we look forward to your next Madeira Beach getaway!!
Rental Agent Resort Rentals is most helpful. Trillium 5C is top floor and beautifully updated. Modern kitchen and bathrooms with all necessary equipment. View of beach and the gulf is outstanding. The lobby, building interior, and exterior are kept exceptionally clean at all times.
Thanks for the post! We are so glad you enjoyed this premier condo in our program, the owners really did a lovely job with the updates inside and we are glad you liked it!! :-) Thank you for being our guest and we hope to have you back on Madeira Beach again very soon!!
Thanks for the post and we are so glad you enjoy this location on Madeira Beach!! :-) We look forward to seeing you again!
Absolutely the BEST time ever!! The #5C condo was OUTSTANDING!! Beautifully decorated and had everything we needed!! It was way beyond our expectations!!Loved this place!! Great Gulf view!!So Hope its available again for future visits. Resort Rental was Great to work With too!!
Great location, great view, beautifully decorated. Highly recommend. Will be back again next year. Has become our October tradition.
This is the third time we rented at Trillium.
First was two years ago in another unit. It was great. Last year we reserved 5C and gave to our friends and this year we used 5C for ourselves. The unit is beautiful and well equipped. We enjoy the view and peach and quite. All the people we meet are friendly and nice to share time with.
When we left were discussing how to plan for next year at the same unit.
Don't know the owner, but THANK YOU for sharing the time in the unit with us. We truly appreciate.
Thank you for your post! We are so glad to hear you enjoyed your stay at the Trillium on Madeira Beach!! This condo falls into our Premier category of units which carry recent updates and you are right, it is beautiful! The owners really did a great job!! :-) Thank you for being a guest with us and we look forward to having back!
This is our 5th time here, that should speak for it's self.
The condo was awesome. So much room for our family of 4. Very clean. The views were to die for. Weather was beautiful everyday. Not a huge complex so not a lot of people which is nice. The condo had a few beach chairs and umbrellas and a styrofoam cooler in the closet.Very close to Johns Pass. The only thing I would suggest is to have a few other necessities on hand. For example...salt and pepper, dish soap, a few spices. Nothing major but it would help. When we left I left a few of those items. Overall it was a great condo, great location and plenty of room.
This condo was incredible. Loads of space, beautifully decorated and updated with a perfect view of the ocean. Spent a lot of time on the balcony, sitting on the beach and relaxing. Plan on coming back next year and doing it again. Thank you for sharing your property with us!
The unit was very nice. Great furniture and all new appliances.
We had an incredible week at the Trillium. The location is perfect and being able to have a view of the strip out the master and then that outstanding view of the Gulf gave us the best of both worlds. The condo we stayed in rocked! It was completely updated, towels and linens were clean and of a high quality (I have stayed places where the linens were like paper). The kitchen was so well furnished--we had gourmet meals nearly every night. The layout and spaciousness of the condo gave everyone plenty of room to stretch out. We never felt cramped with six people. The pool was small but really the perfect size and the location right off the beach made it easy for me to keep an eye on the big kids at the beach while my little one and I stayed at the pool. The building is a little older, the elevator a little slow, and we wish there was a key code system so check-in/check-out isn't as inconvenient (have to drive to St. Pete to get keys and then drop them off). But it was all worth it and really not a big deal. I can't say enough great things about the condo, the property management company, or Madeira Beach as a whole. We will be back again and again!
My family and I (two young children) had a great stay at this condo. The place was extremely clean and very well appointed with every necessity you would need or want. The place looked like it was recently remodeled and all the furniture was extremely nice. I would recommend it too anyone.
Awesome condo with incredible view!
The condo was beautiful, clean and modern with nice furniture! Great location, great view! Loved that it was a small crowds. We've stayed in various beaches around the area and different condos and this was at the top of my list! Would definitely stay here again!
5 star. Great place, great view, soft sanded beach. Steps away from the ocean..you dont have to walk a mile away to get back to your room if you needed to get a refresher. Walking distance to Johns Pass.
