Search

How do institutions think about change? Building on Mary Douglas's famous contention that institutions think by means of analogy, we suggest that institutions think about change by means of irony. Irony is pronounced during times of profound change when the rhetoric and the reality of change can be inconsistent. We show that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has enacted what we term loosely coupled change—change in which symbolic meanings and material practices are only weakly connected and retain their independence. The CCP employed the rhetorical form of irony, known as casuistry, to legitimize a change to market systems as being incremental while in practice radically adopting market systems and dismantling socialist practices. We contribute to research on institutional messaging by examining the hermeneutic depth of casuistry. We also contribute to research on organizational change by explicating how casuistry reconciles contradictory ideologies and facilitates loosely coupled change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on Professor Dov Fox's proposal for "Medical Disobedience" in the context of the medical profession's response to controversial issues like abortion. Topics include the historical evolution of conscience claims, the distinction between medical and civil disobedience, and the challenges posed by expanding ideas of complicity in shaping medical practice and law.

Coercive measures to protect public health are controversial, eliciting questions regarding state-patient relationships and conflicts between individual autonomy and public good. This is challenging in a time when respect for patient autonomy has become elevated yet society faces an increasing number of public health challenges, the most recent being the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19). In that context, there is emphasis on increasing vaccination rates internationally in order to achieve "herd immunity", raising the possibility of compulsory vaccination of populations in the future. Here, we explore current rights of individuals to decline vaccination, utilising prior learning from other viral pathogens internationally (specifically, measles, mumps and rubella), and related public health outcomes. Further, we consider freedom of choice versus mandatory treatment necessitated to avoid contagion during disease outbreaks (such as COVID-19). In doing so, we utilise rhetorical reasoning in the form of casuistry focusing on the core challenges regarding public good versus personal antipathy towards vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Holy Scriptures can be considered a specific kind of normative texts, whose use to assess practical moral cases requires interpretation. In the field of ethics, this interpretative problem results in the necessity of bridging the gap between the normative source – moral precepts – and the specific cases. In the history of the Church, this problem was the core of the so-called casuistry, namely the decision-making practice consisting in applying the Commandments and other principles of the Holy Scriptures to specific cases or moral problems. By taking into account the sin of lying, this paper argues that casuistic texts reveal an extremely sophisticated interpretative method, grounded on "pragmatic" contextual and communicative considerations and argumentative structures that resemble the ones used in legal interpretation. These works show how the underspecified biblical text expressing an abstract norm was enriched pragmatically by completing it and modulating its meaning so that it could be used to draw a conclusion in a specific context on a specific case. The mutual interdependence between biblical interpretation, pragmatics, and argumentation sheds light on a much broader phenomenon, namely the pragmatic nature of argumentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Citizen science (CS) has been presented as a novel form of research relevant for social concerns and global challenges. CS transforms the roles of participants to being actively involved at various stages of research processes, CS projects are dynamic, and pluralism arises when many non-professional researchers take an active involvement in research. Some argue that these elements all make existing research ethical principles and regulations ill-suited for guiding responsible CS conduct. However, while many have sought to highlight such challenges from CS, few have discussed principles per se providing the foundation for regulations. In this article we will investigate the possibilities of midlevel principlism in guiding responsible CS conduct. Principlism has the potential of accommodating many of the concerns taken to reduce the relevance of existing principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies the meaning of the term species in Justinian’s Digest. It considers the uniqueness to the jurisprudential meaning of this concept in the works of the classical Roman jurists and how this meaning rivals that of the theory of forms derived from dialectical and classificatory methods found in Greek philosophy. The paper, offering a reading of fragments of the Digest, argues that the word species refers there to the product of a casuistic approach to jurisprudence, interested in the ‘juridical morphology’ of cases as well as objects. Such species are shown to ‘repeal’ rather than reproduce the taxonomy of general laws and generic classes, pursuing a thought that is at odds with the aim of a ‘general’ jurisprudence. It is hoped that this paper may help point to new approaches to studying the relationship between legal institution and the life sciences, drawing attention to the limitation for legal thought in a dominant biological understanding of the species-concept.

