Numerous amateur sporting events have grown significantly in stature and interest in the past several years. Moreover, these events have realized significant economic benefits for their respective communities. In an attempt to identify the key determinants of economic impact, this article offers numerous comparative economic impact data for amateur sporting events. The comparisons are across various categories, including the same event in different cities, the same city but different events, women's versus men's events, and events involving junior athletes compared to those involving senior athletes. Collectively, these comparisons demonstrate that the number and origin of nonlocal visitors, the proximity of teams involved, visitor spending patterns, length of stay, and operational and organizational expenditures by nonlocal entities affiliated with events are the largest determinants of economic impact for a given event.

Comparative Economic Impact Analyses: Differences Across Cities, Events, and Demographics
Michael J Mondello, Patrick Risne
Economic Development Quarterly http://edq.sagepub.com
http://edq.sagepub.com/content/vol18/issue4/
Nov 2004.Vol.18, Iss. 4; pg. 331
Subjects: Studies, Economic impact, Sports, Economic development
Classification Codes 9130 Experimental/theoretical, 8307 Arts, entertainment & recreation, 9190 United States, 1120 Economic policy & planning
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=737938311&sid=3&Fmt=2&clientId=13371&RQT=309&VName=PQD

The estimated runningcost of a new national identity card scheme has risenagain to £5.8bn over10 years-a 5.5 per cent increase since the previous cost-benefit analysis by the Home Office six months ago.

The increase means that the estimated unit cost of each card has risen from £88 to £93, although the fee charged to the public has not yet been decided. It is likely to be lower for some less well-off groups.

On top of the running costs, there will be an additional bill for setting up the scheme, which the Home Office has refused to estimate on grounds of "commercial sensitivity".

In November the department estimated that the scheme - including new passports with biometric identifiers that will be required for travel to the US - would cost £5.5bn over 10 years. The government's original estimate, made in late 2002, was £3bn.

Results from a government-sponsored trial of biometrics, also released yesterday, showed that iris scan technology was generally effective, but less successful with black people and those aged over 59.

The findings raised fresh questions about the cost-effectiveness of the controversial plan, as ministers launched a new offensive to get the identity card bill through parliament following its defeat before the general election.

The Conservatives said last night they intended to vote against the bill, a move that makes the legislation the first clear test of Tony Blair's authority in the new parliament.

Because of Labour's much-reduced majority, the Tory opposition means that the prime minister will need to work hard to get the bill through the Commons.

Nineteen Labour MPs rebelled over ID cards in the last parliament and it would now take only 15 more votes against to derail the legislation.

Ministers hope the prospect of discounted charges for lower-income groups such as pensioners will help garner support. They also argue that 70 per cent of the cost of the project will have to be spent anyway, to meet the demands of the US and other countries for biometric identities on passports.

Yesterday, the government argued that ID cards were needed to stop the soaring cost of identity theft, playing down previous issues such as counter-terrorism, which have raised concerns among trade union, human rights and Muslim groups.

The Home Office referred to the results of a survey published earlier this week showing that five out of 10 people backed ID cards as the best way to combat identity fraud.

John Cridland, deputy director-general of the CBI business group, said ID cards could be a positive step towards tackling the growing cost to companies and consumers of identity theft, estimated at £1.3bn a year.

The introduction of ID cards is also expected to boost the biometric industry, with the biometrics used in the cards likely to become an industry standard.

By Jimmy Burns and Christopher Adams
Financial Times http://news.ft.com
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/c6ab4960-cd81-11d9-aa26-00000e2511c8.html

We use a simple growth model with public capital to examine the evolution of the US macroeconomy and to discuss the implications of the public infrastructure decline for the productivity slowdown over the last four decades. The main difference of the model to other papers in the related literature is that public investment is actively managed as a non-linear function of the state of the economy, and is not a constant fraction of output in every period. The active management policy delivers transition dynamics that reproduce the public capital downsizing episode, but that accounts for only a minor fraction of the observed productivity slowdown. However, taking into consideration higher rates of returns to public capital or the reallocation of public resources from productive to unproductive expenditures, which is consistent with the US experience in the 70s and 80s, the model simulation accounts for most of the observed productivity slowdown.

