Suchergebnisse

La aplicación de los Sistemas de Información Geográfica (SIG) junto a la Economía Ambiental pueden ser de utilidad para la toma de decisiones en temas de planificación, ordenamiento y gestión territorial. Se toma como caso de estudio el Fundo el Carmen, comuna de Quilpué, con el objetivo de elaborar escenarios territoriales basados en los SIG que faciliten la toma de decisiones en la actual modificación del Plan Regulador Intercomunal de la región de Valparaíso, lugar en donde se encuentra inserto el Fundo. Los SIG son una plataforma tecnológica de información monitoreable y dinámica, que permite la simulación de escenarios futuros, lo cual facilita la toma de decisiones para la planificación, ordenami ento y gestión integral del territorio.

Sur le littoral languedocien la croissance démographique, entre 1999 et 2006 (INSEE, 2006), est plus forte que partout ailleurs en France. Cela se traduit par une urbanisation rapide et mal maîtrisée de la plaine littorale, aux dépens des terres dont le potentiel agronomique est généralement le plus riche. Préoccupée par le phénomène, et pour mieux comprendre les dynamiques de consommation de terres agricoles par les surfaces artificialisées, la Direction Régionale de l'Alimentation de l'Agriculture et de la Forêt Languedoc-Roussillon a commandité une étude méthodologique auprès de l'UMR TETIS (Cemagref) et de l'UMR LISAH (INRA). Pour quantifier les évolutions en surfaces et en qualité des terres agricoles, une méthodologie de construction d'un système d'indicateurs spatialisés et spatiaux est en cours d'élaboration. L'appropriation des indicateurs par les utilisateurs est le gage de leur utilisation. Les travaux se sont donc appuyés sur une démarche participative itérative pour la co-construction et la coévaluation des indicateurs par les acteurs de terrain. La communication a pour objectif de présenter et discuter cette démarche et les méthodes retenues pour la production d'indicateurs. Plus généralement, il s'agit d'une contribution à l'analyse de l'apport de la concertation dans les démarches d'élaboration d'instruments de mesure et d'aide à la décision.

Cette thèse propose une analyse des projets intégrant conservation de la faune sauvage et développement en Afrique centrale, dans la mouvance des approches participatives qui se sont développés à partir des années 1980 au sein de projets de coopération multilatérale. Nous mettons en évidence la représentation des espaces à enjeux de conservation qui domine très nettement le paysage de la conservation intégrée. Cette représentation est produite sur la base d'une opposition de type centre/périphérie entre les espaces naturels à conserver et les aires de production attenantes. Elle génère des modèles de développement et de gouvernance locaux stéréotypes, ainsi que des approches de zonage en profond décalage avec les pratiques locales, notamment en termes de gestion foncière. C'est également cette représentation territoriale centripète qui est à l'origine de rapports de force et de conflits récurrents dans la gestion des aires protégées. Ces jeux de pouvoir s'érigent en obstacle à la participation active des communautés locales aux actions de conservation. Nous illustrons notre propos à partir d'une lecture critique de la rhétorique qui s'est construite autour des paradigmes du Développement Durable appliqués à la conservation de la biodiversité et sur la base de l'expérience de plusieurs projets de terrain mis en oeuvre en Afrique centrale. Nous nous appuyons particulièrement sur l'étude de cas du parc national de Zakouma (Tchad) et sur son dispositif d'aménagement du territoire, caractéristique des pratiques conservationnistes en Afrique centrale.

In dem Beitrag werden die Möglichkeiten und Erkenntnisgewinne einer transdisziplinären Verschränkung der analytischen Kategorien "Raum" und "Diskurs", insbesondere für die kulturwissenschaftliche Stadt- und Öffentlichkeitsforschung, ausgelotet. Ausgangspunkt dafür ist eine gemeinsame Forschungserfahrung der Autorinnen, die interdisziplinäre Ethnografie politischer Raumaneignungen in Mexiko-Stadt, bei der sich die jeweiligen Spezialisierungen (ethnografische Raumforschung bei WILDNER, semiotische Diskursanalyse bei HUFFSCHMID) kreuzten. Diese "Kreuzung" wird hier zunächst in ihren konzeptionellen Prämissen nachvollzogen und anschließend nach Lerneffekten für die analytische Praxis befragt. Ausgangspunkt dafür ist die Annahme der gegenseitigen Durchdrungenheit von Räumlichkeit und Diskursivität: kein Raum (im Sinne von LEFEBVRE) kann ohne seine diskursive Konfiguration gedacht werden, Diskurs (im Sinne FOUCAULTs) wiederum ereignet sich nicht im "luftleeren", sondern in einem sowohl materiell wie auch sozial konstruierten Raum.
Diskutiert werden die methodischen Ansätze der Beobachtung, Lektüre, Beschreibung und Analyse räumlicher wie diskursiver Praktiken und Materialitäten. Anhand des Fallbeispiels der Wahlkampfveranstaltung wird schließlich nach den Schnittstellen und möglichen Verschränkungen zwischen Raum- und Diskursforschung gefragt, die an den Begriffen Setting/Bühne/Inszenierung, Einschreibungen, Kontrolle/Macht expliziert werden.

For many years now, the five Arctic Coastal states have conducted bathymetric and geologic work in the Arctic Ocean region toward what some observers have –-alarmingly but falsely -- called a competitive "land grab:" the extension of national sovereignty outside the 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone. A process for claiming these huge subsea lands was established by Article 76 of the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). In the Arctic, making those claims requires nations to determine where the continental shelves of Eurasia and North America end deep in the Arctic Ocean, and to provide scientific evidence of whether certain features – the famous Lomonosov Ridge comes to mind – are an extension of Greenland, Russia, or both.U.S. claims can be made outside the Arctic Ocean, too – any place the continental shelf slopes seaward gently enough to extend more than 200 miles from shore. But the Arctic is where claims have required the most expensive science and will have the greatest impact on the size of U.S. territory. Here's a bit of a primer – from someone involved in Law of the Sea, research, Arctic policy, and business issues over the last few decades – about what's at stake. My disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, but the opportunity of new Territory on the scale of other giant acquisitions (not quite the Louisiana Purchase, but big nevertheless) has had me pushing for the U.S. to prepare a claim for new lands in the Arctic, both as a citizen and as a sometime government official. Given a long stalemate over UNCLOS ratification in the U.S. Senate, I –and many others – have been tantalized that the U.S. might be able to make this claim even without ratifying and acceding to the UNCLOS treaty.What's at stake?At stake in this mapping effort is many square miles of submerged land, and control of undersea territories and resources for economic use, or if the claiming country sees fit, for preservation in its natural state. In America, as Chair of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission from 2006-2010, I told Congress that a land area "twice the size of California" could be available for a U.S. claim, offshore parts of our country where the continental slope is gentle and extends far offshore. Congress responded by funding the U.S. extended continental shelf research effort, coordinated by several agencies including the Department of State, the Department of the Interior's USGS seismic experts, and NOAA's bathymetric experts, initially about $80 million, and ultimately over $100 million.How did we go about determining the U.S. claim?The legal authorization in UNCLOS is complicated. After describing the science and bathymetry that country should use to set its limits, it says that a country should submit its proposed delimitation to a UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf for review and recommendations, and that "the limits of the shelf established by a coastal State on the basis of these recommendations shall be final and binding."For the U.S., an ad-hoc interagency committee oversaw the mapping effort. Our State Department has an official geographer. Dr. Larry Mayer, a former U.S. Arctic Research Commissioner, led the effort at the University of New Hampshire to generate the water-depth maps used to delineate our claim. The U.S. Coast Guard icebreaker Healy served as the primary platform for charting and seismic efforts in the Arctic, and our U.S. research team often cooperated with Canada for research of that country's Arctic claim along the U.S.