Learning for state‐building: capacity development,education and fragility

This paper examines capacity development in education in fragile contexts. This is a current concern for donors and development partners, but there has been little work on the nexus between capacity, education and fragility. The paper examines the concept of fragility and the particular problems in education associated with fragile contexts. The key argument – and tension – is that the focus should be on restoring state functions, yet this may be in a context of severe difficulties for donor agencies or NGOs of aligning with the government. The paper outlines some of the choices to be made in deciding on a focus for capacity development in education, examining the levels for intervention (individual, organisational, cultural and political) and the different sectors (administration and education institutions). It provides examples of the different sorts of areas in capacity development in education arenas that would address specific features of fragility, but draws attention to the need for research and indicators of the different impact of these strategies. The paper concludes with an analysis of what appears to be necessary to ensure that capacity development efforts are sustainable.     

The ASVIN Project: a study of electronic and printed veterinary science journals in the UK and Ireland

ASVIN was a Research Support for Libraries Programme (RSLP) Funded Project, whose principal aim was to develop better co-operation between nine libraries in the veterinary and animal health field. The project examined a number of library-related areas, such as journal archiving, collection development policies, development of a common Z39.50 catalogue interface, grey literature, and printed and electronic journals. This paper examines the latter, whilst also providing a detailed analysis of printed journals held in partner libraries. Comparisons of the nine partner library collections are undertaken with a range of secondary sources, and an ASVIN core list of veterinary journals was developed. It looks at some of the issues relating to e-journals, expressing the benefits and concerns that many librarians are experiencing, such as licensing arrangements, archiving and general management issues.     

Comparison of methods for determining power generated on a rope-braked cycle ergometer during low-intensity exercise

This study compares the instrumentation and analysis techniques used when determining the power expended pedalling a rope-braked ergometer manufactured by Monark (Sweden) during a low intensity test. Power values were generated by eight subjects. The instrumentation consisted of load cells to measure the rope brake forces, a tachometer to measure the flywheel velocity and instrumented pedal cranks manufactured by Schoberer Rad Messtechnik (SRM). The subjects pedalled a rope-braked ergometer at 60 rev min^-1, against a resistance of 3 kg, for 5 minutes. Three different measurements of the mean power were recorded and these were compared with the value given by Monark. The SRM cranks provided two sets of results using different software packages supplied with the cranks. SRM standard software is used for taking measurements during training and cycle races over long time periods. An additional piece of software is provided by SRM called Ptnew, which gives readings of torque and pedal cadence over periods up to 30 seconds. Using the values supplied by Monark each subject generated 180 W of power. The mean power for the eight subjects, measured using the SRM cranks, was 170.36 W (SD 4.11) using the alternative SRM software (Ptnew) over a 30 second period and 173.68 W (SD 2.21) using the standard SRM software. From the direct measurement of the brake forces and flywheel velocity the mean power across the eight subjects was 148.90 W (SD 5.89). The SRM cranks measure the input power, whereas the direct measurement system measures the power output excluding mechanical losses. These values give a figure for the mechanical efficiency for the roped-braked ergometer of 88%. It was found that Monark overestimates the power generated by the subjects when compared with both the SRM systems and the direct measurement instrumentation.