By Gustavo A. Marrero, Universidad Complutense de Madrid and ICAE
BE Press Topics in Macroeconomics: www.bepress.com
Vol. 5: No. 1, Article 9
http://www.bepress.com/bejm/topics/vol5/iss1/art9

The University of Maryland is going to be at the forefront of research examining the forces driving the competitiveness and complexity of the nation's biotechnology industry.

With a $250,000, three-year matching grant from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation in New York, the university will establish a research center bringing academicians and industry representatives together to identify ways to make the risky business of biotechnology more efficient and effective.

Called the Sloan Biotechnology Industry Center, the organization joins a network of 25 similar university-based facilities around the country - all initially funded by the foundation started by former General Motors Corp. boss Alfred P. Sloan Jr. - spanning 25 industries.

The University of Maryland is the first to focus on biotechnology.

It takes between 10 and 14 years to develop a therapeutic and it costs over $800 million, almost $1 billion, to produce a single product, said Shawn Lofstrom, the University of Maryland center's research director. If you can find ways to reduce it even by 10 percent, that would be phenomenal.

Lofstrom and the center's director, Jacques Gansler, have spent the last several months - with the input of the biotechnology industry, local and national - developing a research agenda and recruiting researchers from fields as diverse as biology, chemistry, business law and ethics.

The five areas of study that emerged cover the lifespan of a biotechnology company, from the uncertainties facing startups to regulation and public policy.

The center will examine, for example, strategies that could help biotechnology companies reduce costs and development time for startup products. It will weigh the costs and benefits of conducting research and clinical trials overseas, and it will analyze the government policies and industry-wide practices that give the United States its competitive edge.

Evaluating the uncertainties startups face likely will be one of three areas the center will start to tackle this summer, the rest to follow in the fall and spring, said Lofstrom.

Fundraising will be a major factor in the center's future since the $250,000 Sloan Foundation grant is nonrenewable.

This is seed funding, said Gail Pesyna, program director of the foundation. They have to come up with a match right up front and show us what they've already got. It [the grant] is helpful because they can use the funding to help leverage other sources of funding. It's like the Good Housekeeping seal of approval.

The centers thriving around the country generally need between $500,000 and $1 million per year to operate, Pesyna said.

She added, however, that the University of Maryland was chosen - after a number of other universities had been turned down over the years - in part because it has the kind of deep relationships it will need with the biotechnology industry to attract additional funding.

Biotechnology companies will likely support the center through membership, said Gansler, but the specifics are still being worked out.

by Robyn Lamb
The Daily Record (University of Maryland) www.newsdesk.umd.edu
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=832552121&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientId=13371&RQT=309&VName=PQD
http://www.newsdesk.umd.edu/um_in_news/index.cfm

One explanation for the cost to mating for females caused by damaging male mating behavior is that this causes the females to adaptively modify their subsequent life histories in a way that also increases male fitness. This might occur because the reduction in residual reproductive value of the female increases her optimal oviposition rate or because an increase in the current level of damage increases the female's optimal remating interval. In this article, C M Lessells presents models of a stochastic dynamic game in which males choose the level of mating damage that they inflict on females and females choose their oviposition rate and whether to remate. The models show that some level of damage is always an evolutionarily stable strategy and may even provoke females into making terminal reproductive investment (and hence a semelparous life history), that nondamaging populations are always invaded by damaging male mutants, and that damage evolves because of its effect on oviposition rate and despite its effect on remating interval.