-Canada maritime border. Russia, which may have been the earliest Arctic nation to submit a proposal to the Commission on Limits of the Continental Shelf, initially sought almost 45 percent of the Arctic Ocean floor. Our vessels may have done some fact-checking in the areas of Russia's claim close to our border, but if we had complaints, we didn't have standing at the UNCLOS forum to voice them (or even to submit our own claim.) Some observers suggested Russia's expansive claims near Alaska help, rather than hurt the U.S.: the more eligible continental shelf land Russia delineated near our maritime border coming north from Asia, the more land the U.S. could claim on our side of the border, even if the land was emanating from Asia.Can the U.S. extend its borders without ratifying and acceding to UNCLOS?The United States has not ratified UNCLOS, primarily because four decades of disagreement in the U.S. Senate has prevented it. It appears that the International Seabed Authority, an extra-sovereign regulating and taxing authority that shares revenues with all governments, is the source of many objections to the treaty. Politicians of all stripes have told me, however, that making a claim for extended continental shelf is in the U.S. national interest, so when there is a will, there may be a way – even without ratifying the treaty or submitting our claim to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. The Department of Defense, resource industry leaders, environmental NGO's have advocated the research and mapping process which brought us to this point.The U.S., for example, used to complain when nations extended their fishing limits out to 200 miles. When Congress extended the limits with passage of the Magnuson Act in 1976, and President Gerry Ford signed it, we did so unilaterally without ratifying the UNCLOS treaty, and other nations respected it and pulled their fishing boats until we licensed them. When President Ronald Reagan proclaimed the U.S. Extended Economic Zone in 1983, he cited international law – without specifically naming the treaty – as empowering him to do so. Those two actions may serve as precedent. Other nations, and some in our own country, may complain if our borders expand without review by the UN's Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, but since our maritime boundaries with Russia and Canada are fairly well established (Canada and the U.S. are still arguing about a 5000-square mile, pie-shaped parcel on our Beaufort Sea border, which is not an issue for the UN panel), a U.S. claim is solid until anyone with rights and standing will challenge it.As this happens, what should we do next?When you get a big piece of real estate, it is time to establish a strategy of what to do with it. As an Alaskan, I have seen the borders of my state change several times in my lifetime. Alaska, for example, was claimed by Russian conquest, without respect for aboriginal ownership by Alaska Native inhabitants. Russian colonists arrived in 1741. In 1867, when Secretary of State William Henry Seward negotiated the purchase from Russia, aboriginal tribes were not part of the negotiation either. Russian America was not to become an extension of Canada, then Great Britain's colony, as Russia was fighting Great Britain in Crimea. Once the U.S. acquired this territory, it took several decades for Congress to pass Organic Acts, allow Alaska settlers to elect a territorial legislature. Native rights were sidestepped again.Hard-won statehood in 1959 came with land transfers to the State of Alaska (103 million acres) and revenue sharing on most remaining federal lands (the rest of Alaska's 365 million acres). It was the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act in 1971 that returned 44 million acres to Alaska's indigenous inhabitants. The 1976 200-mile limit came with a law which brought the States of Alaska, Washington, and Oregon into management of Alaska's offshore fisheries. The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 also set new multiple management regimes up with Alaska Natives overseeing subsistence use of fish and game, and the State of Alaska, as large new federal enclaves -- parks, wild and scenic rivers, and refuges -- were established.Yeah, but what strategy should the United States use for our new offshore lands? If we claim it, what are we going to do with it?Here are some suggestions for Congress, which should immediately examine the ramifications of this action. Whatever they do, they should also hear from coastal residents as even activity 200-plus miles offshore can affect people's lives in coastal areas.1. The Exploration Strategy: Remember Thomas Jefferson launched the Lewis and Clark expedition after the 1803 Louisiana Purchase extended U.S. territory to the Pacific. We should do more of the same in the Arctic. It took a lot of Arctic research to draw up the map of our claim; it will take more to know about the biological and geological assets we've acquired. What's there? Bottom dwelling crab stocks? Critters low in the food chain challenged by ocean warming and acidification? Rare earth minerals? Hydrogen, pure or in hydrocarbon molecules in several forms? Shorter routes across the world for fiber optic cables? We need to know these things. 2. The Security Strategy: We don't need a fort on this new territory. But international law clearly gives a coastal state authority to manage its seabed, even for internationally authorized pipelines and undersea cables. We are likely to secure and police this territory with assets under the sea, icebreakers on the surface of the sea, and airplanes and satellites overhead. Two Congressional hearings this past month have pushed again for new U.S. polar icebreakers. New U.S. Arctic territory would include land in or near the Central Arctic where ten nations have signed on to the 2018 Central Arctic Fisheries Agreement. It was a US initiative with an initial fisheries moratorium in the Central Arctic Ocean, accompanied by commitments for monitoring and research. The Central Arctic agreement was perceived by some as an engraved Tiffany invitation to countries like China to establish a research presence in the region. U.S. extended continental shelf rights may allow our Coast Guard to "inspect" or police these research vessels if we limit their activity on the Ocean bottom. We also have a legally binding Arctic Science Agreement in place — and it can be hoped that any new U.S. Security Strategy following extended continental shelf claims does not block access to the Arctic Ocean bottom where international cooperation has produced much important knowledge on earth history, plate tectonics, even the origin of ocean bottom lands which led to this claim in the first place. Russia has, within its 200-mile EEZ, refused permission for important international ocean drilling programs, aimed not at finding oil but determining the history and structure of Planet earth.3. An Intertwined Economic and Environmental Strategy: An executive proclamation to get this undersea territory for the U.S. could be matched with executive orders to deny any economic use of this land. Joe Biden, and Barak Obama before him, did their best to eliminate all hydrocarbon exploration on federal lands Arctic offshore forever. (Those decisions are being challenged in court.) Many groups want to eliminate seabed mining, shipping, fishing in the Arctic Ocean — often with good motives, but all before we actually know what we are setting aside. I would argue for a moratorium on moratoriums. I'd urge the U.S. to do the exploration strategy first. Environmental protection will be in place from day one, as federal law now requires an environmental impact assessment before almost any major federal authorized action in U.S. territory.A second aspect of the economic/environmental strategy the US must consider is how and whether these lands are managed. We can assume the Department of the Interior would get a big new job, beyond the Outer Continental Shelf resources they manage at BOEM, the Bureau of Offshore Energy Management, or what NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service manages via regional management councils. Extended Continental Shelf doesn't cover all fisheries — but it may cover bottom dwelling creatures in the same way it covers minerals. As well, siting of energy import/export port facilities more than three miles offshore of every coastal state is assigned to the Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration (MARAD), but that authority is not currently active offshore of Alaska. For MARAD to permit these kind of facilities, the 1974 Deepwater Ports Act, as amended, requires an adjacent state to have a Coastal Zone Management Program in place, or in the process of being approved. A third aspect of the economic strategy the US needs to consider is revenue and royalty and tax policy. Interaction with the policies, if not the rules of the International Seabed Authority will be an issue even though the U.S. does not have a seat. Federal law authorizes revenue sharing from OCS leases offshore some states, but not offshore Alaska. That issue could rise again as Congress absorbs these new lands into a management structure. 4. The Democracy Strategy: When the U.S. joined the UN, it promised as other colonizing nations did, to work to provide self-determination to colonies and territories. Alaska Federation of Natives head Julie Kitka often reminds us of this promise, as did the late Alaska Independence Party head Joe Vogler. Alaskans often complain that democracy is not served when decision-making on important lands and waters of its state is made very far from home. Will an extended continental shelf claim by the U.S. change that? It could rekindle arguments about revenue sharing, local and traditional knowledge input in decision-making, shoreside connections for oil, gas, or hydrogen export facilities. The Central Arctic Fisheries Agreement does reach back to include indigenous participation and consultation. Time will tell what Congress does on this issue, too.Another question is whether this move will, ultimately, change the stalemate in the U.S. Senate on UNCLOS ratification. In the short-term, it will bring attention to the ratification issue once again, an issue President Biden championed during his Senate career. Another issue could also affect the political calculus: dissatisfaction with UNCLOS' International Seabed Authority is rising across the political spectrum, not just coming from conservatives. As new undersea mining projects are considered, some ENGO's are urging reform of that body –or even elimination of ISA, just as conservative opponents of UNCLOS have for decades.5. The International Strategy: The U.S. has argued that it abides by the rule of law in international affairs, and a move to claim land unilaterally will raise some eyebrows. Could this move encourage China's claims in the South China Sea, for example, that are of concern to the Philippines, Vietnam, and Japan? Could this move encourage greater cooperation on shipping in the Arctic, even though the claim only extends to the ocean floor, not the seas above it? As U.S. territorial lands move north, so does the U.S. border, and interaction with our neighbors will also likely increase – especially, for example, if one neighbor wants to mine for resources and another neighbor doesn't. What fora – if not UNCLOS, where the U.S. is not at the table – would be the crucible? The Arctic Council? An extension of the Central Arctic Fisheries Agreement? Let's see what the diplomats come up with.

