Competition - Revision history

Sherrie7069: typo fix

2026-01-24T18:07:13Z

typo fix

Show changes

UpdateBot: robot: Update article (please report if you notice any mistake or error in this edit)

2022-06-28T12:09:02Z

robot: Update article (please report if you notice any mistake or error in this edit)

Show changes

WikiJoy: add info

2021-04-21T15:02:46Z

add info

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:32, 21 April 2021
Line 47:		Line 47:
	However, competition may also lead to wasted (duplicated) effort and to increased [[cost]]s (and prices) in some circumstances. For example, the intense competition for the small number of [[superstar\|top jobs in music and movie-acting]] leads many aspiring musicians and actors to make substantial investments in training which are not recouped, because only a fraction become successful. Critics{{which\|date=March 2020}} have also argued that competition can be destabilizing, particularly competition between certain financial institutions.		However, competition may also lead to wasted (duplicated) effort and to increased [[cost]]s (and prices) in some circumstances. For example, the intense competition for the small number of [[superstar\|top jobs in music and movie-acting]] leads many aspiring musicians and actors to make substantial investments in training which are not recouped, because only a fraction become successful. Critics{{which\|date=March 2020}} have also argued that competition can be destabilizing, particularly competition between certain financial institutions.

	Experts have also questioned the constructiveness of competition in profitability. It has been argued that competition-oriented objectives are counterproductive to raising revenues and profitability because they limit the options of strategies for firms as well as their ability to offer innovative responses to changes in the market.<ref>{{cite journal \|url= http://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/documents/research/CompOrientPDF%2011-27%20%282%29.pdf \|title= The Profitability of Winning \|author1= J. Scott Armstrong \|author2= Fred Collopy \|journal= Chief Executive \|pages= 61–63 \|year= 1994 \|access-date= 2011-12-06 \|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100622023252/http://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/documents/research/CompOrientPDF%2011-27%20(2).pdf \|archive-date= 2010-06-22 \|url-status= dead \| quote = A 1996 review of the evidence, summarized in this paper, found that competitor-oriented objectives reduced profitability.		Experts have also questioned the constructiveness of competition in profitability. It has been argued that competition-oriented objectives are counterproductive to raising revenues and profitability because they limit the options of strategies for firms as well as their ability to offer innovative responses to changes in the market.<ref>{{cite journal \|url= http://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/documents/research/CompOrientPDF%2011-27%20%282%29.pdf \|title= The Profitability of Winning \|author1= J. Scott Armstrong \|author2= Fred Collopy \|journal= Chief Executive \|pages= 61–63 \|year= 1994 \|access-date= 2011-12-06 \|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100622023252/http://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/documents/research/CompOrientPDF%2011-27%20(2).pdf \|archive-date= 2010-06-22 \|url-status= dead \| quote = A 1996 review of the evidence, summarized in this paper, found that competitor-oriented objectives reduced profitability.We describe new evidence from 12 studies, one of which is introduced in this paper. The new evidence supports the conclusion that competitor-oriented objectives are harmful, especially when managers receive information about competitors' market shares.}}</ref> In addition, the strong desire to defeat rival firms with competitive prices has the strong possibility of causing [[price war]]s.<ref>{{cite journal \| url = http://qbox.wharton.upenn.edu/documents/mktg/research/Profitability%20of%20winning.pdf \| title = Competitor-oriented Objectives: The Myth of Market Share \| author1 = J. Scott Armstrong \| author2 = Kesten C. Greene \| journal = International Journal of Business \| volume = 12 \| issue = 1 \| pages = 116–34 \| year = 2007 \| issn = 1083-4346 }}{{Dead link\|date= November 2019 \|bot= InternetArchiveBot \|fix-attempted= yes }}</ref>


	==Forms==		==Forms==

WikiJoy: add info

2021-04-21T15:02:07Z

add info

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:32, 21 April 2021
Line 46:		Line 46:

	However, competition may also lead to wasted (duplicated) effort and to increased [[cost]]s (and prices) in some circumstances. For example, the intense competition for the small number of [[superstar\|top jobs in music and movie-acting]] leads many aspiring musicians and actors to make substantial investments in training which are not recouped, because only a fraction become successful. Critics{{which\|date=March 2020}} have also argued that competition can be destabilizing, particularly competition between certain financial institutions.		However, competition may also lead to wasted (duplicated) effort and to increased [[cost]]s (and prices) in some circumstances. For example, the intense competition for the small number of [[superstar\|top jobs in music and movie-acting]] leads many aspiring musicians and actors to make substantial investments in training which are not recouped, because only a fraction become successful. Critics{{which\|date=March 2020}} have also argued that competition can be destabilizing, particularly competition between certain financial institutions.

