The U.S. research university and the joint venture: Evolution of an institution

1996 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 629-653 ◽  
Author(s):  
WilliamL. Baldwin
Keyword(s):  
Research University ◽  
Joint Venture ◽  
The U.S

A discussion on orbital analysis - Radio tracking at Winkfield

1967 ◽  
Vol 262 (1124) ◽  
pp. 46-49
Keyword(s):  
Space Flight ◽  
Joint Venture ◽  
Radio Telemetry ◽  
Research Station ◽  
Radio Tracking ◽  
Goddard Space Flight Center ◽  
Telemetry Measurements ◽  
Orbital Analysis ◽  
The U.S

Winkfield is one of the stations in the Space Tracking and Data Acquisition Network (Stadan) of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (N.A.S.A.) and is operated by the Radio and Space Research Station as a joint venture with N.A.S.A. The stations in the network, using standardized equipment supplied by N.A.S.A., receive by radio telemetry measurements from the various experiments in the satellites, they command the functioning of satellites and they track them. Tracking, with which this paper is concerned, means the measurement of quantities which contribute to the determination of the positions of satellites as a function of time. About ten stations in the network use tracking equipment and methods identical with those used at Winkfield. The network operates 24 h a day, its functioning being coordinated by the Goddard Space Flight Center of N.A.S.A. by means of teleprinter circuits which also serve to convey the raw tracking information from the stations to the N.A.S.A. computer facilities.

scholarly journals Federal Legal and Regulatory Developments Relating to the U.S. Pipeline Industry

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-511
Author(s):  
Chloe J. Marie ◽  
Ross Pifer
Keyword(s):  
Joint Venture ◽  
Atlantic Coast ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Environmental Groups ◽  
Right Of Way ◽  
Pipeline Project ◽  
Regulatory Commission ◽  
The Right ◽  
The U.S ◽  
The Way

The Atlantic Coast Pipeline (“ACP”) was designed as a 600-mile underground, pipeline project transporting natural gas from well sites in West Virginia to end users throughout Virginia and North Carolina. Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC (“Atlantic Coast”), the developer of the ACP project, began the extensive process of obtaining the necessary regulatory approvals for this project by initiating a pre-filing process with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) in October 2014. In the nearly six years that followed, the project received various permits related to water and air quality as well as other matters from state and federal agencies. At nearly every step of the way, however, opponents of the project challenged the grant of these permits. In one case, several environmental groups challenged the propriety of the U.S. Forest Service granting a right-of-way for the pipeline to traverse a portion of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail. The ensuing litigation eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which rendered an opinion on June 15, 2020, upholding the grant of the right-of-way and apparently paving the way for the completion of the project. Despite receiving this favorable ruling, Duke Energy and Dominion Energy— the companies that created Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC as a joint venture—announced they were abandoning construction of the project on July 5, 2020.

Post-Bipolar World: Peaceful Coexistence or Chaos?

2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-29
Author(s):  
A. Lukin
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Research University ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Modern World ◽  
The West ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The World ◽  
The U.S

The article explores characteristics of the international relations bipolar system, changes occurred after its collapse and the future of post-bipolar world, focusing on the role of non-Western actors in it. On one hand, the bipolar system provided stability of international relations, but on the other – lead to competition between the U.S. and the USSR for the influence on the third countries, which sometimes resulted in armed conflicts in the third states. The collapse of the Soviet Union convinced the West both in the universality of its development model and the necessity to spread it all over the world. Now it is clear that the “democratism” ideology failed politically and culturally. The Western model has neither become a panacea for eliminating disparities between countries on different stages of development, nor the only example of successful and strong governance. New power centers, such as Russia, China, India and Brazil, have been successfully developing after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Their influence has been growing along with that of the West, and even though they did not necessarily directly confront it, they never shared all its values, yet never actively imposed their positions on the rest of the world. Regional powers (Nigeria, Venezuela, etc.) are also playing a more significant role in the emerging system, although sometimes they may join the alliances with more powerful countries to achieve their goals (as Vietnam does with the U.S. in its conflict with China). Russia’s reluctance to follow the West in its development created the first serious alternative to the existing unipolar world model and its values, so naturally and widely accepted by the Western actors. Whereas China with its rapid economic development is also posing a challenge to the ideology of "democratism" proving that the economic welfare is achievable outside the Western political model. As for Russia, its role in the modern world is still not defined. The Russian Federation wants to become an independent power unit and a center of the Eurasian integration. However, it is not clear whether it has resources of all kinds to implement this idea, – moreover, its economic dependence on the West is still too strong to insist on further confrontation. Instead, Russia (as well as its partners in the Eurasian Economic Union) could use Eurasian integration platforms to act as an "ambassador" of Asia in Europe and that of Europe in Asia. Acknowledgements. The article has been supported by the grant of the Faculty of World Economy and International Affairs, National Research University Higher School of Economics in 2016.

Increasing Participation of International Students in the Higher Education Classrooms Through Technology-Enhanced Instruction

2020 ◽  
pp. 307-327
Author(s):  
Hyunsil Park ◽  
Robert A. Filback ◽  
Jenifer Crawford
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
International Students ◽  
Research University ◽  
Active Participation ◽  
International Graduate Students ◽  
International Graduate ◽  
Education Environment ◽  
Speakers Of Other Languages ◽  
Master Of Arts ◽  
The U.S

This research-based chapter explores East Asian international graduate students' challenges in the U.S. higher education environment and identifies how technology-enhanced instructional practices can increase their active participation in the classroom. The classroom-based intervention study was conducted in a Master of Arts program in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) at a research university in the Western U.S. The participants were 56 students in this TESOL program. The three types of technology (Padlet, Plickers, and Poll Everywhere) were selected based on criteria including ease of implementation and positive influences on students' participation and learning in class. The data were collected through a pre- and post-survey and three weeks of classroom observation. The resulting qualitative observational and survey data revealed consequences of the technology enhancements in instruction in terms of changes in students' active participation in class, insights produced into critical cultural understandings, and relationships to learning outcomes.

scholarly journals On the Antitrust Treatment of Production Joint Ventures

1990 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 113-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl Shapiro ◽  
Robert D Willig
Keyword(s):  
Joint Ventures ◽  
Joint Venture ◽  
Joint Production ◽  
Antitrust Law ◽  
Enforcement Policy ◽  
Rival Firms ◽  
Legislative Changes ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. Congress is currently considering several bills to alter the antitrust treatment of collaborative production activities among rival firms. This paper sketches the tradeoffs involved in altering U.S. antitrust treatment of joint venture production activities among rival firms. This requires understanding the nature, benefits, difficulties and dangers to competition of production joint ventures; identifying their degrees of prevalence in the U.S. and elsewhere; summarizing the current antitrust treatment of joint ventures; and analyzing the interactions between U.S. competitiveness and antitrust treatment of production joint ventures. We discuss these topics below, after which we assess some proposed alterations to the antitrust treatment of production joint ventures. We conclude that current antitrust law and enforcement policy with regard to production joint ventures are working quite well and hardly can be considered a hindrance to innovation or “competitiveness.” We support some modest changes in antitrust law that may serve to encourage pro-competitive joint production ventures, but we do not endorse the more sweeping legislative changes by Jorde and Teece in this issue.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document