For many years now, the five Arctic Coastal states have conducted bathymetric and geologic work in the Arctic Ocean region toward what some observers have –-alarmingly but falsely -- called a competitive "land grab:" the extension of national sovereignty outside the 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone. A process for claiming these huge subsea lands was established by Article 76 of the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). In the Arctic, making those claims requires nations to determine where the continental shelves of Eurasia and North America end deep in the Arctic Ocean, and to provide scientific evidence of whether certain features – the famous Lomonosov Ridge comes to mind – are an extension of Greenland, Russia, or both.U.S. claims can be made outside the Arctic Ocean, too – any place the continental shelf slopes seaward gently enough to extend more than 200 miles from shore. But the Arctic is where claims have required the most expensive science and will have the greatest impact on the size of U.S. territory. Here's a bit of a primer – from someone involved in Law of the Sea, research, Arctic policy, and business issues over the last few decades – about what's at stake. My disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, but the opportunity of new Territory on the scale of other giant acquisitions (not quite the Louisiana Purchase, but big nevertheless) has had me pushing for the U.S. to prepare a claim for new lands in the Arctic, both as a citizen and as a sometime government official. Given a long stalemate over UNCLOS ratification in the U.S. Senate, I –and many others – have been tantalized that the U.S. might be able to make this claim even without ratifying and acceding to the UNCLOS treaty.What's at stake?At stake in this mapping effort is many square miles of submerged land, and control of undersea territories and resources for economic use, or if the claiming country sees fit, for preservation in its natural state. In America, as Chair of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission from 2006-2010, I told Congress that a land area "twice the size of California" could be available for a U.S. claim, offshore parts of our country where the continental slope is gentle and extends far offshore. Congress responded by funding the U.S. extended continental shelf research effort, coordinated by several agencies including the Department of State, the Department of the Interior's USGS seismic experts, and NOAA's bathymetric experts, initially about $80 million, and ultimately over $100 million.How did we go about determining the U.S. claim?The legal authorization in UNCLOS is complicated. After describing the science and bathymetry that country should use to set its limits, it says that a country should submit its proposed delimitation to a UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf for review and recommendations, and that "the limits of the shelf established by a coastal State on the basis of these recommendations shall be final and binding."For the U.S., an ad-hoc interagency committee oversaw the mapping effort. Our State Department has an official geographer. Dr. Larry Mayer, a former U.S. Arctic Research Commissioner, led the effort at the University of New Hampshire to generate the water-depth maps used to delineate our claim. The U.S. Coast Guard icebreaker Healy served as the primary platform for charting and seismic efforts in the Arctic, and our U.S. research team often cooperated with Canada for research of that country's Arctic claim along the U.S.-Canada maritime border. Russia, which may have been the earliest Arctic nation to submit a proposal to the Commission on Limits of the Continental Shelf, initially sought almost 45 percent of the Arctic Ocean floor. Our vessels may have done some fact-checking in the areas of Russia's claim close to our border, but if we had complaints, we didn't have standing at the UNCLOS forum to voice them (or even to submit our own claim.) Some observers suggested Russia's expansive claims near Alaska help, rather than hurt the U.S.: the more eligible continental shelf land Russia delineated near our maritime border coming north from Asia, the more land the U.S. could claim on our side of the border, even if the land was emanating from Asia.Can the U.S. extend its borders without ratifying and acceding to UNCLOS?The United States has not ratified UNCLOS, primarily because four decades of disagreement in the U.S. Senate has prevented it. It appears that the International Seabed Authority, an extra-sovereign regulating and taxing authority that shares revenues with all governments, is the source of many objections to the treaty. Politicians of all stripes have told me, however, that making a claim for extended continental shelf is in the U.S. national interest, so when there is a will, there may be a way – even without ratifying the treaty or submitting our claim to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. The Department of Defense, resource industry leaders, environmental NGO's have advocated the research and mapping process which brought us to this point.The U.S., for example, used to complain when nations extended their fishing limits out to 200 miles. When Congress extended the limits with passage of the Magnuson Act in 1976, and President Gerry Ford signed it, we did so unilaterally without ratifying the UNCLOS treaty, and other nations respected it and pulled their fishing boats until we licensed them. When President Ronald Reagan proclaimed the U.S. Extended Economic Zone in 1983, he cited international law – without specifically naming the treaty – as empowering him to do so. Those two actions may serve as precedent. Other nations, and some in our own country, may complain if our borders expand without review by the UN's Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, but since our maritime boundaries with Russia and Canada are fairly well established (Canada and the U.S. are still arguing about a 5000-square mile, pie-shaped parcel on our Beaufort Sea border, which is not an issue for the UN panel), a U.S. claim is solid until anyone with rights and standing will challenge it.As this happens, what should we do next?When you get a big piece of real estate, it is time to establish a strategy of what to do with it. As an Alaskan, I have seen the borders of my state change several times in my lifetime. Alaska, for example, was claimed by Russian conquest, without respect for aboriginal ownership by Alaska Native inhabitants. Russian colonists arrived in 1741. In 1867, when Secretary of State William Henry Seward negotiated the purchase from Russia, aboriginal tribes were not part of the negotiation either. Russian America was not to become an extension of Canada, then Great Britain's colony, as Russia was fighting Great Britain in Crimea. Once the U.S. acquired this territory, it took several decades for Congress to pass Organic Acts, allow Alaska settlers to elect a territorial legislature. Native rights were sidestepped again.Hard-won statehood in 1959 came with land transfers to the State of Alaska (103 million acres) and revenue sharing on most remaining federal lands (the rest of Alaska's 365 million acres). It was the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act in 1971 that returned 44 million acres to Alaska's indigenous inhabitants. The 1976 200-mile limit came with a law which brought the States of Alaska, Washington, and Oregon into management of Alaska's offshore fisheries. The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 also set new multiple management regimes up with Alaska Natives overseeing subsistence use of fish and game, and the State of Alaska, as large new federal enclaves -- parks, wild and scenic rivers, and refuges -- were established.Yeah, but what strategy should the United States use for our new offshore lands? If we claim it, what are we going to do with it?Here are some suggestions for Congress, which should immediately examine the ramifications of this action. Whatever they do, they should also hear from coastal residents as even activity 200-plus miles offshore can affect people's lives in coastal areas.1. The Exploration Strategy: Remember Thomas Jefferson launched the Lewis and Clark expedition after the 1803 Louisiana Purchase extended U.S. territory to the Pacific. We should do more of the same in the Arctic. It took a lot of Arctic research to draw up the map of our claim; it will take more to know about the biological and geological assets we've acquired. What's there? Bottom dwelling crab stocks? Critters low in the food chain challenged by ocean warming and acidification? Rare earth minerals? Hydrogen, pure or in hydrocarbon molecules in several forms? Shorter routes across the world for fiber optic cables? We need to know these things. 2. The Security Strategy: We don't need a fort on this new territory. But international law clearly gives a coastal state authority to manage its seabed, even for internationally authorized pipelines and undersea cables. We are likely to secure and police this territory with assets under the sea, icebreakers on the surface of the sea, and airplanes and satellites overhead. Two Congressional hearings this past month have pushed again for new U.S. polar icebreakers. New U.S. Arctic territory would include land in or near the Central Arctic where ten nations have signed on to the 2018 Central Arctic Fisheries Agreement. It was a US initiative with an initial fisheries moratorium in the Central Arctic Ocean, accompanied by commitments for monitoring and research. The Central Arctic agreement was perceived by some as an engraved Tiffany invitation to countries like China to establish a research presence in the region. U.S. extended continental shelf rights may allow our Coast Guard to "inspect" or police these research vessels if we limit their activity on the Ocean bottom. We also have a legally binding Arctic Science Agreement in place — and it can be hoped that any new U.S. Security Strategy following extended continental shelf claims does not block access to the Arctic Ocean bottom where international cooperation has produced much important knowledge on earth history, plate tectonics, even the origin of ocean bottom lands which led to this claim in the first place. Russia has, within its 200-mile EEZ, refused permission for important international ocean drilling programs, aimed not at finding oil but determining the history and structure of Planet earth.3. An Intertwined Economic and Environmental Strategy: An executive proclamation to get this undersea territory for the U.S. could be matched with executive orders to deny any economic use of this land. Joe Biden, and Barak Obama before him, did their best to eliminate all hydrocarbon exploration on federal lands Arctic offshore forever. (Those decisions are being challenged in court.) Many groups want to eliminate seabed mining, shipping, fishing in the Arctic Ocean — often with good motives, but all before we actually know what we are setting aside. I would argue for a moratorium on moratoriums. I'd urge the U.S. to do the exploration strategy first. Environmental protection will be in place from day one, as federal law now requires an environmental impact assessment before almost any major federal authorized action in U.S. territory.A second aspect of the economic/environmental strategy the US must consider is how and whether these lands are managed. We can assume the Department of the Interior would get a big new job, beyond the Outer Continental Shelf resources they manage at BOEM, the Bureau of Offshore Energy Management, or what NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service manages via regional management councils. Extended Continental Shelf doesn't cover all fisheries — but it may cover bottom dwelling creatures in the same way it covers minerals. As well, siting of energy import/export port facilities more than three miles offshore of every coastal state is assigned to the Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration (MARAD), but that authority is not currently active offshore of Alaska. For MARAD to permit these kind of facilities, the 1974 Deepwater Ports Act, as amended, requires an adjacent state to have a Coastal Zone Management Program in place, or in the process of being approved. A third aspect of the economic strategy the US needs to consider is revenue and royalty and tax policy. Interaction with the policies, if not the rules of the International Seabed Authority will be an issue even though the U.S. does not have a seat. Federal law authorizes revenue sharing from OCS leases offshore some states, but not offshore Alaska. That issue could rise again as Congress absorbs these new lands into a management structure. 4. The Democracy Strategy: When the U.S. joined the UN, it promised as other colonizing nations did, to work to provide self-determination to colonies and territories. Alaska Federation of Natives head Julie Kitka often reminds us of this promise, as did the late Alaska Independence Party head Joe Vogler. Alaskans often complain that democracy is not served when decision-making on important lands and waters of its state is made very far from home. Will an extended continental shelf claim by the U.S. change that? It could rekindle arguments about revenue sharing, local and traditional knowledge input in decision-making, shoreside connections for oil, gas, or hydrogen export facilities. The Central Arctic Fisheries Agreement does reach back to include indigenous participation and consultation. Time will tell what Congress does on this issue, too.Another question is whether this move will, ultimately, change the stalemate in the U.S. Senate on UNCLOS ratification. In the short-term, it will bring attention to the ratification issue once again, an issue President Biden championed during his Senate career. Another issue could also affect the political calculus: dissatisfaction with UNCLOS' International Seabed Authority is rising across the political spectrum, not just coming from conservatives. As new undersea mining projects are considered, some ENGO's are urging reform of that body –or even elimination of ISA, just as conservative opponents of UNCLOS have for decades.5. The International Strategy: The U.S. has argued that it abides by the rule of law in international affairs, and a move to claim land unilaterally will raise some eyebrows. Could this move encourage China's claims in the South China Sea, for example, that are of concern to the Philippines, Vietnam, and Japan? Could this move encourage greater cooperation on shipping in the Arctic, even though the claim only extends to the ocean floor, not the seas above it? As U.S. territorial lands move north, so does the U.S. border, and interaction with our neighbors will also likely increase – especially, for example, if one neighbor wants to mine for resources and another neighbor doesn't. What fora – if not UNCLOS, where the U.S. is not at the table – would be the crucible? The Arctic Council? An extension of the Central Arctic Fisheries Agreement? Let's see what the diplomats come up with.

