This study examined the determinants of the exchange rate in a mono-resource economy, during the period of currency and oil price fall in Nigeria. The aim of the study is to ascertain the potentiality of economic diversification (non-oil export) in saving the falling value of the domestic currency, as well as, its stability. The study employed the use of monthly data from the Central Bank of Nigeria and Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation from January 2008 to December 2020 using the ARDL and NARDL models to achieve the stated objectives. In the literature, several empirical studies analyzed the relationship between exchange rates, oil price, and oil export and came to the logical conclusion that a rise in the price of oil would bring about a rise in the exchange rate, all things being equal while the reverse is the case. To add to the existing body of knowledge this study did not only look at the relationship between the variables but also examined the determinants of the exchange rate in a mono-resource economy and ascertained the potentiality of economic diversification in bringing succor to the falling exchange rate in the midst of falling oil price. The NARDL result corroborates the findings of previous studies on the relationship between exchange rate, oil price, and the performance of non-oil export. It maintains that positive changes in oil prices would lead to the appreciation of domestic currency while negative changes in oil prices would lead to the depreciation of the domestic currency. With this analysis, the study recommends the diversification of the economy and revitalization of the non-oil sector. Since import proves to have a negative impact on the exchange rate, the revitalization of the non-oil sector stimulates domestic consumption and thus reduces import bills which raise the demand for the dollar and weakens the naira.

To make an assessment of ratemaking proposals, this article proposes that regulators should consider applying a logical decision-making process, such as multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), that selects or modifies those rate mechanisms that come closest to achieving the public interest, as defined by regulators. MCDA seems like an fitting tool to improve regulatory decisions by making more explicit the relationship between different rate mechanisms and the public interest. This article provides a simplified version of MCDA to demonstrate how regulators can apply this tool to evaluate new rate mechanisms in terms of the public interest. As far as the author knows, the MCDA methodology applied to utility ratemaking has not appeared in the literature. While regulators may not want to or lack the resources to execute all the steps presented in this article, MCDA can provide direction to regulators in evaluating different rate mechanisms and ultimately reaching decisions that are more rational and aligned with the public interest. After all, evaluating rate mechanisms is one of the major functions of utility regulators. Doing it wrongly can have a consequential effect on society’s welfare.

Less-Lethal Weapons, including electric Tasers, velocity-reduction bullet-capture projectiles, rubber bullets, beanbag rounds, and other less-lethal projectiles used in police departments, federal and local law enforcement agencies, and military policing operations, as well as for private use, are topics of significant debate in recent years. These weapons can reduce collateral damage, reputational risk, and legal exposure while preventing wrongful and unnecessary deaths caused by conventional bullet wounds. Yet, opponents have highlighted concerns regarding the safety and effectiveness of these weapons, as well as their potential to cause injury or even death. While the primary duty of law enforcement officials is to preserve order and execute the law while protecting individual rights, they ultimately achieve these goals by exercising their coercive authority. Society expects police officers to rely on their professional training and judgment when using physical force to defend citizens and themselves or to apprehend criminal suspects. Because police officers must occasionally participate in physical acts of coercion, it is unavoidable that some of these interactions may result in bodily injuries to individuals, including the officers themselves. These injuries have real costs, such as medical treatment, lost wages, municipal liability, court claims and settlements, riots, and legal or even criminal exposure, as well as less-tangible collateral costs, such as the erosion of police legitimacy and public trust, which are more difficult to quantify but arguably more influential in shaping long-term public perceptions than personal injuries alone. Less lethal technology eliminates some of the concerns raised by lethal weaponry. This study reviews the advantages and disadvantages of these less-lethal weapon technologies versus traditional firearms for use by the police force, federal agencies, and military police while also performing advanced analytics to model the valuation and return on investment for a law enforcement organization implementing such technologies.