The health risks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have changed daily life tremendously. Many are uncertain how to respond due to conflicting advice from authorities, and the practical difficulties inherent in protecting human health while sustaining the economy. The Anglican tradition offers a moral framework, practical principles, and a method of public engagement to address the challenges of COVID-19. Kenneth Kirk provides a framework of virtue and spiritual practices and a method of moral reasoning that resolves problems of conscience. William Temple develops principles of love, justice, human dignity, the common good, and the preferential option for the vulnerable that can be applied to concrete cases. Nigel Biggar and Pauli Murray show how to engage the public from an Anglican perspective to spark conversations and create structures that address the pandemic. The result is flexible guidance that can be tailored to the needs of particular persons and communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines how Catholic moral theologians analysed the constraints imposed by the rights of the dead to their good name on historical writing and research. The concern of Catholic moral theologians for persons' rights to their good name coupled with their concern for the rights of dead persons placed serious moral constraints on the work of historians. At the same time, from very early on, these moral theologians showed appreciation of the benefits of historical writing, including writing on the less public aspects of historical figures. The general tendency was to allow historians some moral elbow room. There was, however, a clear red line: what was and had always been secret could not be revealed, regardless of the benefits. By the end of the nineteenth century, the authors of the casuist manualists revised the traditional doctrine and removed the moral red line that had been accepted until then. Historians could now reveal what had always been secret. This doctrinal development was the result of two historical events: the opening of the Vatican Archives and allowing propagandists and journalists within politically organized Catholic conservatism to fight as equals in the printed media. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Estebanillo González is the last Spanish picaresque novel, but its eponymous protagonist rarely features in the discussions on the genre in the way other male characters, Lazarillo, Guzmán or Pablos do. In this article, drawing on earlier literary criticism and historical research concerning religious diasporas in Early Modern Europe, I offer a new analysis of the protagonist's possible converso origins. The protagonist's attitude towards his alleged hidalguía questions the relevance of social status. In the second part of the article, I argue that behind the protagonist's jokes and puns hides religious scepticism aimed in particular at Counter-Reformation techniques of casuistry. Both hidalguía and Catholic practices, fundamental aspects of Spanish society, are therefore undermined. Estebanillo, as the last picaro, offers his own original vision of the self in the world and as such should join the picaresque trio. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical use of prescription opioids has steadily increased since the 1990s, particularly in the U.S.A. and Canada, along with abuse of these substances and significant increases in rates of addiction and death related to prescription opioids. The American authorities speak of an "addiction epidemic" and are launching a series of countermeasures to better address the problem. In Europe, there is an increasing use of prescription opioids and related problems, but the European context is much less dramatic than the American and Canadian ones. Nevertheless, based on the data, it cannot be ruled out that a similar crisis will occur on the Old Continent. The aim of this study is to analyze the Italian context to better understand whether there is a possibility of an addiction epidemic. Twenty-four cases of death of people under treatment with prescription opioids have been retrospectively analyzed. Toxicological samples were collected with routine methods during the autopsy, followed by systematic screening for substances by diverse methods. Volatile compounds were identified using gas chromatography-flame ionization detection (GC-FID). Medical drugs and drugs of abuse were identified via the use of gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS). Of a total of 24 subjects, 14 died due to an overdose of Tramadol, while 7 died due to an overdose of Buprenorphine and 3 dues to a Fentanyl overdose. The most used drug was Tramadol. Histological examination was performed with hematoxylin/eosin staining, though no significant findings emerged apart from widespread edema and focal sclerosis of the myocardium, and interstitial and alveolar edema of the lungs. Our data show that attention must be paid to prescription opioids. European institutions, as soon as possible, must implement preventive measures that avoid the recurrence of the North American situation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this Philological Conversation , Carlo Ginzburg reflects on the place of philology in his work and explores the connections between philology, microhistory, and casuistry. We talk about the people who inspired his early thinking, including his father Leone Ginzburg, his mother Natalia, and his grandfather, moving on to Erich Auerbach, Leo