Without a doubt agriculture sector is vital part of modern Ukrainian economy. Agriculture is ranked 3rd largest contributor to the national GDP with approx. 17% in 2018 (compared to 14.4% in 2016) of total GDP, followed with industrial sector (26.3%) and services sector (59.3%). It should be noted that it is very promising field in terms of potential economic growth and both regional and international investment opportunities. Food products being a necessity in everyday life of every person. Food and processing industries are the large industries that are interconnected to agricultural cultivation. These industries have great potential to increase the value of agricultural products due to the added value, as not raw materials are sold but finished products that can be consumed in the domestic market and exported. Meanwhile the global process of urbanization and changes in national politics, have had their impact on Ukrainian economy. The number of urban populations is continuing to increase, while great number of work force is migrating to neighboring countries. Several studies state that number of Ukrainian workers living aboard is around 2.5 million people. In this context we plan to investigate and build general forecast model on how urbanization is impacting agricultural land use and certain factors of its impact on economic development of region. On the other hand, we have examples of modern issues, such as climate change caused by rapid urbanization and the irrational use of natural resources. The study showed that urban development requires substantial land rescue for its expansion. By examining closely spatial data of urban and suburban areas, for example that of Kyiv city, agricultural land in suburban areas is used for new construction sites and infrastructural development. Another indirect effect of urban development is ecological changes to the surrounding areas. The affected areas become much less suitable for agricultural uses, require large financial investment and high technologies to renew the soil fertility.Research work that have been conducted in this area focused mostly on financial resources, international politics, and large agricultural holdings of agricultural land use. A lot of work has been done to highlight importance of advocating open land market in Ukraine. While other researchers in their research analyzed specific crop or certain agricultural industry markets. In general, the focus of previous publications was either on the current agricultural export or land use data in Ukraine. The goal of this research paper is to find, establish connections between urbanization and agricultural land use, while focusing attention on possibilities for economic growth and development of effective land use policies. This paper will consider open land market as future possibility; however, it is relations and impact with urbanization falls outside of current research work scope.With this research we plan to describe the connection between rapid urbanization process and changes in agricultural land use from economical perspective. The author focuses his research work and economical modeling on case Ukraine. We plan to showcase changes of agricultural enterprise income, in case of population migration to large urban centers. Additionally, we will study the cases of effective land resource management, where we will study whether it is more profitable for companies to establish the new enterprise closer or inside urban areas as opposed to farmland regions. In this research we plan to highlight the major economical differences of company's startup and operations costs based on available transportation network, land resources and local agricultural specialization. The research work should introduce possible outcomes for small, medium companies, also separating those that are part of international corporate structure and local business. The research will cover whether local company can benefit from urbanization and what are its effects on individual famers earnings. One of the expected research outcomes is to describe how to increase added value of agricultural products with focus on city markets.For this study we used data mining and analytics approaches. During research work we placed great emphasis on determining, locating, and analyzing statistical data from multiple sources. Important art of the research work is identifying right data in context of our research, the one that has clear connection to urbanization process. Spatial data visualization was used to determine key urban centers in Ukraine, as well as locations of agricultural, food and processing companies. Other types of material used are official notional statistics data, European Union public reports, U.S. Department of Commerce datasheets, Kyiv city council, Municipal Enterprise "Kyivgenplan", private companies report, economists' publications, and Public cadastral map of Ukraine. Mathematical framework was used to build robust forecast model. The methodology of the study employed various mathematical tools, such as statistical analytics, polynomial and linear approximations, mathematical correlation, ratio analysis. Besides profit and utility curves were used for growth modeling and global forecast. Spatial data have been outlined as highly effective for predictions modeling and establishing connections with the existing urbanization growth models. Urbanization processes serve as catalyst for land use change and shift in economic activities . As more population migrate to urban centers, remote villages and towns shrink in size, lose work force and often local enterprise become bankrupt or shut down. There is a consequent indirect effect of urbanization on agriculture land use that is when local community become poor or bankrupt, the farmlands are rented by large agricultural holdings. Many researchers noted that agricultural holdings have no interest in development of local communities or investment in local business. Even though they employ local people, the average income of holdings farm employees is much lesser, then those farmers whose lands are in private use or those working in agricultural sector in neighboring European Union countries. The average salary is important factor when looking at land use by large companies since agricultural holdings business goals centered about exporting raw resources and they are registered as business entities in offshore countries.The scope of current research works is limited to the analyses of medium to large size food and processing companies, that operate in local Ukrainian market, with brief overview of food products export business. To build economical model the existing transport infrastructure in Ukraine and its neighboring European countries was studied and used in system analyses. Author analyzed available human resources, amount of investments, industry type and available transportation connections. As a part of research work, physical geographical placement (distance by road) of food and processing production companies relative to closest and regional urban center positions have been outlined. A large array of economical and spatial data has been processed. It was determined that parts of this data have low correlation levels, which makes it difficult to include for modeling purposes. Author made decision to make the necessary edits, generalization to simplify the initial economical model.To build a research model we will make the following assumptions and data sets. Let us use the city of Kyiv as the main market for food products, i.e. it is the largest city in Ukraine, with a huge number of food products consumers and significant financial resources. We shall label it as an urban center for this research work. It is important to note that new companies and international corporations choose to establish their business in the Kyiv or in the 50-kilometer zone from it. For modeling we will choose 12 enterprises, which are located both in the capital and in different regions of Ukraine - west, south, east and center. We rank the selected enterprises by the number of employees.In the context of our economic modeling, consider the land market, namely: the average cost of rent of 1 hectare per year, the location of the enterprise in an industrial region or in a separate settlement. Note that the production capacity of the investigated enterprises is concentrated in one production site (complex). However, the exception is the corporation "Milk Alliance" which has 5 separate production facilities, we will focus on the largest of them, located in the city of Yagotyn (others are located in Peratyn, Zolotonosha, Bashtanka).It is reported that the total area of land plots in Ukraine is 60.4 million hectares, of which 42.4 million hectares are agricultural land (32 million hectares are cultivated per year), the area of built-up land plots is 2550.4 thousand hectares. Land for industrial purposes, which includes the food industry is 224.1 thousand hectares. The cost of annual lease of land in Ukraine for 2019 population 3518 UAH/hectare per year.At the same time, the statistics by region are as follows: Kyiv - 2694 UAH per year; Kyiv region - 3474 UAH per year; Zhytomyr and region – 4000 UAH per year; Mykolaiv Oblast – 4103 UAH per year; Kharkiv and oblast – 3152 UAH per year; Odessa region – 4065 UAH per year; Lviv region - 4172 UAH per year; Donetsk oblast - 1832 UAH per year. It is planned that in 2020 the total revenues to local budgets from land rent will amount to 185,714,285 UAH per year.To understand the general picture of the relationship and economic performance of enterprises located in Kyiv and different regions of Ukraine, we shall consider Kyiv as a self-sufficient object, both in terms of products sales and production. The largest food retailers have opened more than 575 stores in Kyiv as of 2018, and more than 60 new stores are opened each year. The production of food, beverages and tobacco by Kyiv enterprises is 46.6% of the total industrial production, which employs 1,730,000 people (7.4% of total in Kyiv), and the average wage in industry is from 16,511 UAH/month in 2019. In total, there are 9069 industrial enterprises in the capital, which employ 278,863 people, the volume of products sold by industrial enterprises of Kyiv in 2019 amounted to 892,1765,46.2 thousand UAH. At the same time, there are 7351 natural persons-entrepreneurs operating in the capital (11,877 people are employed, the volume of sold products is 5,622,011.9 thousand UAH) in industry, including the volume of products sold by food industry enterprises – 125,140,998.9 thousand UAH according to 2019 data.It should be noted that in Kyiv the main industrial capacities of food and processing enterprises are concentrated in the following areas: Industrial zone " Degtyarivska Street" covers an area of 17.7 hectares; Podilsko-Kurenivskyi industrial district - 539.5 hectares, Pirogovo industrial zone - 121.9 hectares; Voskresensky industrial district - 107.2 hectares.For economic analysis we focused on comparison of three large enterprises of Ukraine, typical for the agricultural sector and food industry, one of which is in Kyiv – "Astrata", "Sandora" and "Kyivhlib". For calculations of transportation costs let's use the following data, 20 to 22 tons van will charge 27 UAH per km outside of Kyiv, while 10 tons van charges 20 UAH per km outside of Kyiv and 250 UAH per km within Kyiv.The "Astrata" corpopration, a large agricultural enterprise, has 5,470 employees, 230,000 hectares of land (aprox. 1514090000 UAH per yar for land rent), with Net profit of 12,631,155,000, Gross profit of 2,432,488,000 UAH, and a total salary expenditure of UAH 427,597,000 (average per employee 6514 UAH per month). For our research we are using one of the sugar processing factories that is part of Astrata holding, it is in Hlobyne, Poltavska oblast. The distance from Hlobyne to Kyiv center is 287 km, so it will cost 7749 UAH per large van to transport products to Kyiv.One of the largest food manufacturers in Ukraine is "Sandora". It consists of 3230 employees, total salary expenses - 630 128 thousand UAH (average per employee 16,257 UAH per month), have a land area of 1.3646 hectares (aprox. 5600 UAH per yar for land rent) and a unit cost of production - 22.66 UAH per liter of apple. Single 10-ton van will charge 10020 UAH to transport products to Kyiv (501km distance to the city center).For Kyiv study we picked "Kyivhlib", which has 1911 employees, total salary expenses – 168,227 thousand UAH (average per employee 14,019 UAH per month), have a land area of 8 hectares (aprox. 21552 UAH per yar for land rent) and the unit cost of production - 14.9 UAH per kg of rye-wheat bread. It will cost 7500 UAH to transport products within 30 km of Kyiv center by 10-ton van. Distance from the production location to the market is not always proportional to net profit. The research results have proved that it is worth examining the data from the same sub-industries companies in several regions, with focus on large cities as main market for those companies' products. ; The paper is devoted to studying the economic and social connections between the urbanization process and agricultural land use in Ukraine. It is worth noting that both urbanization and agriculture require new lands for their future development. The important part of this connection is ecology and effective use of the available resources, as well as land use in the context of urbanization. After all, the process of urbanization can have a significant negative impact on the state of land resources. The research work determines which economic factors of urbanization are the most relevant to the land use in city suburbs and agricultural regions. The article introduces the notion of economic feasibility of land use by purpose and studies cases of food and processing companies. Food and processing industries were chosen as the main research subjects since they are the most promising fields for the future economic development of each individual region and country as a whole. These industries are centered around both import and export, besides producing added value products. Cities without a doubt are the main consumers of food products and at the same time, they drain labor resources from the countryside. In this research work, we studied the global situation in Ukraine, how 21-century urbanization has affected the agricultural sector in the country. This sector has experienced rapid growth in past decades, as opposed to industrial and manufacturing sectors, and increased the national wide level of land use. While the national wide level of urbanization might not be the highest in modern history (20th to 21st century), it continues to have a wide impact on the national economy. The scope of this impact falls outside of this research work as it consists of multidimensional data and a wide range of interdependencies, including policies and regulations. Research models require a large amount of data and cases, that's why we focused on the food and processing sector in this paper. They proved to be a good test ground to study the urbanization impact patterns as well as make economical modeling more convenient. In this context, the peculiarities of land use models were studied, as food and processing industries use land resources, can be located both inside the city, suburban area, or in remote farmland region. It is evident that cities and businesses form large supply and demand of natural resources, labor, and financial investments.