Beautiful condo. Very modern. Well stocked with bedding and all your kitchen needs. Beach items also provided. Pool small but adequate. Beach is just steps from the condo. Perfect view.
Everything about our experience was just great! Found the unit at the last minute after a change of plans. The unit itself was spectacular, newly remodeled, clean and convienent.
The condo was absolutely awesome! The spaciousness and cleanliness were beyond compare. Wish this condo were closer to our kids in Punta Gorda. Only regret was the weather...only 1 sunny day the entire week. Sea fog did not burn off...But you can't control Mother Nature! Cannot say enough good things about the condo..fantastic!!!!
A Much Better Experience Than We Could Have Ever Expected!
No one in our party of 4 had ever rented a condo before. I must say it completely exceeded all of our expectations! Very nicely decorated, wonderful view, appliances in wonderful condition. Beds comfortable. Just can't say enough to justify this place. VERY clean. Pool was very nice and really warmly heated. LOVED IT. There is a binder on tv stand to give you ideas of places to visit while you are there. We added a few of our own that we found. Overall.. not a negative thing to say, other than our vacation wasn't nearly long enough! Thanks so much!


Ron Haskins is a senior fellow in the Economic Studies program and co-director of the Center on Children and Families at the Brookings Institution; He is also a senior consultant at the Annie E. Casey Foundation in Baltimore, Maryland. From February to December of 2002, he was the senior advisor to the president for welfare policy at the White House. Prior to joining Brookings and Casey, he spent 14 years on the staff of the House Ways and Means Human Resources Subcommittee, first as welfare counsel to the Republican staff, then as the subcommittee's staff director. He is the author of numerous publications, and his areas of expertise include welfare reform, child care, child support, marriage, child protection, and budget and deficit issues. In 1997, Mr. Haskins was selected by the National Journal as one of the 100 most influential people in the federal government. He received the President's Award for Outstanding Contributions to the Field of Human Services from the American Public Human Services Association (2005) and the Lion Award from the Grantmakers for Children, Youth and Families (2010). Mr. Haskins holds a bachelor's degree in History, a master's in Education, and a Ph.D. in Developmental Psychology, all from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Sue Lehmann has been a management consultant for more than 25 years. In the last 15 years, she has worked primarily in the nonprofit and government sectors as a consultant and facilitator for organizations as diverse as the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Save the Children, and the New York City Board of Education. Ms. Lehmann currently serves on the Executive Committees of the Boards of New Visions for Public Schools and Teach For America, where she served as Chair of the National Board and now chairs the Audit Committee. She is a director of the Harlem Children's Zone and chair of the Board of Youth Noise. Ms. Lehmann brings a wealth of experience from the private and nonprofit sectors. She will be advising us on our educational strategy.


text:
Trump's roadmap
Wajid Ali Syed December 31, 2017 Leave a comment
America's decision to declare Jerusalem Israel's capital does not necessarily imply a bipartisan declaration of intent
All the king's horses and all the king's men and almost all the kings convened the 'extraordinary summit' in Istanbul on December 13 under the auspices of the Organisation of Islamic Countries (OIC) to counter President Trump's announcement on Jerusalem.
For the majority gathered in Istanbul, the Palestinian conflict is viewed solely through a religious, more specifically a crescent-shaped, prism. Thus, the OIC's declaration on 'Freedom of Al-Quds' discounted the non-Muslim populations in the region, and emphasised that the Muslim ummah could defend its causes globally. When the world desired inclusivity, the group demanded exclusivity.
Trump could have taken the old route of trying to fix compulsory issues first and then deciding the respective capitals. But he rejected the notion.
The released document mentioned East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, in a knee-jerk reaction to Trump's declaration. If such a state has to exist; it has to be agreed upon not just by the ummah but also the non-Muslim Palestinian population. It has to be then recognised by Israel, the US, the UN, and other neighbouring Arab nations.
This seemed like mere bluster by the OIC. Even though the UN Security Council members showed unwavering opposition to Trump's decision, and the UN General Assembly voted against it; the world's reaction is largely symbolic. As in the past, its unfettered non-binding support has been to resolve the issue through negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.