Spitzer, and Sebastiano Timpanaro. We discuss the ethical and political implications of his research and reflect on the power of philology to give voice to the marginalized and suppressed. The conversation, which was edited for readability, took place during the Corona pandemic over three meetings via Zoom on July 13, September 10, and September 17, 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interest in the role of casuistry and casuistical questions in Kant's Doctrine of Virtue (DV), i.e. the second part of the Metaphysics of Morals, has grown in recent years. My own position is formulated in Schuessler (2012, in German), the main thesis of which will be retained here in an updated form and with some shifts of emphasis. I hold that the casuistical questions concerning perfect duties in the DV are not intended to represent casuistry in Kant's sense. Casuistry and casuistical questions are neither equivalent in the DV nor do they serve the same purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A modern theory of casuistry has not been developed or paid much attention to in legal scholarship in Europe lately, since the partial failure of Viehweg to reintroduce the casuistic (topical) approach in 1950s. Yet, the related problems have not withered away and even today many legal professionals (attorneys and judges alike) still face the same dilemmas as already the medieval confessors and casuists did. This contribution thus ponders upon the question as to whether any new solid theory of legal casuistry – building either on the casuistry employed by theologians and confessors, or casuistry employed nowadays by ethicists, especially in bioethics – can be helpful to modern continental lawyers, who are used rather to systematic instead of casuistic thinking, but still either doubt the one-right-answer theory, or find themselves in a situation of legal uncertainty for whichever reason.

Although the theological contexts of St. Alphonsus de Liguori and Pope Francis are very different in both their historical and methodological aspects, they have been following a down-to-earth, person-centred approach in proposing moral solutions to pastoral issues. While for both of them general moral norms are indispensable indicators of objective morality it is the conscience of persons (informed by those moral norms) in their proper contexts that has the ultimate priority in arriving at moral solutions. The common hermeneutical key to their respective pastoral/moral approaches is to take the moral agent in his/her lived context seriously. Consequently, one cannot expect the same uniform pastoral solution to moral cases in diverse contexts. After all, moral theology is not a deductive science such as mathematics or logic. This article tries to highlight this point (which has been either forgotten or ignored by quite a number of contemporary moral theologians) by using a few selected teachings of St. Alphonsus in his Theologia Moralis along with those of Pope Francis in Amoris laetitia, concluding that the latter is a re-echoing of the pastoral/moral spirit of the former. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Parts 1 and 2 in this series of three articles have shown that and how strong evidence‐based medicine has neither a coherent theoretical foundation nor creditable application to clinical practice. Because of its core commitment to the discredited positivist tradition it holds both a false concept of scientific knowledge and misunderstandings concerning clinical decision‐making. Strong EBM continues attempts to use flawed adjustments to recover from the unsalvageable base view. Paper three argues that a promising solution is at hand if we can manage several modes of inclusion. A modified original, moderate version of EBM continues though usually overshadowed. As definitively laid out by Sackett in the 1990s, clinical decision making is intended to be person‐centered, recognizing and integrating multiple modes of evidence and knowledge that have been marginalized: professional experience, illness narratives, and individual patients' values and preferences. Complementary resources are at hand: interpretative understanding and practice, such as philosophical anthropology, hermeneutical phenomenology, complexity theory, and phronetic practices respond to the major problems and open new possibilities. Phronesis is especially important in regard to public decision making. Within part 3 an additional tone necessarily occurs. While most of papers 1, 2, and 3 are written in the classical mode of contrasting the theoretical‐logical and empirical evidence offered by contending positions bearing on the decision making and judgement in clinical practice, a shift occurs when considerations move beyond what is possible for clinical practitioners to accomplish. A different, discontinuous level of power operates in the trans‐personal realm of instrumental policy, insurance, and hospital management practices. In this social‐economic‐political‐ethical realm what happens in clinical practice today increasingly becomes a matter of what is "done unto" clinical practitioners, of what hampers their professional action and thus care of individual patients and clients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fallberichte bieten einen wertvollen Einblick in die osteopathische Praxis. Sie ermöglichen die Beschreibung von Diagnosen, Interventionen und Managementstrategien bei Beschwerden, die in der Praxis auftreten. Häufig werden Fallberichte mit