Search results

Competition, cooperation and collaboration

Food quality and quantity are more important in explaining foraging of an intermediate-sized mammalian herbivore than predation risk or competition

During times of high activity by predators and competitors, herbivores may be forced to forage in patches of low‐quality food. However, the relative importance in determining where and what herbivores forage still remains unclear, especially for small‐ and intermediate‐sized herbivores. Our objective was to test the relative importance of predator and competitor activity, and forage quality and quantity on the proportion of time spent in a vegetation type and the proportion of time spent foraging by the intermediate‐sized herbivore European hare (Lepus europaeus). We studied red fox (Vulpes vulpes) as a predator species and European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) as a competitor. We investigated the time spent at a location and foraging time of hare using GPS with accelerometers. Forage quality and quantity were analyzed based on hand‐plucked samples of a selection of the locally most important plant species in the diet of hare. Predator activity and competitor activity were investigated using a network of camera traps. Hares spent a higher proportion of time in vegetation types that contained a higher percentage of fibers (i.e., NDF). Besides, hares spent a higher proportion of time in vegetation types that contained relatively low food quantity and quality of forage (i.e., high percentage of fibers) during days that foxes (Vulpes vulpes) were more active. Also during days that rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) were more active, hares spent a higher proportion of time foraging in vegetation types that contained a relatively low quality of forage. Although predation risk affected space use and foraging behavior, and competition affected foraging behavior, our study shows that food quality and quantity more strongly affected space use and foraging behavior than predation risk or competition. It seems that we need to reconsider the relative importance of the landscape of food in a world of fear and competition.

Balancing between coordination, cooperation and competition?

In recent years, the subsidiarity principle has been underlined in Sport-for-All policies in countries such as Germany, Austria and Belgium. According to this organising principle, issues need to be handled by the lowest possible political and administrative level, and as close to the citizens as possible. The 2007 decree concerning Sport-for-All policies at the local level in Flanders (Belgium) clearly referred to this. It emphasised the decentralisation of the Sport for All policy, and highlighted the regulatory and coordinating role of local sports authorities. As a consequence, they may face conflicting roles of being coordinator, regulator and provider of mass sport at the local level. In this paper, a mixed-method approach is used to give a closer insight in the role perceptions of local sports authorities in Flanders, and their position towards private sport providers. The results show that local sports authorities consider the coordination and regulation of mass sport in their municipality as their primary task. Yet, it appears that private sport providers also perceive competition from local sports authorities. Moreover, a considerable number of the local sports authorities believe they can combine the roles of provider and coordinator. As there appears to be considerable goal ambiguity, it is necessary for local sports authorities to formulate clear goals. Referring to the principle of subsidiarity, it is argued that sports authorities should only intervene when (non-)profit sport providers are not able to achieve the desirable outcomes with regard to sport and the welfare agenda.

State of Competition in the Dutch EV charging sector

In the Netherlands and some neighbouring European countries, the electric vehicle (EV) charging sector is receiving attention from market regulators. Concerns relating to competitive processes in this developing and rapidly growing sector are being raised. This paper identifies specific markets where regulation can help increase the level of competition for the development of affordable and accessible public charging infrastructure, both within the built environment (slow charging) as well as along highways (fast charging). Barriers to competition include exclusive concessions at the municipality level and long-term exclusive concessions at locations along highways.

Is competition between regions welfare increasing?

It is generally assumed that competition increases welfare. The main idea behind this assumption is that competition in a market is the best incentive mechanism to produce efficient market outcomes. This is good for social welfare and therefore stimulating competition is welfare increasing. According to this view, a lot of emphasis has been laid on the conditions to enhance competition in certain areas of the economy.   Next to these developments in the markets of goods and services, one sees a similar development in emphasizing competition between regions and semi-public and other kind of institutions. One can generally say that as a result of general development in other sectors and more formally, globalization tends also to increase the intensity of competition.

Three factors of the Intrasexual Competition Scale?

In a multinational project (N = 3707), we factor analyzed a commonly used self-report measure of intrasexual competition and found a three-dimensional system. We called these factors envy (i.e., wanting what others have), jealousy (i.e., protecting what one has), and competitiveness (i.e., beliefs that one is better). To better understand these factors and test whether the solution is sensible, we examined sex differences and correlations with the Dark Triad traits (i.e., psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism), life history strategies, and age. Results are discussed using an adaptationist lens.