			Experts have also questioned the constructiveness of competition in profitability. It has been argued that competition-oriented objectives are counterproductive to raising revenues and profitability because they limit the options of strategies for firms as well as their ability to offer innovative responses to changes in the market.<ref>{{cite journal \|url= http://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/documents/research/CompOrientPDF%2011-27%20%282%29.pdf \|title= The Profitability of Winning \|author1= J. Scott Armstrong \|author2= Fred Collopy \|journal= Chief Executive \|pages= 61–63 \|year= 1994 \|access-date= 2011-12-06 \|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100622023252/http://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/documents/research/CompOrientPDF%2011-27%20(2).pdf \|archive-date= 2010-06-22 \|url-status= dead \| quote = A 1996 review of the evidence, summarized in this paper, found that competitor-oriented objectives reduced profitability.

	==Forms==		==Forms==

WikiJoy: add info

2021-04-21T15:01:23Z

add info

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:31, 21 April 2021
Line 44:		Line 44:
	Merriam-Webster gives as one definition of competition (relating to [[business sector\|business]]) as "[...] rivalry: such as [...] the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms".<ref>Compare: [http://m-w.com/dictionary/competition Definition of competition] - "competition [...] 1 : the act or process of competing : rivalry: such as [...] a : the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms "</ref> [[Adam Smith]] in his 1776 book ''[[The Wealth of Nations]]'' and later economists described competition in general as allocating productive [[resource]]s to their most highly valued uses and encouraging [[X-inefficiency\|efficiency]].<ref>[[George J. Stigler]] ([[The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics\|[1987]]] 2008). "competition," ''[[The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics]]''. [http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_C000261&q=competition&topicid=&result_number=6 Abstract.]		Merriam-Webster gives as one definition of competition (relating to [[business sector\|business]]) as "[...] rivalry: such as [...] the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms".<ref>Compare: [http://m-w.com/dictionary/competition Definition of competition] - "competition [...] 1 : the act or process of competing : rivalry: such as [...] a : the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms "</ref> [[Adam Smith]] in his 1776 book ''[[The Wealth of Nations]]'' and later economists described competition in general as allocating productive [[resource]]s to their most highly valued uses and encouraging [[X-inefficiency\|efficiency]].<ref>[[George J. Stigler]] ([[The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics\|[1987]]] 2008). "competition," ''[[The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics]]''. [http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_C000261&q=competition&topicid=&result_number=6 Abstract.]
	{{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150215032134/http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_C000261&q=competition&topicid=&result_number=6 \|date=2015-02-15 }}</ref>{{qn\|date=March 2020}} Later [[microeconomic theory]] distinguished between [[perfect competition]] and [[imperfect competition]], concluding that no system of resource allocation is more efficient than [[perfect competition]].{{citation needed\|date=March 2020}} Competition, according to the theory, causes commercial firms to develop new products, services and technologies, which would give consumers greater selection and better products. The greater selection typically causes lower prices for the products, compared to what the price would be if there was no competition ([[monopoly]]) or little competition ([[oligopoly]]).{{citation needed\|date=March 2020}}		{{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150215032134/http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_C000261&q=competition&topicid=&result_number=6 \|date=2015-02-15 }}</ref>{{qn\|date=March 2020}} Later [[microeconomic theory]] distinguished between [[perfect competition]] and [[imperfect competition]], concluding that no system of resource allocation is more efficient than [[perfect competition]].{{citation needed\|date=March 2020}} Competition, according to the theory, causes commercial firms to develop new products, services and technologies, which would give consumers greater selection and better products. The greater selection typically causes lower prices for the products, compared to what the price would be if there was no competition ([[monopoly]]) or little competition ([[oligopoly]]).{{citation needed\|date=March 2020}}

			However, competition may also lead to wasted (duplicated) effort and to increased [[cost]]s (and prices) in some circumstances. For example, the intense competition for the small number of [[superstar\|top jobs in music and movie-acting]] leads many aspiring musicians and actors to make substantial investments in training which are not recouped, because only a fraction become successful. Critics{{which\|date=March 2020}} have also argued that competition can be destabilizing, particularly competition between certain financial institutions.

