The collapse of Icelandic financial institutions in the autumn of 2008 brought to light not only the surprisingly large amounts of money invested by local authorities, but also the fact that local authorities had invested nearly £1 billion in Iceland, funds that were consequently at risk. This prompted the Committee to launch an inquiry into local authority investments, in order to understand current practice, to study the roles and responsibilities of various groups and individuals involved, and to make recommendations intended to limit the exposure of local authority funds to such risk in future. The unusual nature of the recent financial situation should not excuse failures that occurred in local authority financial arrangements. The inquiry reveals a degree of misunderstanding, misinformation and complacency on the part of some crucial players, both within local authorities and in the wider financial sector, which contributed to the putting of taxpayers' money at unnecessary risk. There is significant room for improvement in the guidance and codes of practice for local authorities: to be more explicit in certain areas in order to make the system more transparent; to explain where the responsibilities lie, both in executing and in overseeing treasury management, including more rigorous training and reporting; and to highlight the variations of service on offer by different external service providers. It was the role of external service providers, specifically some of the treasury management advisers, which caused the Committee most concern and the Financial Services Authority should investigate the services provided by them as soon as possible and should take a more active role in their regulation.

This new edition incorporates revised guidance from H.M Treasury which is designed to promote efficient policy development and resource allocation across government through the use of a thorough, long-term and analytically robust approach to the appraisal and evaluation of public service projects before significant funds are committed. It is the first edition to have been aided by a consultation process in order to ensure the guidance is clearer and more closely tailored to suit the needs of users.

This report discusses the findings from a mail survey of local government economic development activities that was sent to all 540 municipalities and 100 counties in North Carolina. An important part of the analysis examines whether cities and counties differ significantly in their economic development efforts and whether smaller jurisdictions employ different types of development strategies and tools than larger ones. The survey findings also highlight the barriers that local governments face in promoting economic development and identify important technical assistance needs and gaps in local capacity.

It is frequently argued that U.S. corporations have shorter time horizons for planning and investment than their Japanese and German competitors. This argument, though widely accepted in studies of U.S. competitiveness, has rarely been examined in depth. Time Horizons and Technology Investments explores the evidence that some U.S. corporations consistently select projects biased toward short-term return and addresses factors influencing the time-related preferences of U.S. corporate managers in selecting projects for investment. It makes recommendations to policymakers and managers about policies to mitigate negative external influences and about strategies to remove internal biases toward noncompetitive decisions.