Positive’ and. ‘negative’ consequences – the normative aspect Some consequences can be perceived as ‗positive‘, ‗beneficial‘; others as ‗negative‘, or ‗adverse‘ by some or all policy actors. Both sides are in principle relevant not least because different policy actors are likely to have different views and opinions. As already stated, the intentions and objectives defined in connection with policy adoption is our basic reference. This means that judgment or valuation of the effects (‗good/bad‘) will first and foremost be oriented after their influence on fulfilling the intentions, in direct (primary) and indirect (secondary) sense as above; hence we can talk in the first instance about ‗intentional‘ versus ‗non-intentional‘ and ‗counter-intentional‘ effects, rather than necessarily good or adverse ones. The first, ‗intentional‘ ones, are by our definition desirable; the second, non-intentional ones, mean they may be desirable or not, the third type, counter-intentional, arguably the most interesting one, is inherently problematic, for obvious reasons. First, we consider non-intentional effects that in some way possess a significant degree of operative influence on primary objectives, thereby altering the net expedience, or ‗usefulness‘, of the intervention. Such unintended effects can be expedient (i.e. serendipitous, obtaining a desirable outcome in an accidental way), or inexpedient (i.e. ‗adverse‘, or rather counter-intentional). While the former are interesting and worthy of analysis, they rarely receive the levels of concerted attention devoted to the latter in the academic literature. In contrast, ‗adverse‘ consequences have been identified in ex-post analyses of myriad transport policies. These are not rare; many decades ago, in 1967, Xxxxxxxxx noted ‗the centrality of side-effects‘ (Talvittie, 2006). This refers to a situation where side-effects, rather that original intentions become key for the success or failure of a project. We need to be careful to label anything as generally ‗adverse‘. The Oxford English Dictionary (1989), defines ‗adverse‘ as ―[something] opposing any one's interests (real or supposed); hence, unfavourable, hurtful, detrimental, injurious, calamitous, afflictive.‖ In the present terminology, we adopt, as already noted, the policy makers‟ view of this, and replace adverse generally with the two categories counter- and non-intentional, where ‗counter‘ means something that works to the opposite (detriment) of reaching a policy objective, whi...
Positive’ and turbine meters - For positive meters AGA Measurement Committee Report No. 6 (AGA Report No. 6), dated January 1971, and any subsequent amendments or revisions. For turbine meters, AGA Measurement Committee Report No. 7 (AGA Report No. 7), First Revision, dated November, 1984, and any subsequent amendments or revisions as mutually agreed upon.
