Often, system specific residence times alone are not useful to describe the timescales of transport in the Damköhler concept, because it neglects that degradation of redox-sensitive compounds depend on dynamically changing and non-uniformly distributed hydro-biogeochemical boundary conditions that either facilitate or suppress biogeochemical reactions.
Open image in new window Fig. 1 Share of internal trainers by age in changing and non-changing firms.
We have first to ensure that the estimated propensity scores of workers employed in changing and non-changing firms overlap sufficiently.
To make the workers employed in changing and non-changing firms comparable in terms of observable characteristics, we rely on propensity score matching techniques (Rosenbaum and Rubin 1983).
It is clear that the adaptive management process can help improve the scientific information for a site, and that it encourages the flexible and responsive management that changing and non-equilibrial rangelands demand.
One can argue that a more suitable approach would be first to apply propensity score matching to identify similar workers in changing and non-changing firms and second to apply it to those who participate or do not participate in training.
According to this view, time may be encoded by any reproducible pattern of activity across a population of neurons for as long as the pattern is continuously changing and non-repeating.
But the situation is changing and those non-communicable diseases, often associated with affluence – or "revealed by affluence", as some say – are at the centre of this transition.
This has possibly created a situation where the use of some of the skills acquired through experience has become conditional on mastering a new ICT tool. Figure 1 displays the share of internal trainers for workers aged 25 5711 by age for the two sub-samples of workers employed in changing firms and non-changing firms.
When distinguishing changing and non-changing firms and using the alternative definition of a trainer, the effect is slightly stronger in the former case (19.5 p.p., relative to the baseline effect of 18.1 p.p).
But history is different: it is concerned with exploring and understanding individual cases as individual, that is, unique, non-recurrent, changing and unstable.