Interestingly, Russia became the first country to declare West Jerusalem as Israel's capital earlier this year, but the world did not care about the Russian declaration as much. The American announcement was given much greater significance which still stands all-powerful albeit challenged at the UN forum.
US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley posed a threatening tone and warned that no vote in the UN would make any difference to the decision taken by the American President. "The decision does not preclude a two-state solution, if the parties agree to that. The decision does nothing to harm peace efforts," referring to the fact that the decision does not prejudge the final status issues, including Jerusalem's boundaries. This was also the part of President Trump's speech that was generally not taken into consideration. He had stated, "Jerusalem is today, and must remain, a place where Jews pray at the Western Wall, where Christians walk the Stations of the Cross, and where Muslims worship at Al-Aqsa Mosque."
Does the presidential announcement give Israel any pass, or demarcate borders? That appears to be the caveat for other countries: Borders. Is Jerusalem still divided? Would Trump be able to push Israel out of the Eastern part? The general understanding that developed after the announcement was that the whole of Jerusalem has been awarded to Israel. To avoid this suspicion, the president could have taken the old route of trying to fix compulsory issues first and then deciding the respective capitals. But he rejected the notion saying, "we cannot solve our problems by making the same failed assumptions and repeating the same failed strategies of the past. All challenges demand new approaches."
Since 1995, all presidents before Trump have exercised the waiver provision, hoping to achieve the Palestine-Israel peace process first and then adopt the Jerusalem Embassy Act. Trump stirred up the old order, and when he announced Jerusalem as Israel's capital he did not specify if it's just West Jerusalem or the eastern part as well which the Israeli forces occupied in 1967. This created enormous ambiguity. The announcement broke with an international consensus that Jerusalem's final status should first be decided in direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians and then any other movement made in this regard. Therefore, the UN demanded the US to rescind its declaration on Jerusalem and keep it a contested holy city as it has always been.
Before making the decision, Trump spent a whole day explaining the policy change in telephonic calls with Prime Minister Netanyahu; Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president; and Arab leaders who apparently warned him that it could disrupt the peace process.
However, Donald Trump "very clearly" said that nothing is defined so far. "This decision is not intended, in any way, to reflect a departure from our strong commitment to facilitate a lasting peace agreement. We want an agreement that is a great deal for the Israelis and a great deal for the Palestinians. We are not taking position of any final status issues, including the specific boundaries of the Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem, or the resolution of contested borders. Those questions are up to the parties involved."
The president also asserted that the US would support a two-state solution if agreed to by both sides. He called on all parties to maintain the status quo at Jerusalem's holy sites, including the Temple Mount, also known as Haram al-Sharif. The next logical step is to carry out and oversee a peace plan between the Israelis and Palestinians.
One of the critical negotiators in the past from the Israeli side, Yossi Beilin, believes that the Trump declaration is just a part of public diplomacy. Beilin's far-reaching proposed peace agreement in the mid 1990s, after lengthy negotiations, came to be known as the Beilin-Abu Mazen document. It remained an unofficial draft because of the assassination of the then-prime minister Yitzhak Rabin. After that, both sides refuted the existence of any such deal.
I asked Dr. Beilin what the future holds and how different any peace proposal could be from the Oslo Accords and the Geneva Initiative? He replied: "I think that the optimal plan, right now, should be based on the 'Arab Initiative' from 2002 and on the 'Road Map' from 2003; namely: a Palestinian State in provisional borders for a limited period, and an intensive Arab involvement in the process, which will culminate in full normalisation with Israel."
The Arab Initiative was spearheaded by the Saudis. It called for normalising relations between the Arab region and Israel, in exchange for a full withdrawal by Israel from the occupied territories, including East Jerusalem, and a "just settlement" of the Palestinian refugee problem based on UN Resolution 194. The Palestinian Authority had embraced the plan.