Beschreibungen von seltenen oder besonderen Fällen in Verbindung gebracht. Für Osteopath*innen sind jedoch auch Berichte über häufige Beschwerden außerordentlich nützlich. Dieser Artikel soll erläutern, wie man einen Fallbericht für diese und viele andere medizinische Zeitschriften verfasst. Die korrekte Anwendung der Richtlinien für Fallberichte (CARE) wird beschrieben, und Praxisbeispiele werden präsentiert. Die Autoren möchten Therapeut*innen dazu ermutigen, die Veröffentlichung von Fallberichten in Betracht zu ziehen, um die Evidenzbasis des Berufsstandes zu erweitern und Informationen für zukünftige Forschungsvorhaben zu liefern. Case reports provide a valuable insight into osteopathic practice. They allow for the description of diagnoses, interventions and management strategies for complaints that present to practice. Although case reports are traditionally associated with descriptions of rare or unique cases, reports of more common presentations to osteopaths are exceptionally useful. The purpose of this Masterclass is to describe how to construct a case report for the journal, and many other medical journals. The Masterclass outlines how to use the Case Report (CARE) guidelines and provides examples from published case reports related to osteopathic practice. We hope that this Masterclass will encourage practitioners to consider publishing case reports to expand the professions' evidence base and inform future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intensive care unit (ICU) professionals engage in ethical decision making under conditions of high stakes, great uncertainty, time-sensitivity and frequent irreversibility of action. Casuistry is a way by which actionable knowledge is obtained through comparing a patient case to previous cases from experience in clinical practice. However, within the field of study as well as in practice, evidence-based medicine is the dominant epistemic framework. This multiple case study evaluated the use of casuistic reasoning by intensive care unit (ICU) professionals during moral case deliberation. It took place in two Dutch hospitals between June 2020 and June 2022. Twentyfive moral case deliberations from ICU practice were recorded and analyzed using discourse analysis. Additionally, 47 interviews were held with ICU professionals who participated in these deliberations, analyzed using thematic analysis. We found that ICU professionals made considerable use of case comparisons when discussing continuation, withdrawal or limitation. Analogies played a role in justifying or complicating moral judgements, and also played a role in addressing moral distress. The language of case-based arguments is most often not overtly normative. Rather, the data shows that casuistic reasoning deals with the medical, ethical and contextual elements of decisions in an integrated manner. Facilitators of MCD have an essential role in (supporting ICU professionals in) scrutinizing casuistic arguments. The data shows that during MCD, actual reasoning often deviated from principle- and rule-based reasoning which ICU professionals preferred themselves. Evidence-based arguments often gained the character of analogical arguments, especially when a patient-at-hand was seen as highly unique from the average patients in the literature. Casuistic arguments disguised as evidence-based arguments may therefore provide ICU professionals with a false sense of certainty. Within education, we should strive to train clinicians and ethics facilitators so that they can recognize and evaluate casuistic arguments. • ICU professionals use paradigmatic cases to address ethical issues. • Paradigm cases include spinal cord injury patients and patients with cancer. • Casuistic reasoning is not always critically appraised by ICU professionals. • Case-analogies from the literature can provide a false sense of moral certainty. • Clinicians should be trained so that they can appraise casuistic arguments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The period of 16th to 18th centuries has brought about significant changes in legal thought. In addition to looking for a system in conflicting Roman law and Canon law texts, late scholastics formulated the first general rules (regulae) that they derived from the Roman case law and which were to become the nucleus of current, predominantly systematic, approach to law in Europe – applying the rule prescribed by law, court practice or legal science onto the facts of the case via the so-called legal syllogism method. And although in the mid- 20th century there were also attempts to reinvigorate the casuistic approach to law known previously in the ancient Rome and in medieval moral theology (revived through Viehweg’s topics or Perelman’s new rhetoric), these efforts have ultimately not changed the prevailing way of legal thinking. However, current technological challenges as well as strongly perceived ambiguity of law, especially in the so-called hard cases (the most difficult legal cases), where there is no clear legal solution to be found in legal norms, the approaches and methods of problem-based (casuistic, topical) legal thinking resurface again. There seems to be thus a need for a new (and indeed beneficial) reconsidering of legal casuistry, helping to address the so far unclear legal problems, arising more often than ever before. This sort of new legal casuistry can be thereby built on the foundations taken from Roman law as well as from ethics, more specifically from the early modern moral theology.

