Search

Within the financialisation literature, scholars have turned their attention to the state, exploring the adoption of financial activities by state actors, paying less attention to the limits of state financialisation. This paper explores these limits using the case of social impact bonds (SIBs). Pioneered in the UK in 2010 and subsequently trialed in some 35 countries, SIBs use private capital to fund social programs, with governments providing a return based on the degree of success. Despite expectations of dramatic growth, the SIB model has never truly taken hold. Based on the rollout of SIBs in the UK, Israel, and Canada, the paper considers the challenges encountered by the SIB enterprise as a form of financialised statecraft and identifies three barriers: (1) resistance to political agendas of state financialisation; (2) clashes between finance and public sector cultures; (3) financial innovation seen as 'risk' and 'disruption' to entrenched socio-technical routines. These barriers reveal tensions both within the state itself and between finance and the public sector, and indicate the importance of thinking about the limits and failures of state financialisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical trials for the treatment of schizophrenia now often include cognitive assessments in addition to clinical ratings of symptoms. Recently, these trials have included cross-national assessments. It is not clear if translated psychological tests produce consistent results across different languages. This paper presents the results of a study of the comparability of the results of cognitive assessments in different English-speaking countries and a number of countries where tests were translated into other languages. Performance on tests of executive functioning, verbal and visuo-spatial learning and memory, language skills, psychomotor speed, and vigilance was compared across the first episode patients with schizophrenia (n=301) assessed in six different languages (English, French, Finnish, German, Hebrew, and Afrikaans), including two different countries where patients were assessed in English and other languages: Canada (French) and South Africa (Afrikaans). The variance in performance across the sites tested in English was as large as the variance between English and non-English speakers when all tests were considered. Performance differences across English and other languages were found only for executive functions, vigilance, and psychomotor speed, with executive functioning differences nonsignificant when education was considered. No differences were found between English and non-English speakers in Canada. These results suggest that the translation of tests of memory and verbal skills can lead to consistent results across translated versions of the tests. Differences between countries were greater than differences between languages, suggesting the need to consider representativeness of patient samples in terms of local educational attainment. In general, these data support the validity of cross-national neuropsychological assessments. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]