The Road Map was proposed by the Quartet on the Middle-East: the United States, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations in April 2003. The plan described as a "performance-based and goal-driven roadmap" has three phases. It aims at an independent Palestinian state living side by side with Israel in peace.
Given the humanitarian crisis that looms over the region, the cycle of distrust and violence that sustains, and efforts for peace that are frustrated, the only rational response to this continuing tragedy is to revitalise the peace process through negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. The US has also proclaimed that it remains deeply committed to facilitating a peace agreement that is acceptable to both sides. If it's any indication, Trump's first ever tour as president was to Saudi Arabia and then to Israel to discuss the region. His administration says that it will unveil the peace plan "when the time is right" to do so.
Meanwhile, the ummah propagators need to realise that the bloodshed has not helped Palestinians gain any territory or other rights so far. As Jimmy Carter puts it, a genuine move toward peace might bring rich dividends by arousing support in the US and other nations. Trump's decision must be followed up by a peaceful dialogue to preserve the two-state solution and lobbying for border settlement according to the wishes of the concerned parties.
Wajid Ali Syed 2017-12-31
Wajid Ali Syed
The writer is Geo TV's Washington correspondent. He can be reached at [email protected]
Safety is in preparedness


$69 fares to Europe: Coming soon to two small Northeast airports?
Norwegian Air's new 737 bases will bring Europe flights to places like Newburgh, N.Y.
Get ready Newburgh, N.Y. Your nonstop flights to Europe are coming – maybe nearly two dozen – with fares that could start at as little as $69 one way.
And Newburgh is not the only smaller, "secondary" Northeastern airport in line for a similar bonanza of European flights. A similar schedule of trans-Atlantic flights are likely on the way for one of three New England airports from a list that includes Portsmouth, N.H., Providence, R.I. and Hartford, Conn.
Those flights will come courtesy of European budget carrier Norwegian Air, which will add Newburgh and one of those three New England airports to its route map next year as it opens two U.S. bases next year to house pilots for its new Boeing 737 MAX jets.
The "MAX" is the newest variant of Boeing's best-selling 737 narrowbody. They come with new engines and aerodynamic improvements that will allow airlines like Norwegian to fly the jet on routes between North America and western Europe. Norwegian says using the smaller single-aisle 737 MAX for international routes -- instead of a more traditional twin-aisle "widebody" jet -- will allow it to keep costs low and offer fares as low as $69 one way on its service between the USA and Europe.
Norwegian's decision to open the two new bases at smaller "secondary" airports in the region also means trans-Atlantic service will soon be coming to airports rarely considered for high-profile overseas routes.
Norwegian has confirmed one of its new bases will be at the Stewart International Airport in Newburgh, located about 70 miles north of Midtown Manhattan.
Thomas Ramdahl, Norwegian's chief commercial officer, told The Wall Street Journal that Portsmouth, Providence and Hartford were in the running for a second base that would be close to metro Boston.
Norwegian spokesman Anders Lindström confirmed to Today in the Sky that Newburgh will one of the bases, but said the location of a Boston-area base is not yet finalized. "We will make a major announcement in the next few months," he said in an email to Today in the Sky.
Details of the second location notwithstanding, the moves confirm that nonstop European passenger flights will be coming to at least two secondary airports in the Northeast.
Newburgh's airport, now run by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey that also runs New York City's three primary airports (LaGuardia, JFK and Newark), has long been touted as a potential reliever facility for the New York City metro area. Despite that, its flight schedule has remained relatively modest during the past decade. The airport currently has just five regularly scheduled routes on four airlines: American (flights to Philadelphia), Delta (to Detroit), JetBlue (to Fort Lauderdale and Orlando) and Allegiant (to St. Petersburg, Fla.).
Providence's T.F. Green Airport has a more robust schedule, though it's still considerably less than what's offered 60 miles to the north at New England's busiest air hub: Boston's Logan International Airport.
Providence has secured some on-again, off-again routes to Europe in recent years, but landing a Norwegian pilot base – and the new routes it would bring – would be a significant boost for an airport in a region where the vast majority of the international routes operate from Boston.