	==Forms==		==Forms==

WikiJoy: add info

2021-04-21T15:00:47Z

add info

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:30, 21 April 2021
Line 43:		Line 43:

	Merriam-Webster gives as one definition of competition (relating to [[business sector\|business]]) as "[...] rivalry: such as [...] the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms".<ref>Compare: [http://m-w.com/dictionary/competition Definition of competition] - "competition [...] 1 : the act or process of competing : rivalry: such as [...] a : the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms "</ref> [[Adam Smith]] in his 1776 book ''[[The Wealth of Nations]]'' and later economists described competition in general as allocating productive [[resource]]s to their most highly valued uses and encouraging [[X-inefficiency\|efficiency]].<ref>[[George J. Stigler]] ([[The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics\|[1987]]] 2008). "competition," ''[[The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics]]''. [http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_C000261&q=competition&topicid=&result_number=6 Abstract.]		Merriam-Webster gives as one definition of competition (relating to [[business sector\|business]]) as "[...] rivalry: such as [...] the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms".<ref>Compare: [http://m-w.com/dictionary/competition Definition of competition] - "competition [...] 1 : the act or process of competing : rivalry: such as [...] a : the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms "</ref> [[Adam Smith]] in his 1776 book ''[[The Wealth of Nations]]'' and later economists described competition in general as allocating productive [[resource]]s to their most highly valued uses and encouraging [[X-inefficiency\|efficiency]].<ref>[[George J. Stigler]] ([[The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics\|[1987]]] 2008). "competition," ''[[The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics]]''. [http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_C000261&q=competition&topicid=&result_number=6 Abstract.]
			{{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150215032134/http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_C000261&q=competition&topicid=&result_number=6 \|date=2015-02-15 }}</ref>{{qn\|date=March 2020}} Later [[microeconomic theory]] distinguished between [[perfect competition]] and [[imperfect competition]], concluding that no system of resource allocation is more efficient than [[perfect competition]].{{citation needed\|date=March 2020}} Competition, according to the theory, causes commercial firms to develop new products, services and technologies, which would give consumers greater selection and better products. The greater selection typically causes lower prices for the products, compared to what the price would be if there was no competition ([[monopoly]]) or little competition ([[oligopoly]]).{{citation needed\|date=March 2020}}

	==Forms==		==Forms==

WikiJoy: Economics

2021-04-21T15:00:21Z

Economics

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:30, 21 April 2021
Line 38:		Line 38:

	However, other studies such as the [[Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking]] show that the effect of competition on students depends on each individual's level of [[Agency (philosophy)\|agency]]. Students with a high level of agency thrive on competition, are self-motivated, and are willing to risk failure.Compared to their counterparts who are low in agency, these students are more likely to be flexible, adaptable and creative as adults.<ref>{{Citation\|last1=Conti\|first1=Regina\|title=The impact of competition on intrinsic motivation and creativity: Considering gender, gender segregation and gender role orientation\|date=December 2001\|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223760263\|journal=Personality and Individual Differences\|volume=31\|issue=8\|pages=1273–1289\|doi=10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00217-8\|last2=Picariello\|first2=Martha\|last3=Collins\|first3=Mary}}</ref><ref>{{Citation\|last1=Eisenberg\|first1=Jacob\|title=The Effects of Competition on Improvisers' Motivation, Stress, and Creative Performance\|date=16 April 2012\|journal=Creativity Research Journal\|volume=23\|issue=2\|pages=129–136\|doi=10.1080/10400419.2011.571185\|issn=1040-0419\|last2=Thompson\|first2=William Forde\|s2cid=144893872}}</ref>		However, other studies such as the [[Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking]] show that the effect of competition on students depends on each individual's level of [[Agency (philosophy)\|agency]]. Students with a high level of agency thrive on competition, are self-motivated, and are willing to risk failure.Compared to their counterparts who are low in agency, these students are more likely to be flexible, adaptable and creative as adults.<ref>{{Citation\|last1=Conti\|first1=Regina\|title=The impact of competition on intrinsic motivation and creativity: Considering gender, gender segregation and gender role orientation\|date=December 2001\|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223760263\|journal=Personality and Individual Differences\|volume=31\|issue=8\|pages=1273–1289\|doi=10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00217-8\|last2=Picariello\|first2=Martha\|last3=Collins\|first3=Mary}}</ref><ref>{{Citation\|last1=Eisenberg\|first1=Jacob\|title=The Effects of Competition on Improvisers' Motivation, Stress, and Creative Performance\|date=16 April 2012\|journal=Creativity Research Journal\|volume=23\|issue=2\|pages=129–136\|doi=10.1080/10400419.2011.571185\|issn=1040-0419\|last2=Thompson\|first2=William Forde\|s2cid=144893872}}</ref>

			==Economics==
			{{Main\|Competition (economics)}}

			Merriam-Webster gives as one definition of competition (relating to [[business sector\|business]]) as "[...] rivalry: such as [...] the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms".<ref>Compare: [http://m-w.com/dictionary/competition Definition of competition] - "competition [...] 1 : the act or process of competing : rivalry: such as [...] a : the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms "</ref> [[Adam Smith]] in his 1776 book ''[[The Wealth of Nations]]'' and later economists described competition in general as allocating productive [[resource]]s to their most highly valued uses and encouraging [[X-inefficiency\|efficiency]].<ref>[[George J. Stigler]] ([[The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics\|[1987]]] 2008). "competition," ''[[The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics]]''. [http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_C000261&q=competition&topicid=&result_number=6 Abstract.]