Females remate at decreasing intervals throughout their reproductive span. In this example, females remate at least one time step before they would become totally infertile, emphasizing that remating is a strategic decision balancing the costs and benefits of mating. Within each mating interval, oviposition rate tends to rise slightly and then fall. This is the outcome of the value of current oviposition and residual fitness both falling, but at different rates. The value of current reproduction falls because of decreasing fertility. Residual fitness falls because of the reduction in fertility of eggs laid in the remaining time steps before remating and an increasingly imminent increase in damage as a result of remating. The oviposition rate in the time step in which a female mates becomes higher with successive matings. This happens because the female's residual fitness is lower because of the accumulated damage. Eventually, females make a terminal reproductive investment by laying the physiologically maximum number of eggs leading to certain death before the next time step.

by C M Lessells
The American Naturalist www.journals.uchicago.edu/AN/
Chicago: May 2005. Volume 165 page S46, 18 pages
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=831631691&sid=1&Fmt=4&clientId=13371&RQT=309&VName=PQD
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AN/

Countering the risks of terrorism imposes enormous costs. While it is impossible to remove completely the risk of terrorist attacks in the transport sector, measures designed to counter terrorism can add certainty and stability to the global economy, raise investor confidence and facilitate trade. Modelling suggests productivity losses associated with the increasing threat of terrorism can be more than offset by the positive effects of enhanced security. Nations have much to gain from cooperating to reduce the risk of terrorism.

Evanor Palac-McMiken1
Asian-Pacific Economic Literature via Blackwell www.blackwell-synergy.com
Volume 19 Issue 1 Page 60 - May 2005
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8411.2005.00158.x
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8411.2005.00158.x
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8411.2005.00158.x
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8411.2005.00158.x

It may be nearly a half-century old, but the cardiac pacemaker just keeps on ticking, pepping up desultory hearts quietly and efficiently. The advent of the implantable battery-powered pacemaker is considered one of the singular medical achievements of the 20th century.

But it's not your father's pacemaker any more. Almost without notice, the little device to regulate the heart rate has gotten some zip from 21st century electronic wizardry. These days, the newest versions of the pacemaker keep the heart beating at just the right speed with electronic leads placed on both the organ's upper chambers (the atria) and one of the lower chambers (the right ventricle). The older versions generally did their work via a single electrode placed on the right ventricle, occasionally the right atrium.

Why is this important, you may ask. It all has to do with the electrical activity of the heart and how, when it goes awry, to best mimic the natural physiology artificially with a battery-operated stimulator. Easy to say, hard to do.

For some time now, the atrial version of the pacemaker, known as the dual-chamber device, has taken over the market for the 600,000 or so patients who get a device implanted every year. Cardiologists assumed that the newer device's more physiological approach had a variety of advantages -- among them reducing the risk of heart failure and stroke and improving quality of life. They also assumed it extended life.

In fact, several large studies suggested a modest benefit for all these and others, except that life expectancy was essentially unchanged. But as the dual-chamber pacemaker was about $3,000 more expensive, the question arose as to whether the modest clinical improvements were worth the extra money.

Now, for at least one major reason that people are given pacemakers, the answer appears to be yes, as measured by a complicated formula called quality-adjusted life years gained. This problem is called sick sinus syndrome. It refers to the sinus node, the bundle of specialized cells in the right atrial wall that form the body's natural pacemaker.

The cost-benefit study was published in the Jan. 4 issue of Circulation, the journal of the American Heart Association. It found that the dual-chamber device had a greater cost-benefit advantage than a number of other interventions in cardiology. Over a projected lifetime, particularly beyond four years, it actually saved money in hospitalization and other medical costs compared with the single-chamber device.

Meanwhile, a small study published in The Lancet suggested that pacemakers could help epileptics with a high risk of sudden death, a rare outcome of epilepsy.

Twenty patients with severe epilepsy were monitored for 22 months with implanted devices that recorded heart rates. Sixteen had frequent episodes of abnormally rapid heart rates, though they were not life-threatening. The other four patients, however, had bouts of abnormally slow heart rates, which were dangerous. Those four were given pacemakers.

Although the practicality of finding those with epilepsy who are at risk of sudden death was not clear, neurologists were intrigued by the possibilities. About one in every 1,000 persons with epilepsy dies each year of what is called SUDEP, sudden unexplained death in epilepsy, and the incidence of sudden death increases with the severity of the condition. For patients whose epilepsy is severe enough to require surgery, the annual SUDEP death rate is 1 percent.