l'Italia è un territorio ricco di testimonianze e bellezze artistiche e archeologiche. Questa tesi va ad inserirsi in un'ottica di conservazione del nostro patrimonio culturale; in questa si vanno ad inserire anche le problematiche di carattere sismico del nostro costruito. In tale ambito di studio è stata focalizzata l'attenzione sulla Certosa di Pisa, un edificio monumentale che costituisce un patrimonio di inestimabile valore e incomparabile bellezza. Il complesso, nato nel 1366, nel corso della sua lunga vita ha visto avvicendarsi periodi fiorenti seguiti da periodi di decadenza, l'ultimo dei quali condusse al definitivo abbandono della Certosa nel 1969 da parte dei suoi monaci. Agli inizi del Novecento, la comunità certosina era ormai ridotta a poche unita e furono costretti a convivere con le istituzioni di passaggio. In questo periodo la Certosa infatti fu occupata dai militari come un ospedale per i prigionieri feriti. Nel 1972, gli ultimi due monaci lasciarono definitivamente la Certosa di Calci, che gradualmente si andò sempre più degradando, al punto che, per la sua sopravvivenza, si decise nel 1979 di destinare alcuni degli spazi dell'ala occidentale del monastero alla realizzazione del Museo di Storia Naturale e del Territorio, inaugurato nel 1986, affidandoli al dipartimento universitario pisano di Scienze della Terra. Questo momento risulta essere molto importante per il mantenimento dell'intero complesso monastico; rimangono però alcune aree attualmente chiuse al pubblico, fortemente degradate, che necessitano di urgente restauro, sia architettonico che strutturale. Si pongono cosi le basi per uno studio e analisi sul tema del recupero, restauro e riqualificazione del Bene, finalizzato a valutare le condizioni di conservazione e la vulnerabilità sismica evidenziando gli elementi di maggiore criticità e fornendo spunti per indagini più approfondite. Tra le aree maggiormente degradate è stata individuata la zona di ambito di studio: il chiostro delle foresterie; Il chiostro delle foresterie, anche detto granducale o del priore, ha avuto una forte trasformazione nel corso tempo. Nel 1384 venne costruito il piano terra del chiostro, andandosi ad inserire in un contesto già delineato e realizzato; La parte superiore fu costruita nel 1471; Nel 1606 cominciarono i lavori di ammodernamento anche nella parte orientale del monastero, con la costruzione della foresteria nuova e di una cisterna. Al piano terra venne realizzata una pilastratura a sostegno del percorso aereo del piano superiore. Questa conformazione, oltre a comportare una diversa organizzazione degli spazi monastici, comporta una nuova distribuzione degli sforzi. Nel 1614 fu eseguito il tamponamento del livello inferiore del chiostro. Nel 1769 sotto il suo priorato fu realizzata la foresteria granducale; per l'esecuzione della foresteria furono demoliti i muri che dividevano una sala ed una camera e costruire tre maschi murari per separare gli spazzi. Venne realizzata la "galleria dei quadri" e una piccola stanza attigua, la cappellina e il terrazzo coperto. Dopo questi lavori si instaurano nuove distribuzioni degli sforzi e un comportamento completamente diverso della fabbrica nei confronti di azioni esterne. Altro problema è stata la realizzazione del terrazzo coperto; essendo un vero e proprio ampliamento della fabbrica realizzato successivamente rispetto alle altre parti del monastero, funziona da "perno" che si oppone alla spinta della parete frontale delle foresterie. Presumibilmente potrebbero essere nati quindi dei cinematismi di rotazione o ribaltamento della facciata laterale che ha come vincolo l'intersezione tra la foresteria nobile e il terrazzo coperto; questo cinematismo potrebbe essere anche parte delle cause delle lesioni nella foresteria granducale localizzate in corrispondenza dell'ammorsamento dei maschi murari di separazione delle sale con la facciata laterale. È stata sviluppata l'analisi dello stato di fatto con la relativa caratterizzazione dei materiali Come strutture verticali sono state individuate le pareti portanti di spessore variabile dai 15 ai 90 cm. Sono presenti due diverse tipologie di muratura; muratura mista in pietre e mattoni e muratura in mattoni pieni; come strutture orizzontali sono presenti solai piani e diversi tipi di volte: volte a crociera, a botte, a padiglione e unghiate. È stato sviluppato anche un rilievo del degrado, il quale ha permesso di individuare le zone più alterate e degradate classificandole. Il Chiostro della Foresteria presenta un esteso degrado su gli elementi costituenti la struttura, sia che siano pareti intonacate, volte a crociera, o colonne in pietra serena. L'intonaco è in buona parte deteriorato con patine, distacchi e mancanze, fino a portare in luce la sottostante struttura. In alcuni casi il degrado è imputabile ad infiltrazioni d'acqua derivanti dalle coperture, mentre in altri punti è dovuto ad interventi di manutenzione realizzati con poca cura, oltre che ad un normale deperimento dei materiali. Il degrado degli ambienti interni, attigui al chiostro, è dovuto principalmente a problemi di umidità ed infiltrazioni di acqua dalle coperture, che stanno provocando evidenti danni sulle superfici affrescate e stuccate delle volte oltre che agire negativamente sulle strutture lignee, provocando marcescenza delle travi. Per tali motivi le zone maggiormente degradate risultano essere quelle prossime alle strutture di copertura. Il degrado si manifesta con macchie di umidità e nei casi più gravi con distacco di intonaco, con efflorescenze ed ossidazioni delle superfici in laterizio, con marcimento dei travicelli e travi. Risulta necessario operare urgenti ristrutturazioni delle coperture per scongiurare maggiori danni, che possono condurre alla perdita definitiva degli affreschi o ad oneri eccessivi per il loro restauro. Questo parte del rilievo, oltre a farci capire quali siano gli interventi più urgenti, ha permesso di individuare possibili meccanismi locali da analizzare. Le Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni consentono di eseguire per le costruzioni in muratura analisi statiche o dinamiche, lineari o non lineari. L'analisi ritenuta più opportuna per la caratterizzazione della risposta strutturale del complesso architettonico è l'Analisi Dinamica Modale con spettro di risposta. L'analisi dinamica modale dell'edificio è stata eseguita su modello tridimensionale ad elementi finiti ed è stata condotta con l'ausilio del software di calcolo SAP 2000 v.14. Nel modello sono stati distinti e modellati gli elementi costituenti la struttura portante dell'edificio: pareti, pilastri e colonne, orizzontamenti piani e voltati, strutture di copertura e fondazioni. Le pareti in muratura sono state schematizzate con elementi bidimensionali tipo "shell". La modellazione strutturale prevede di rappresentare solamente le porzioni di pareti aventi funzione strutturale, e cioè i maschi murari e le travi di accoppiamento. Gli elementi portanti verticali quali pilastri in mattoni e colonne in pietra sono stati modellati con elementi monodimensionali di tipo "frame", ad ognuno dei quali viene assegnata la sezione e il materiale costituente. Le volte presenti ad ogni piano nel fabbricato hanno geometria molto varia e talvolta complessa, per cui, date le finalità a cui è volta l'analisi, si è preferito fare ricorso alla trattazione delle volte equivalenti proposta da Lagomarsino; sono state rappresentate con elementi piani (shell) di rigidezza equivalente. Le coperture lignee sono state modellate schematizzando gli elementi portanti (travi e travicelli) mediante elementi "frame" di opportuna sezione disposti a rappresentare le orditure (doppie o triple) delle strutture portanti. Infine l'interfaccia terreno-struttura è stata modellata adottando una schematizzazione elastica del suolo alla Winkler con molle di adeguata rigidezza disposte nelle tre direzioni. Come azioni forzanti sono stati inseriti gli spettri di progetto dell'azione sismica in accelerazione orizzontale nelle due direzioni principali x e y. Gli effetti sulla struttura sono stati valutati combinando gli effetti dei primi 150 modi di vibrare con il metodo CQC. I risultati ottenuti dall'analisi dinamica modale mostrano che i primi due modi di vibrare mobilitano una quota rilevante di massa partecipante nelle direzioni x ed y, ed a questi modi sono associate delle forme modali flessionali. Ai modi successivi sono associate forme modali torsionali. Il raggiungimento del'85% di massa partecipante per entrambe le direzioni si ottiene oltre il 100° modo di vibrare. Gli studi svolti sulla struttura in termini di rilievo geometrico, rilievo strutturale ed analisi