It's a similar story at Hartford's Bradley International Airport, which sits about 110 miles from central Boston and about 125 from Midtown Manhattan. It has a healthy flight schedule for the size of the region it serves, but international flights have been harder to come by. Hartford scored a victory in landing flights to Dublin on Irish carrier Aer Lingus, but that service – which began just this past September – is the first trans-Atlantic route there in eight years.
Landing Norwegian would be an even bigger deal for New Hampshire's Portsmouth International Airport. That airport – located about 60 miles north of Boston – has been trying to stake out a niche as secondary airport in the region. However, Portsmouth has failed to secure regular service on any of the biggest U.S. airlines. Small leisure carrier Allegiant is currently the only one flying from Portsmouth, offering four routes to Florida.
Predictably, airports being considered for Norwegian's new 737 MAX bases are excited about the both the possibility – and the routes that would accompany such a base.
Though Norwegian's exact flight plans have yet been to be revealed, officials in Newburgh welcomed the news.
Neuhaus tells the newspaper he expects the airline to launch 21 flights a week from Newburgh to destinations in England, Scotland, Ireland and Norway.
Officials at the other airports in the running for Norwegian's Boston-area base talked up their offerings.
"We've had numerous negotiations with them," David Mullen, executive director at the airport's operating authority, adds to The Portsmouth Herald. "They're not yet ready to make a decision but I expect they will in the not too distant future."
While Norwegian's base are likely to be a boon for two of the Northeast's smaller airports, it may mean the region's bigger airports are now less likely to get new flights on the fast-growing budget carrier.
Norwegian has long talked about adding nonstop service to the U.S. from both Dublin and Cork, service now appears likely to be announced soon after the U.S. Department of Transportation belatedly granted an operating certificate to a subsidiary Norwegian has set up in Ireland.
Boston had been considered a likely destination for those new Ireland flights, but The Boston Herald says Norwegian now will fly those routes – to be operated with the carrier's smaller 737 MAXs – to the cities it chooses for its new Northeast pilot bases.
"To operate the Boeing 737s ... from a primary airport becomes much more expensive with a small aircraft type than a larger aircraft type due to limited passenger numbers," Lindström says to the Herald.
"These are the routes that will launch with $69 fares and have average (round-trip) fares of $300 (to) $350, including taxes. In order to operate such flights profitably, they need to be served by medium-sized/smaller airports within the Greater Boston and NYC areas," Lindström explains to the Herald.
But, Lindström tells Today in the Sky that the Ireland routes now make more sense for the smaller airports now that Norwegian has decided to set up 737 bases here. As for its existing presence at bigger airports in the Northeast, Lindström says Norwegian intends to "maintain and continue to expand the routes" it already has scheduled from Boston, New York JFK and Newark (service begins in June 2017) with its larger Boeing 787 widebody jets.


text:
Genetics: Foundation of Practice| November 01 1998
Genetic Family History Assessment
Patricia L. Bender, RN, MSN
From the Division of Human Genetics, Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Reprint requests to Patricia L. Bender, Division of Human Genetics, Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45229.
AACN Adv Crit Care (1998) 9 (4): 483–490.
Patricia L. Bender; Genetic Family History Assessment. AACN Adv Crit Care 1 November 1998; 9 (4): 483–490. doi:
The purpose of this article is to familiarize nurses with why, how, when, and where a genetic family history assessment should be used in clinical practice. Pedigrees are diagrams that display the relationship among family members by using a combination of symbols and lines. They are used to record concisely a complete family history to identify the risk of transmitting inherited conditions, to identify people at risk for development of adult-onset conditions, to aid in clinical diagnosis, and to serve as a reference for social and biologic relationships. A detailed explanation of the standardized pedigree nomenclature that was recommended by the Pedigree Standardization Task Force in 1995 is included. Step-by-step guidelines on taking a genetic family history and drawing pedigrees are provided. A case study is also included to illustrate pedigree construction


1000 Main is deeply connected with Houston – its lively history, its vibrant business activity, and with its very bright future.