Finally, there was a byte of good news for the three million Americans living with pacemakers. The devices appear to be standing up well to the wireless age, according to a Mayo Clinic study.

Doctors there undertook the study to avoid risking danger to patients with an implanted pacemaker. They wanted to make sure that wireless networks they set up at the clinic were not affecting the sophisticated pacemaker circuitry with electromagnetic interference. All systems were "go."

To learn more about pacemakers, visit the American Heart Association (www.americanheart.org ).

www.healthcentral.com
http://www.healthcentral.com/newsdetail/408/525322.html

It takes 59 pages of graphs, mind-numbing equations and dense academic language to make the case. But the co-author of a paper on the NFL draft yesterday used simple language to comfort fans fretting over the Giants' lack of a first-round pick Saturday.

"It's not the end of the world," said Cade Massey, assistant professor of management at Duke's Fuqua School of Business. "In fact, they have a more valuable pick. We know that sounds kind of crazy."

The paper, not yet published and written with Richard Thaler of the University of Chicago, makes the argument that NFL officials routinely overestimate their ability to predict performance.

That, along with the high cost of early first-round picks in salary and trade value, means the cost-benefit ratio peaks far from the big names at the top of the draft.

At what spot on the graph do quality of player and reasonableness of price meet, according to the paper? At No. 43 overall, precisely where the Giants own their first selection.

Massey "hates" when his study is boiled down to an endorsement of the 43rd pick, the 11th in the second round, arguing it is too precise given the data's vagaries. But generally, he and Thaler "like the top half of the second round" for cost effectiveness.

The Giants apparently like it, too, at least this year. Fifty-two weeks after taking the kind of risk Massey argues against by trading for No. 1 pick Eli Manning - and paying him accordingly - they insist they are happy where they are.

Might general manager Ernie Accorsi trade up for the fourth time in five years?

"I don't really want to; I don't want to give up any choices," he said. "It's not worth it. We're happy where we are."

Might he trade down to add more choices to the four he has, the fewest in team history?

"You have to be careful," he said. "We're going to get a pretty good player at No. 43."

Pretty good might be good enough, because by signing three youthful free agents in tackle Kareem McKenzie, wide receiver Plaxico Burress and linebacker Antonio Pierce they eased the pressure to find rookies to rush into service.

The key was Burress, without whom they likely would have drafted a receiver in the second round. Instead, they could go in any of several directions.

The glaring priorities are defensive end, where there is no depth behind Michael Strahan (who is 33) and Osi Umenyiora, and cornerback, where there is no established player behind Will Allen (whose deal is up after this year) and Will Peterson. "I do think we need a corner," Peterson said.

Accorsi said the need at end could be addressed in the late-spring free-agent market. Given Strahan's age and massive contract, though, it might be time to develop a young player.

Other positions the Giants could target include linebacker, a back to groom as an eventual successor to Tiki Barber and an offensive tackle. A blocking tight end is a need, but a viable candidate is on the roster in Chris Luzar, a powerful former Jaguar.

Coach Tom Coughlin expressed no regrets about the Manning deal but added, "You'd like to have your numbers [of picks] because it's economical and it feeds your team. So we'll certainly have to do very well with the picks we do have."

The Giants gave the Chargers last year's third-round pick and this year's first-rounder (12th overall) and fifth-rounder for Manning. They also traded this year's seventh-rounder for guard Jason Whittle, so their only picks will be in the second, third, fourth and sixth rounds. Whether the Giants' bold move last April pays off in the long run, history shows they are nearly as likely to find a good player with their initial pick this year, at far less risk.

"We're not going so far as saying that teams should start passing on [first-round] picks," Massey said. "But our numbers show there is more value in the second round."

BY NEIL BEST
Newsday www.newsday.com
http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/ny-spgiants204225754apr20,0,5566098.story?coll=ny-football-headlines