	==Forms==		==Forms==

WikiJoy: add info

2021-04-21T14:59:35Z

add info

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:29, 21 April 2021
Line 37:		Line 37:
	Competition is a major factor in education. On a global scale, national education systems, intending to bring out the best in the next generation, encourage competitiveness among students through [[scholarships]]. Countries such as England and Singapore have [[special education]] programmes which cater for specialist students, prompting charges of [[academic elitism]]. Upon receipt of their academic results, students tend to compare their grades to see who is better. In severe cases, the pressure to perform in some countries is so high that it can result in stigmatization of intellectually deficient students, or even suicide as a consequence of failing the exams; Japan being a prime example (see [[Education in Japan]]).This has resulted in critical re-evaluation of examinations as a whole by educationalists {{Citation needed\|date=February 2007}}. Critics of competition as a motivating factor in education systems, such as [[Alfie Kohn]], assert that competition actually has a net negative influence on the achievement levels of students, and that it "turns all of us into losers" (Kohn 1986). Economist [[Richard Layard]] has commented on the harmful effects, stating "people feel that they are under a great deal of pressure. They feel that their main objective in life is to do better than other people. That is certainly what young people are being taught in school every day. And it's not a good basis for a society."<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13052639 ''Group dedicated to happiness launched in UK'', BBC video, April 12, 2011]</ref>		Competition is a major factor in education. On a global scale, national education systems, intending to bring out the best in the next generation, encourage competitiveness among students through [[scholarships]]. Countries such as England and Singapore have [[special education]] programmes which cater for specialist students, prompting charges of [[academic elitism]]. Upon receipt of their academic results, students tend to compare their grades to see who is better. In severe cases, the pressure to perform in some countries is so high that it can result in stigmatization of intellectually deficient students, or even suicide as a consequence of failing the exams; Japan being a prime example (see [[Education in Japan]]).This has resulted in critical re-evaluation of examinations as a whole by educationalists {{Citation needed\|date=February 2007}}. Critics of competition as a motivating factor in education systems, such as [[Alfie Kohn]], assert that competition actually has a net negative influence on the achievement levels of students, and that it "turns all of us into losers" (Kohn 1986). Economist [[Richard Layard]] has commented on the harmful effects, stating "people feel that they are under a great deal of pressure. They feel that their main objective in life is to do better than other people. That is certainly what young people are being taught in school every day. And it's not a good basis for a society."<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13052639 ''Group dedicated to happiness launched in UK'', BBC video, April 12, 2011]</ref>

	However, other studies such as the [[Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking]] show that the effect of competition on students depends on each individual's level of [[Agency (philosophy)\|agency]]. Students with a high level of agency thrive on competition, are self-motivated, and are willing to risk failure.		However, other studies such as the [[Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking]] show that the effect of competition on students depends on each individual's level of [[Agency (philosophy)\|agency]]. Students with a high level of agency thrive on competition, are self-motivated, and are willing to risk failure.Compared to their counterparts who are low in agency, these students are more likely to be flexible, adaptable and creative as adults.<ref>{{Citation\|last1=Conti\|first1=Regina\|title=The impact of competition on intrinsic motivation and creativity: Considering gender, gender segregation and gender role orientation\|date=December 2001\|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223760263\|journal=Personality and Individual Differences\|volume=31\|issue=8\|pages=1273–1289\|doi=10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00217-8\|last2=Picariello\|first2=Martha\|last3=Collins\|first3=Mary}}</ref><ref>{{Citation\|last1=Eisenberg\|first1=Jacob\|title=The Effects of Competition on Improvisers' Motivation, Stress, and Creative Performance\|date=16 April 2012\|journal=Creativity Research Journal\|volume=23\|issue=2\|pages=129–136\|doi=10.1080/10400419.2011.571185\|issn=1040-0419\|last2=Thompson\|first2=William Forde\|s2cid=144893872}}</ref>