storico-critica, hanno permesso di acquisire una buona conoscenza del manufatto in esame; Tuttavia, la presenza in molti ambienti di affreschi di notevole pregio storico-artistico ha reso problematica l'esecuzione di saggi necessari a caratterizzare il materiale in opera ed ad identificare la qualità degli ammorsamenti tra pareti; per la natura esclusivamente geometrica delle informazioni in possesso, si dovrebbe rientrare nella classe LC1, tuttavia l'esecuzione di un qualsiasi intervento su una struttura di tale pregio storico, comporterà necessariamente una preventiva campagna di saggi, pertanto in quest'ottica si è scelto di eseguire un'analisi più complessa e porci in classe LC2, adottando il relativo fattore di confidenza pari a 1,20. Le verifiche agli Stati Limite Ultimi sono state effettuate sia in condizione statica che sismica. Le verifiche SLU in condizione statica per carichi gravitazionali ed in assenza di sisma sono state svolte riferendosi alle sollecitazioni derivate dalla combinazione fondamentale; le verifiche SLV (per TR = 712 anni) in condizione sismica sono state effettuate sottoponendo la struttura ad un sisma proveniente sia dalla direzione X che dalla direzione Y, facendo riferimento alle sollecitazioni ricavate dalle combinazioni sismiche. Le verifiche previste per gli Stati Limite Ultimi (sia statici che simici) sono: • pressoflessione nel piano della parete; • pressoflessione fuori piano; • taglio per azioni nel piano della parete (taglio-trazione diagonale e taglio-scorrimento orizzontale). Le verifiche agli SLU eseguite in condizione statica risultano in genere soddisfatte con eccezione di alcuni elementi. La verifica a pressoflessione nel piano può essere ritenuta adeguatamente soddisfatta ad ogni livello della struttura, con alcune singolarità in elementi di piccole dimensioni. Tali punti non sono da ritenersi critici per la sicurezza globale statica. Anche la verifica a pressoflessione fuori piano risulta adeguatamente soddisfatta tranne nei maschi murari che già non soddisfano le limitazioni di snellezza, e risultano quindi maggiormente vulnerabili all'instabilizzazione fuori piano. La verifica a taglio invece presenta un più alto numero di elementi che, in misura maggiore o minore, non verificano le condizioni di scorrimento. Le maggiori criticità si riscontrano nel fronte del chiostro, dove le aperture seriali riducono la sezione netta resistente, ed all'ultimo piano della struttura, dove si localizzano le azioni orizzontali più rilevanti. Le verifiche condotte ad SLV per sisma X e sisma Y mostrano una situazione più gravosa rispetto alla condizione statica. Riferendoci al caso di pressoflessione nel piano si nota che il piano terra e il primo piano riescono a soddisfare adeguatamente le verifiche imposte, in quanto le pareti sono soggette a tensioni normali di una certa entità e momenti sollecitanti non eccessivi. Maggiori problemi si riscontrano al secondo piano dove la combinazione di sforzo normale minore ed elevato momento flettente comporta il non soddisfacimento della verifica. La verifica di pressoflessione fuori piano condotta con il metodo semplificato suggerito da norma mostra in maniera evidente come i maggiori problemi di stabilità fuori piano siano attribuibili agli elementi con elevata snellezza. Inoltre non risultano verificate tutte le pareti dell'ultimo piano poiché, trovandosi a quota elevata rispetto al piano delle fondazioni, su queste agiscono forze sismiche rilevanti. Tuttavia la situazione più critica si instaura nella verifica a taglio delle pareti: la quasi totalità dei maschi murari non riesce a soddisfare le condizioni di scorrimento imposte da norma, sia nel caso di azione sismica proveniente dalla direzione X che dalla direzione Y, denotando una sostanziale inadeguatezza dell'intero complesso ad assorbire le azioni orizzontali generate da un terremoto tipo con periodo di ritorno pari a 712 anni. Le verifiche sui solai piani sono state condotte separatamente rispetto al modello tridimensionale della struttura, facendo ricorso a schemi statici bidimensionali rappresentativi della situazione in esame. Le misure fatte per i solai del lato frontale sono state estese anche per gli altri (attualmente inaccessibili). Sono stati ipotizzati quindi travicelli di dimensione pari a 6x8 cm con interasse di 30 cm, sorretti dalle travi principali di dimensione 20x27cm. Per il travicello è stato adottato uno schema di trave semplicemente appoggiata con carico distribuito, mentre la trave principale è stata schematizzata come trave semplicemente appoggiata con carichi concentrati in corrispondenza dell'appoggio dei travicelli. Per questi schemi sono state effettuate la verifica a flessione deviata, la verifica a taglio e la verifica a deformazione. Le seguenti verifiche risultano generalmente soddisfatte; I travicelli costituenti l'orditura secondaria risultano ovunque verificati, sia in termini di resistenza che di deformabilità. Anche le travi principali soddisfano i requisiti di sicurezza. Tuttavia è da far presente che le verifiche sono state condotte riferendosi alle sezioni degli elementi rilevati in opera supposte interamente reagenti, cioè in condizioni di buono stato di conservazione. Alcuni elementi lignei mostrano un elevato stato di marcescenza a causa delle continue infiltrazioni d'acqua, per cui la sezione resistente dell'elemento risulta notevolmente ridotta. Per questi elementi in avanzato stato di degrado le verifiche condotte non possono essere considerate rappresentative dello stato di fatto. Nelle costruzioni esistenti in muratura il collasso è determinato, più che dalla resistenza ultima della muratura, dalla carenza dei vincoli, da difetti costruttivi, dalla presenza di discontinuità non sempre visibili. Da qui la necessità di affiancare all'analisi sismica globale realizzata con l'ausilio dei software di calcolo, un analisi locale dei possibili meccanismi di collasso. Dall'esame del quadro fessurativo è stato possibile riconoscere meccanismi di ribaltamento composto della facciata; sulle pareti di controvento si individuano lesioni diagonali, con origine in prossimità del fronte e terminanti in corrispondenza delle porte. In corrispondenza delle intersezioni murarie sono presenti lesioni verticali. Il calcolo viene effettuato assumendo lo schema di corpo rigido, e confrontando il valore del momento stabilizzante, dovuto all'azione dei carichi verticali ed alle reazioni esercitate in corrispondenza dei ritegni orizzontali con quello ribaltante dovuto alle azioni orizzontali. Il valore dell'accelerazione orizzontale che porta all'attivazione del meccanismo è di 0.120g, contro un valore di riferimento della PGA (valutata per SLV con TR= 712 anni) di 0.138g. In queste condizioni è quindi possibile l'attivazione di questo meccanismo. L'analisi dello stato di fatto ed i risultati ottenuti dalle verifiche sul fabbricato hanno evidenziato alcune problematiche; saranno quindi indispensabili studi più approfonditi sui materiali degli elementi portanti e sulle loro proprietà meccaniche; si necessita inoltre si indagini inerenti ad una precisa definizione dei carichi gravanti sulla struttura. Lo stato di degrado in cui versa il complesso generato da uno stato di incuria è evidente; Sono presenti infiltrazioni d'acqua in vari punti della struttura; sono pertanto di primaria urgenza provvedimenti volti a consolidare le coperture al fine di non protrarre oltre le perdite subite; in alcune zone infatti sono già in atto i lavori. Dalle analisi svolte seguendo sia un approccio globale, che locale sono emersi elementi di vulnerabilità della struttura; problematiche sono riscontrabili in tutta l'area analizzata; ai piani superiori, dove gli elementi sono soggetti a ridotte compressioni ed elevati momenti flettenti, i maschi risultano eccessivamente snelli e suscettibili ai fenomeni di instabilità fuori piano. Il comportamento nei confronti dell'azione tagliante, in particolar modo nella condizione sismica, risulta abbastanza critico per l'intera struttura. D'altronde questo risultato era prevedibile, essendo questa la maggiore problematica che affligge gli edifici storici in muratura. In relazione alle questioni riscontrate risulta evidente come sia necessario effettuare degli interventi sulle fabbriche al fine di garantirne una migliore risposta strutturale. Un intervento su un edificio tutelato può risultare molto complesso da svolgersi: deve infatti essere in grado di conciliare le esigenze di conservazione con quelle di sicurezza, evitando l'esecuzione di opere invasive; Saranno quindi preferibili interventi di tipo locale che conducano al soddisfacimento dei requisiti richiesti per le azioni simiche.

