Public Assistance and Promotion of Local Rail Projects.

In the second half of the nineteenth century, and again in the middle of the twentieth century, federal, state, and local governments were involved in large-scale subsidizing and promoting of railroad infrastructure for economic development purposes. In the 1800s, public financial involvement centered on the expansion of railroads to develop the West. In the 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s, public financial assistance focused on preserving rail freight services, and on restructuring the then oversized national rail network. In the 1990s and beyond, rail improvements and the need for public assistance are likely to be more incremental, with mostly local projects. Case study research was conducted on six local freight rail service projects, all of which had public sector investment. Five attributes were identified whose presence was associated with project success, or conversely, whose absence may have reduced the likelihood for project success. These success attributes should be used as an adjunct to sound economic analysis, and incorporated within future policies governing selection of local rail projects to receive public assistance.     

Central and East European Trade Developments

Josef C. Brada, The European Community and Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Report on Eastern Europe.
de Weydenthal, Jan B., Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland Gain Associate Membership in the EC. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Research Report.
Agra Europe . Weekly issues.
East Europe Agriculture and Food Monthly .
EC Documents & Regulation (Number 34) .     

The use and abuse of paradigms in the history of political thought

A paradigm is a methodological device which historians of political thought borrow from the history of science. The initial part of this article examines the views of three distinguished historians of political thought—Sheldon Wolin, Alan Ryan and John Pocock—who have borrowed paradigms. Wolin and Ryan are shown to have confused paradigms with weltanschauungen in such a way as to make the former less useful as methodological devices. Pocock, on the other hand, has been successful in his use of paradigms, though he does not sufficiently recognise their methodological limits. He also raises a conceptual problem. The latter part of this article examines the recent history of science in an attempt to clarify the use of paradigms and their limits.