	==Forms==		==Forms==

WikiJoy: add info

2021-04-21T14:59:07Z

add info

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:29, 21 April 2021
Line 36:		Line 36:
	== Education ==		== Education ==
	Competition is a major factor in education. On a global scale, national education systems, intending to bring out the best in the next generation, encourage competitiveness among students through [[scholarships]]. Countries such as England and Singapore have [[special education]] programmes which cater for specialist students, prompting charges of [[academic elitism]]. Upon receipt of their academic results, students tend to compare their grades to see who is better. In severe cases, the pressure to perform in some countries is so high that it can result in stigmatization of intellectually deficient students, or even suicide as a consequence of failing the exams; Japan being a prime example (see [[Education in Japan]]).This has resulted in critical re-evaluation of examinations as a whole by educationalists {{Citation needed\|date=February 2007}}. Critics of competition as a motivating factor in education systems, such as [[Alfie Kohn]], assert that competition actually has a net negative influence on the achievement levels of students, and that it "turns all of us into losers" (Kohn 1986). Economist [[Richard Layard]] has commented on the harmful effects, stating "people feel that they are under a great deal of pressure. They feel that their main objective in life is to do better than other people. That is certainly what young people are being taught in school every day. And it's not a good basis for a society."<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13052639 ''Group dedicated to happiness launched in UK'', BBC video, April 12, 2011]</ref>		Competition is a major factor in education. On a global scale, national education systems, intending to bring out the best in the next generation, encourage competitiveness among students through [[scholarships]]. Countries such as England and Singapore have [[special education]] programmes which cater for specialist students, prompting charges of [[academic elitism]]. Upon receipt of their academic results, students tend to compare their grades to see who is better. In severe cases, the pressure to perform in some countries is so high that it can result in stigmatization of intellectually deficient students, or even suicide as a consequence of failing the exams; Japan being a prime example (see [[Education in Japan]]).This has resulted in critical re-evaluation of examinations as a whole by educationalists {{Citation needed\|date=February 2007}}. Critics of competition as a motivating factor in education systems, such as [[Alfie Kohn]], assert that competition actually has a net negative influence on the achievement levels of students, and that it "turns all of us into losers" (Kohn 1986). Economist [[Richard Layard]] has commented on the harmful effects, stating "people feel that they are under a great deal of pressure. They feel that their main objective in life is to do better than other people. That is certainly what young people are being taught in school every day. And it's not a good basis for a society."<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13052639 ''Group dedicated to happiness launched in UK'', BBC video, April 12, 2011]</ref>

			However, other studies such as the [[Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking]] show that the effect of competition on students depends on each individual's level of [[Agency (philosophy)\|agency]]. Students with a high level of agency thrive on competition, are self-motivated, and are willing to risk failure.

	==Forms==		==Forms==

WikiJoy: add info

2021-04-21T14:58:21Z

add info

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:28, 21 April 2021
Line 35:		Line 35:

	== Education ==		== Education ==
	Competition is a major factor in education. On a global scale, national education systems, intending to bring out the best in the next generation, encourage competitiveness among students through [[scholarships]]. Countries such as England and Singapore have [[special education]] programmes which cater for specialist students, prompting charges of [[academic elitism]]. Upon receipt of their academic results, students tend to compare their grades to see who is better. In severe cases, the pressure to perform in some countries is so high that it can result in stigmatization of intellectually deficient students, or even suicide as a consequence of failing the exams; Japan being a prime example (see [[Education in Japan]]).		Competition is a major factor in education. On a global scale, national education systems, intending to bring out the best in the next generation, encourage competitiveness among students through [[scholarships]]. Countries such as England and Singapore have [[special education]] programmes which cater for specialist students, prompting charges of [[academic elitism]]. Upon receipt of their academic results, students tend to compare their grades to see who is better. In severe cases, the pressure to perform in some countries is so high that it can result in stigmatization of intellectually deficient students, or even suicide as a consequence of failing the exams; Japan being a prime example (see [[Education in Japan]]).This has resulted in critical re-evaluation of examinations as a whole by educationalists {{Citation needed\|date=February 2007}}. Critics of competition as a motivating factor in education systems, such as [[Alfie Kohn]], assert that competition actually has a net negative influence on the achievement levels of students, and that it "turns all of us into losers" (Kohn 1986). Economist [[Richard Layard]] has commented on the harmful effects, stating "people feel that they are under a great deal of pressure. They feel that their main objective in life is to do better than other people. That is certainly what young people are being taught in school every day. And it's not a good basis for a society."<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13052639 ''Group dedicated to happiness launched in UK'', BBC video, April 12, 2011]</ref>

	==Forms==		==Forms==