Máster Universitario en Ingeniería Industrial ; El proyecto surge por el propio interés propio del alumno en todo lo que rodea a las energías renovables y tiene como objetivo estudiar la implantación de una central hidroeléctrica reversible en una localización concreta. El Plan de Energías Renovables 2011-2020 establece que para este último año el 20% de la energía consumida en España debe proceder de una fuente renovable. Esta es la motivación principal, el reto de que en diferentes partes de España la implantación de fuentes de energía renovables ha sido desigual, y mediante la construcción en zonas aisladas de centrales hidroeléctricas reversibles se puede ayudar a la aparición de otras o mejorar su rentabilidad, como la éolica o la fotovoltaico cuyo funcionamiento depende de la aleatoriedad del entorno, ya que mediante el bombeo se puede almacenar la energía que las otras produzcan cuando no sea necesario, y turbinar durante los momentos de demanda más alta. La primera parte del proyecto por tanto abarca la justificación del proyecto, las motivaciones, y la búsqueda de la ubicación para la central. Para esto último se realiza un análisis del mercado eléctrico en las diferentes islas del archipiélago Canario para así discernir sobre en cuál de las islas sería más necesario. Finalmente se ha decantado por la Isla de La Gomera debido a su escasa implantación de instalaciones renovables y que prácticamente el 100% de su electricidad consumida proviene de la central térmica El Palmar. Una vez decidida la isla, se busca la posibilidad de utilizar embalses ya existentes debido al ahorro que supondría. Finalmente se encuentra un embalse suficientemente grande para actuar como embalse o nivel inferior, el embalse de Almalahüigue de 900.000 m3 de capacidad, mientras que el embalse o nivel inferior será a construir con unas dimensiones de 60x50x10 y una capacidad de 30.000 m3. Esta localización permite un desnivel entre los dos embalses de 300 metros. Una vez elegida la ubicación se comienza con el diseño de la central propiamente dicho. El primer paso es seleccionar las tuberías y calcular las pérdidas de carga. Debido al elevado desnivel entre los dos embalses, que necesitaría de bombas muy grandes se decide separar la central en dos partes, la primera parte con 4 bombas en paralelo impulsando un caudal de 1000 m3/h cada una, y otra parte con otras cuatro bombas en serie separadas dos a dos. Esto permitirá instalar bombas más pequeñas y económicas. A su vez, con el objetivo de desligar las pérdidas de carga de una zona de la otra, se decide que la primera zona descargue en un pozo de bombeo, que habrá que dimensionar. Una vez establecidas las dimensiones de ambas zonas se calculan las pérdidas de carga para cada zona tanto para bombeo como para turbinación, y se puede establecer la altura efectiva de cada una de las turbomáquinas y proceder a la selección de las bombas y de las turbinas para la instalación, obteniendo de esta manera la potencia nominal de la central para cada uno de sus modos de funcionamiento, siendo estos 4,13 MW en bombeo y 2,82 MW en turbinación. Para hacer esto se procede a estudiar las diferentes ofertas del mercado buscando precios normales en los diferentes catálogos de las empresas del mercado. Los mismo se hace con las máquinas eléctricas y los transformadores, necesarios para el intercambio de energía entre la red y la central. Para finalizar la fase de diseño de la central se adjunto los diferentes planos que son necesarios para entender el funcionamiento de la instalación. Una vez realizado el diseño de la central se realiza la estimación del presupuesto y de la inversión inicial necesaria para su puesta en marcha. Para hacer esto se utiliza la ecuación LCC (Life Cost Cycle) que permite tener en cuenta los diferentes costes intrínsecos al ciclo de vida de un proyecto siendo estos, compra, instalación y puesta en marcha, obtención de energía, operación, mantenimiento, reparaciones, costes medioambientales y finalmente retirada. Además de los costes que van a ser tenidos en cuenta, es necesario establecer una longitud a la vida útil de la central, habiéndose escogido en este caso 50 años. Teniendo en cuenta estos costes y esta vida útil, el presupuesto de la central asciende a Dos millones trescientos doce mil ochocientos catorce Euros (2.312.814 €). Una vez realizado el diseño y estimado el presupuesto se procede a estudiar la viabilidad de la central. La viabilidad esta estudiada desde el punto de vista técnico, económico y medioambiental. La viabilidad técnica se justifica durante la parte del diseño, mediante el estudio de no cavitación y sobre el golpe de ariete. Para estudiar la viabilidad económica se utiliza la ecuación del VAN (Valor Actual Neto) que permite calcular el valor actual de los diferente flujos de caja futuros que se producirán a lo largo del proyecto. Mediante el cálculo del VAN se establece si el proyecto va a producir rentabilidad o no. Para hacer esto es necesario conocer el valor de la inversión inicial, que se calcula sumando los costes del presupuesto que se tienen que realizar antes de la puesta en marcha de la central. La inversión inicial asciende en este caso a un millón setecientos sesenta mil doscientos euros (1.761.200,0 €). Junto a la inversión inicial se debe calcular los beneficios que va a generar la central. Para hacer esto se discretiza el día en dos periodos de 7 horas, uno de bombeo y otro de turbinación. La central funcionará en modo turbinación durante las 7 horas del día que presenten un precio horario de compra de energía en MWh mayor, mientras que durante las 7 horas con un precio menor la central funcionará en modo bombeo. Para conocer los precios horarios de energía se recurre a los datos publicados del OMIE, calculándose el beneficio medio esperado para cada mes del año. Para estos valores de inversión inicial y de beneficios esperados para la compra-venta de electricidad se obtiene un VAN negativo. Esto quiere decir que el proyecto no va a ser suficientemente rentable para compensar una inversión inicial y unos costes demasiado elevados comparados con los beneficios que la central produce. A pesar de esto, para justificar la rentabilidad de la central hidroeléctrica es posible acogerse al Plan de Retribución Específico del Gobierno para las energías renovables. Concretamente es posible acogerse a recibir un término por unidad de potencia que compense la inversión inicial para instalaciones renovables de elevado coste. Así se lograría compensar los costes de la inversión y aumentar la rentabilidad de la central. Aún así, se pone de relevancia que una central hidroeléctrica reversible por sí sola no produce suficientes beneficios apoyándose simplemente en las diferencias de precio entre los picos y los valles de demanda energética, sino que el mayor punto fuerte de estas centrales es la posibilidad de almacenamiento de energía, que combinándolo con otras fuentes de energía renovables, permita disminuir la utilización de fuentes de energía contaminantes. Para terminar el proyecto se realiza un estudio sobre el impacto ambienta y la viabilidad desde el punto de vista medio ambiental. Debido al carácter natural de la isla y de la existencia de un Parque Nacional en el centro de la misma hace que el respeto del medio ambiente sea muy importante para la realización del proyecto, ya de que no hacerlo este puede ser rechazado o cancelado. Para ello se enumeran los posibles impactos o riesgos que pueden aparecer en una central de este tipo y se proponen actuaciones a seguir para minimizarlos. ; The project purpose arises from the interest of the student in everything related to renewable energy and is aimed to study the implementation of a reversible hydroelectric power plant at an specific location. The Renewable Energy Plan 2011-2020 states that 20% of the energy consumed in Spain must come from a renewable source. This is the main motivation, the challenge that in different parts of Spain the implementation of renewable energy sources has been uneven, and by building in isolated areas of reversible hydroelectric power plants can help the appearance of others or improve their profitability, such as wind mills or photovoltaic plants whose operation depends on the randomness of the environment as by pumping can store energy than other produce when not needed, and turbining during times of highest demand. The first part of the project includes the project justification, motivations, and the research for a location for the plant. To do this, an analysis of the electricity market is carried out in the different islands of the Canary archipelago in order to discern which of the islands would be most suitable for the project. It has been finally chosen the island of La Gomera due to its poor implementation of renewable energy installations and because of almost 100% of its electricity consumed comes from the thermal power station El Palmar. After chosing the island, it is necessary to look for the possibility of using existing reservoirs due to the savings that would result. Finally the large enough Almalahüigue reservoir is going to act as the lower level or reservoir with a capacity of 900,000 m3, while higher level will be built, with dimensions of 60x50x10 and a capacity of 30,000 m3. This location allows for a gap between the two reservoirs of 300 meters. Once the location is chosen it is time to begin with the design of the plant itself. The first step is to select the pipes and calculate the losses. Due to the large gap between the two reservoirs, which would have required very large pumps, it is decided to split the plant into two parts, the first part with 4 pumps in parallel to drive a flow of 1000 m3 / h each, and a second part with four other bombs serially spaced in pairs. This will let us install smaller and cheaper pumps. In turn, with the aim of reversing losses of a zone of the other, it is decided that the first zone unload in a pumping well, which will be dimensioned. the dimensions of both areas are stablished, the load losses for each zone and for both pumping or turbine stations are calculated, so we will be able to set the effective height of each of the turbomachinery and proceed to the selection of pumps and turbines for the plant, thereby obtaining the nominal power of the plant for each of its operating modes, these being 4.13 MWfor pumping and 2.82 MW for turbining. To do this we proceed to study the different offers on the market, looking normal prices in the catalogs of the companies in the market. The same is done with electric machines and all the necessary for the energy exchange between the network and the power plant. The different planes that are necessary to understand the operation of the facility are attached to complete the design phase of the plant. Once the design of the power plant is completed, it is time for the budget estimatation and the initial investment required for its implementation. To do this, the equation LCC (Life Cost Cycle) is used, which allows taking into account the different intrinsic costs the life cycle of a project being these, purchasing, installation and commissioning, energy production, operation, maintenance, repairs used, environmental costs and eventually withdrawn. In addition to the costs that will be taken into account, it is necessary to set a length to the life of the plant, having been chosen in this case 50 years. Given these costs and useful life, powet plant budget rises to two million three hundred and twelve thousand eight hundred and fourteen Euros (€ 2,312,814). Once the design and thebudget estimation are done, we proceed to study the feasibility of the plant. The feasibility is studied from the technical, economic and environmental point of view. The technical feasibility is justified during the design part, by studying no cavitation and water hammer. To study the economic viability , the equation NPV (net present value) is used for calculating the present value of future cash flows that will occur throughout the project used. By calculating the NPV it is set if the project will produce profits or not. To do this it is necessary to know the value of the initial investment, which is calculated by adding the costs of the budget that must be done before the commissioning of the plant. The initial investment in this case arises to one million seven hundred sixty thousand two hundred euros (€ 1,761,200.0). Along with the initial investment we must calculate the benefits that the plant will generate. To do this, the days are splitted up into two periods of seven hours, one for pumping and the other for turbining. The plant works in turbination mode while the 7 hours when the energy price for MWh is higher, while during the 7 hours with a lower price the plant works in pumping mode. For the diary energy pricing the OMIE published data is used to calculate the average profit expected for each month of the year. For these values of initial investment and expected benefits for the buying and selling of electricity a negative NPV is obtained. This means that the project will not be profitable enough with this high initial investment and excessively high costs compared to the benefits that the plant produces. Despite this, to justify the profitability of the hydroelectric plant may benefit from the specific Compensation Plan Government for renewable energy. Specifically it may qualify to receive an economic amount per power unit to offset the initial investment for high-cost renewable energy installations. This would ensure offset the investment costs and increase profitability of the plant. Still, it becomes important that a pumped-storage hydroelectricity alone does not produce enough benefits simply relying on price differences between the peaks and valleys of energy demand, but the greatest strength of these plants is the possibility of storage energy, which combined with other sources of renewable energy, allow to reduce the use of polluting energy sources. To complete the project a study on the feasibility and environmental degradation is done. Due to the natural character of the island and the existence of a National Park in the middle of it makes the respect for the environment a very important issue for the project, and not taking it into account can make this project be rejected or canceled. For this, the potential impacts or risks that may appear in a plant of this type and possible actions are proposed in order to minimize them.