From its premier location, on bustling and energetic Main Street, light rail trains ease past, connecting busy professionals with the day's agenda. Shoppers connect with an abundance of retail choices, while walkers, joggers and cyclists actively connect with sun, sky and fresh air right outside our door.
1000 Main is the best way to experience downtown Houston. From its heart-of-the-city location, the 1000 Main building is a thoroughly modern business address with strong connections to its neighborhood roots. From ample parking to amazing parks, from transit options to optimal tunnel access, the elements of success are all around you.
Versatility defines 1000 Main. Floor plates that are efficiently-stacked. Layouts that are well-suited for any number of possibilities. And contiguous spaces are available for tenants of all sizes.


Earlier this month, PESA announced the formation of the Colorado Task Force to provide support and help facilitate coordination among PESA members with operations in Colorado in relation to upcoming ballot initiatives and other legislative issues in the state.
Colorado accounts for roughly 4% of the oil production in the U.S. and is among the top five natural gas producing states. Approximately 232,000 jobs in Colorado rely on the oil and gas industry. It is extremely important to highlight the impact of the oilfield services and equipment sector to the state.
For more information on the Colorado Task Force, please contact PESA Vice President Government Relations, Tim Tarpley.


I've addressed multiple scenarios that identify opportunities for corporate marketers to collaborate with regional marketers and franchisees. But how do you help the passionate "cowboys" in the field who are attempting to use social media tactics to drive their sales--who feel empowered to blaze their own trails and have never been required to take direction from corporate leadership?
Managing the various social media channels for your brand or company can be a thankless role unless there's a problem or crisis. Even then, once the leadership is brought into the loop, it really only complicates the situation further. This reminds me of the "cat herding" Super Bowl commercial Fallon did few years back. The visual of cowboys chasing thousands of kitties across the prairies was a big hit with viewers, despite very few folks being able to remember that spot was for the the technology company EDS.
So, what is the most advantageous way to wrangle your proverbial social media cats with multiple stakeholders, consumer-bases, geographies, and even social handles? Do you now turn to your agency or internal marketing team to develop a strategy for aligning a fragmented social media presence both visually and strategically? How do you coach your individual stakeholders to deliver content that speaks to their local shoppers and delivers the message in a relevant, compelling way for a positive ROI? And how can you ensure participation in the alignment process?
Our recommendation is to first consider taking a coaching and supporting approach vs purely a corporate mandate--providing instruction and tools for support, so there's a distinct possibility of social media alignment. Yes, it might feel like you are giving away the "power" but in our experience most of the cowboys are looking for you to engage in their plight and show you understand that the brand has a different relationship with folks in your market vs theirs. Spend time with the stakeholders, showing your acknowledgement of their concerns and establish best practices based on the best of what you observe in the field. Acknowledge the high-achievers in the mix in front of their peers and encourage them to take a mentoring role.
Then make a concerted effort to share these documented best practices, recommendations and examples. This will give stakeholders the guidance they need to be brand compliant without stifling their ability to communicate authentically with their local customers. As you gain participation you can layer in more complex and definitive best practices--making sure the educational and budget resources are increased accordingly.
Most importantly, this provides you, the "wrangler," a realistic way to drive the cattle, or rather--guide the brand, and ultimately grow sales through providing an abundance of advice, resources and skill-building tools that will be warmly received.
If herding Lone Ranger-style seems daunting, consider soliciting help from an outside resource who has been down this road before. Social Forces has been developing social media strategies for corporations for the past decade--from the very moment corporations became aware they need one, practically speaking.


My name is Ats Liiv and I'm 24 years old. I'm originally from Pärnu, Estonia, but currently based in London, UK.
All my photos are taken with a Canon EOS 6D and a Sigma 35mm F1.4 ART lens.
I find my inspiration in everyday life. The massive city that I live in with its awesome architecture and all the people who are surrounding me.
No, not really. I just like to explore places where I've never been to before. But if I had to pick only one spot then it has to be Shoreditch.