The article focuses on impact of globalization processes on culture such as economy, moral ethoses and labor market and mentions ethical concept against the threat of casuistry. Topics discussed include paradox of universality and diversity , globalization bounded with processes of assimilation and cultural homogenization and prescriptivism applicable to basic values.

A critical assessment of Bishop Kenneth Kirk's classic book The Vision of God and its reception within, and influence upon, Anglican moral theology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent debates in urban theory have centred on the problem of whether universal concepts can have applications to particular places. These debates could benefit from more serious attention to how urban thought involves styles of analogical reasoning closer in spirit to casuistry than to explanatory theory. The difficult status of 'the case' in urban studies is explored through a consideration of different types of universality in this field, leading to a re-consideration of ideas of experimentalism and wicked problems. Further attention should be given to the multiple styles of reasoning through which urban knowledge is produced and circulated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is dedicated to the application questions of a case study method known as casuistry. In its long tradition, it focuses on an influential variant of the early modern period and reconstructs its functionality. In the course of reading recent receptions, it is noted that some studies speak of a "casuistic revival" in moral case deliberation in health care. As a result of this revival, casuistry has been modified in such a way that it guides case discussions in practice with the help of a tripartite methodology (morphology, taxonomy, and kinetics). However, as it turns out, casuistry, a case comparison method of ethical judgement based on reasoning logic, is less suitable for moral case deliberations in direct patient care. This stems from the fact that casuistry is a detailed procedure of ethical learning beneficial to institutionalized ethics committees or similar forms of ethics consultation in health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conciliationist and steadfast approaches have dominated the conversation in the epistemology of disagreement. In this paper, drawing on Jennifer Lackey's justificationist approach and the casuistry paradigm in medical ethics, I will develop a more contextual epistemology of political disagreement. On this account, a given political disagreement's scope, domain, genealogy, and consequence can be helpful for determining whether we should respond to that disagreement at the level of our confidence, beliefs, or with policy. Though some may argue that responding with policy is a practical consideration instead of an epistemic matter, I argue that even policy responses to disagreements have an epistemic dimension to them that we should not ignore. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I lay out the bare bones of my conception of practical reasoning, which I understand as similar in all relevant respects to theoretical reasoning except that (as it is put) the conclusion of practical reasoning is either action or intention, while the conclusion of theoretical reasoning is belief. I then turn to ask how, on this conception, moral education is possible—understanding moral education as more practical than theoretical. We want people to do the right things, not just to believe that they ought to do them. But the first task is to identify the right thing to do and this requires practical reasoning since it involves tracing reasons to act in one way rather than another, the right act being the one there is most reason (of a certain sort) to do. I maintain that a certain form of casuistry can take people who already have some competence with the notion of a reason and enable them to develop that competence by a process of explicit questioning, without our needing to see this process as a form of indoctrination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A modern theory of casuistry has not been developed or paid much attention to in legal scholarship in Europe lately, since the partial failure of Viehweg to reintroduce the casuistic (topical) approach in 1950s. Yet, the related problems have not withered away and even today many legal professionals (attorneys and judges alike) still face the same dilemmas as already the medieval confessors and casuists did. This contribution thus ponders upon the question as to whether any new solid theory of legal casuistry - building either on the casuistry employed by theologians and confessors, or casuistry employed nowadays by ethicists, especially in bioethics - can be helpful to modern continental lawyers, who are used rather to systematic instead of casuistic thinking, but still either doubt the one-right-answer theory, or find themselves in a situation of legal uncertainty for whichever reason. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents a hitherto unknown document relating to Robert Boyle's concern with casuistry, in other words, with the analysis of matters on his conscience. It comprises an autograph manuscript that Boyle submitted to his casuistical mentor, Thomas Barlow, which is here published in full, and both this and Barlow's response are discussed in the course of the article. The opportunity is also taken to provide a more general assessment of Boyle's casuistical concerns and their significance, drawing on Boyle's contact in this connection not only with Barlow, but also with two other prominent ecclesiastics, Edward Stillingfleet and Gilbert Burnet. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Joseph Hall's cases of conscience treatise, Resolutions and Decisions of Divers Practicall Cases of Conscience, is noteworthy in its genre for its interaction with early-modern Continental Roman Catholics and their treatises De iustitia et iure. Hall's reading of the Jesuit theologian Leonardus Lessius, in particular, illustrates a significant avenue of the English Protestant reception not only of Continental Catholic casuistry, but of the insights of late-scholastic Roman Catholic economic thought. Hall's work also illustrates that, not withstanding their polemical rhetoric against the Jesuits, some English Protestants were not only reading Jesuit moral texts, but were willing to adapt and adopt ideas from their arch theological opponents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article was written in response to a paper titled "Is Philosophy Relevant to Applied Ethics," by Richard Rorty. The author discusses the connection between philosophy and business ethics. The author asserts that ethics has always been a practical subject and that ethics is an attempt to comprehend our individual and collective moral experience. The author also examines the development of applied ethics, and how it has led to a renewal of interest in using casuitry to solve moral problems and dilemmas.

Martin Calkins proposes the "combined use of casuistry and virtue ethics as a way for both sides to move ahead on [the] pressing issue [of agricultural biotechnology]." However, his defense of this methodology relies on a set of mistaken, albeit familiar, claims regarding the normative resources of virtue ethics: (1) virtue ethics is egoistic; (2) virtue ethics cannot defend any particular account of the virtues as the objectively correct ones and is therefore inextricably relativistic; (3) virtue ethics cannot supply a procedure for providing practical or policy guidance in concrete situations; and (4) virtue ethics cannot adequately account for the possibility of conflicting or partial virtues. After a brief overview of the basic structure of virtue ethics, I take up each of these misconceptions in turn. I conclude with some comments on the implications of these considerations for Calkins's proposed methodology for addressing the issue of agricultural biotechnology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues for the compatibility of casuistry and the business case method. It describes the salient features of casuistry and the case method, shows how the two methods are similar yet different, and suggests how elements of casuistry might benefit the use of the case method in management education. Toward these ends, it shows how casuistry and the case method are both inductive and practical methods of reasoning focussed on single settings and real-life situations and how both methods stress that real-life decision making is not the exclusive domain of experts. It also shows how casuistry and the case method are not identical processes but have different purposes and emphasize order and problem-resolution differently. In the end, Casuistry and the Business Case Method suggests that, despite their differences, casuistry and the case method might be brought together to benefit business management and the field of business ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I critically examine the implications of the uncodifiability thesis for principlism as a pluralistic and non-absolute generalist ethical theory. In this regard, I begin with a brief overview of W.D. Ross's ethical theory and his focus on general but defeasible prima facie principles before turning to 2) the revival of principlism in contemporary bioethics through the influential work of Tom Beauchamp and James Childress; 3) the widespread adoption of specification as a response to the indeterminacy of abstract general principles and the limitations of balancing and deductive approaches; 4) the challenges raised to fully specified principlism by the uncodifiability thesis and 5) finally offer a defense of the uncodifiability thesis against various critiques that have been raised.

Water authorities search for new collaborations with non-governmental actors, with the aim of facilitating societal initiatives. A comparative case study was conducted to analyze the value dilemmas faced by water authorities when they choose to facilitate and how they cope with these dilemmas. The study found that the most prevalent dilemma is between traditional democratic values and efficiency-related values. In the chosen solutions, the latter seem to prevail over the former. Casuistry, cycling and hybridization are common coping mechanisms. The study shows the potential of non-governmental initiatives in the water sector while also reflecting critically on dominant administrative values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]