In 1928, Utah Construction Company completed its first project outside of the United States with the 110 mile railroad for Southern Pacific of Mexico. Over the next 30 years, UCC continued to work on projects in Mexico including dams, roads, mining, and canals. The collection contains several booklets and correspondence along with approximately 500 photographs. ; 8.5 x 11 in. paper ; ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF ING. LUIS DE LA PEA PORTH'S SPEECH INAUGURA-TING THE NINTH NATIONAL CONVENTION OF THE ASSOCIATION OF MINING, ME-TALLURGICAL AND GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERS OF MEXICO. Preamble by the Press, as published in the Hermosillo Daily ""Imparcial"" De la Pea Porth Demands Unity of Endeavor and Unity of Resources for Mexican Mining. Taking the speaker's stand to expound his concept of the general pa-norama of mining in Mexico, the Deputy-Minister of ""Recursos Natura-les No Renovables', Luis de la Pea Porth, delivered a vibrant mes-sage to more than 1,600 delegates of different entities of Mexico, to whom he delineated the Mining Policy of the present Administration. The official from the Federal Government, demanded the participation of all parties in the difficult task of the resurgance of the mining-metallurgical industry of Mexico and cited concepts of great signifi-cance which are presented during his speech which is published com-pletely as follows: VERBAL TEXT OF ING. LUIS DE LA PEA PORTH'S INAUGURAL ADDRESS TO THE NINTH NATIONAL CONVENTION OF THE ""ASOCIACION DE INGENIEROS DE MINAS, METALURGISTAS Y-GEOLOGOS DE MEXICO"" October 25, 1971 - Hermosillo, Sonora Mr. Governor of the State of Sonora; Mr. President of the Board of Directors of the National Association of Mining, Metallurgical and Geological Engineers of Mexico; Honorable Members of the Presidium; Ladies and gentlemen. It is a great honor for me and one of the greatest satisfactions of my professional life to be present in this ceremony with the most ho-norable representation of Mr. Lic. Luis Echeverra, Constitutional President of the Mexican United States, as well as to transmit to you, on his behalf, a warm greeting and his best wishes for the suc- cess of this Ninth National Convention. Considering the foregoing and knowing that the Asociacin de Ingenie-ros de Minas, Metalurgistas y Gelogos de Mxico, to which I'm proud to belong, includes the majority of Mexican mining technicians and that one of their main objectives is to collaborate with the Govern-ment in the development of the mining activities of the country, I feel it is very appropriate to take advantage of this opportunity to present to you some of the main components of the present mining policy of the Mexican Government. An adequate mining policy, aside from purely technical and economic factors, must consider, very specially, social, cultural, political factors and in some cases aspects of national sovereignity. It is not acceptable, under any circumstance, to believe the thesis that the exploitation of mineral resources with which the Country has been endowed should be developed with exclusively economic objectives, no - 2 - matter how justifiable and apparently favorable they may be. It is indispensable, in our opinion, that this exploitation be developed in such a way that a maximum contribution be made toward the achieve- ment of the highest national objectives. Undoubtedly, one of the fundamental aspects of the mining policy of the Mexican Government during the last years, has been the so-called ""mexicanization of mining"". This process, consisting in the majority participation in Mexican mining enterprises by Mexican capital, be it state or private, is backed in the precepts of Article 27 of the 1917 Constitution, which clearly states that the exploitation and use of the mineral resources will only be able to be developed in the Coun-try, under the protection of concessions given by the Mexican state and that these concessions will be given only to Mexican citizens or Mexican enterprises. I consider it very important to clarify that ""mexicanization"" is not equivalent to nationalization, nor does it constitute in itself, a first step in this direction. On the contrary, we understand mexica-nization to be an alternative between a mining industry in Mexico controlled by foreign interests, separated from the economic life of the country, and a nationalized mining industry, separated from its natural markets and from its most accessible sources of capital and tecnology. Considered in this manner, mexicanization of mining may not be a so-lution thoretically ideal for the difficult dilemma with which we are faced, but we sincerely believe that, within the general frame-work of realities of our national circumstances, as well as interna-tional, it is the best practical solution that, at the moment, we can find for this dilemma. The basic objectives of mexicanization are: a) To ensure that the private interests of mining enterprises be kept, in all cases, subordinate to national interests; b) To achieve a true integration of mining activities with the e-conomic life of the country, and c) To avoid, as much as possible, and without resort to coercive measures, the exit of economic resources from the country, ge-nerated by the exploitation of our mineral resources. It is undoubtable that in the first stages of the mexicanization of mining enterprises that were already in operation, this process, which the President of the Republic himself has claimed a ""national conquest of great importance"", has been successful. Nevertheless, it is necessary to recognize also that, unfortunately, there still exist doubtful ""mexicanizations"" that only obey the let-ter of the Law but not its spirit. Also, facts and negative tenden-cies in mining are occuring which require corrective measures which will perfect and make more real and effective the mexicanization of mining. Among the negative aspects of the present disposition of Mexican mi-ning, we are particularly concerned about the following: 3 a) The insufficient investments presently being made both by the State as well as by private enterprise, in mining exploration and in the development of new mining ventures. b) The weakness of the small and medium mining entities, and the dan-gerous concentration of the national mining production by a small number of large companies. c) The vulnerability of the Mexican mining industry to international prices, to the extent that when prices are unfavorable they not only affect present production, but they have a large impact on future production and impede taking adequate advantage of periods of good prices. d) The abuse in the incorporation of enterprises that, with purely promotional or speculative ends, obtain mineral concessions over large surfaces of land. e) The existance of many inactive mining properties or on which only the minimum legal work is carried out, even though some of them are located in zones with no other natural resources, and in which. zones mining is vital for employment. f) The disequilibrium which exists between the degree of mexicaniza-tion achieved in the productive phase of mining and the scarse progress obtained in other phases, such as the commercial (market- ing) phase and with reference to the utilization of mineral pro-duction, and g) Finally, the precarious situation due to international factors be-yond our control, which affect mining in general, and which ef-fects we are just beginning to feel. The first phase of mexicanization, namely the mexicanization of enter-prises that were already in operation, was almost completed with the mexicanization of Cananea, which event was announced by the President of the Republic on August 27 of this year. With pride we can state that at the present, more than 98% of mining production in Mexico is generated by enterprises in which the majority of share capital is Mexican. Nevertheless, it is appropriate to note that the foregoing fact also implies a great challenge for the future. In other words, we can say that the simple phase, relatively certain and inexpensive to attain, of buying operating enterprises, has ended, and we now enter a much more difficult and expensive stage; namely, to create and organize new enterprises and new mining/metallurgical ventures. This is a phase that requires great technical and administrative know-how and in which there is no room for improvisations or lack of preparation. With reference to mining, the Mexican Government considers that the small, medium, and large enterprises are the parties who are responsa-ble for the principal tasks and work involved, but the Government is also conscious that its promoting function must be intensified by means of its direct participation in enterprises dedicated to the ex-ploration, exploitation, and refining of minerals, as well as to the transformation and marketing of mineral products. It is undoubtable. -4- in our opinion, that the association of the State with private enter-prise has already demonstrated to be a positive factor in the develop-ment of the Mexican mining industry, and that it can be much more so in the future. Another very important aspect of the mining policy of the Government is that which consists in achieving the maximum transformation or in-dustrialization economically possible of the mining products of the country. We consider that, except for some cases in which special circumstances have resulted in unfortunate and prejudicial consequen-ces, Mexico has had considerable success in its objective of reducing the exportation of its raw minerals or concentrates with a low degree of refining. To conciliate and stimulate, as much as possible, the development and the modernization of foundries, refineries and metal industries in Me-xico, is (and we are sure that it will continue to be) a fundamental tenet of the mining policy of the Mexican Government. Another of the basic aspects of the Mexican mining policy is the de-cisive support and encouragement of the existence and development of the small and medium mining enterprise, which has been emphatically ratified on numerous occasions by the President of the Republic him-self. ""We conceive the development of mining in Mexico"", the Presi-dent has said, ""basing it not only on large enterprises, but especially on thousands and thousands of small and medium size mining enterprises and producers"". In addition to the aspects of a social nature, which in themselves would suffice to justify this policy, we consider that there exist also in this respect solid justifications both technical and economic. The particular characteristics which are found in many of our mineral deposits; the low unit value of some of these minerals or great varia-tions in their prices, make their exploitation marginally attractive, or frankly uneconomic for large enterprises. We believe that Mexico, under no circumstances, can afford to waste or ""freeze"" for an indefi-nite period of time, resources that, even without large profits, can be exploited which permit the generation of productive employment to our fellow citizens. Whichever the state of development of a country, it is undoubtable, that one of its most important resources is constituted by the existence and availability of technical and administrative personnel well trained Therefore, another of the important aspects of the Mexican mining policy is to achieve the objective that in these activities, the services of Mexican personnel be used and developed at maximum levels in all fields of mining. Adapting to our case an old Chinese proverb, we could affirm that if we want to have mining for a few years, mexicanization of these mining enterprises actually existent is sufficient, but if we wish to achieve the development of a prosperous mining industry of unlimited duration, we will have to be able, with our own technical and administrative skills to discover new mineral deposits, to develop those which are being discovered, and to create and organize new enterprises and enti-ties to exploit them, new industries that use the minerals that are thusly obtained, and to establish marketing enterprises able to -5- place our mineral products In international markets. During the last few years, and as a result of the combined work of the Government, the Universities, and mining enterprises, the number of students that have enrolled and graduated in the field of Mining Engineering, Metallurgy and Geology in Mexico, has increased notably. It would be sad indeed if, due to conditions, which are undoubtedly of a transitory nature, the Mexican mining industry did not take advantage of the work developed to date and left without employment some of the technicians who egress from our universities. I consider it my duty to specifically mention this, problem, which may become a serious situa-tion next year and for the adequate solution of which I consider indis-pensable, the cooperation and good-will of all mining enterprises working in Mexico, and which will require the decisive intervention of the Asociacin de Ingenieros de Minas, Metalurgistas y Gelogos de Mxico. Another of the basic functions of the Mexican Government with regard to mining, is the colaboration and the publication of basic information such as topographic and geologic maps, statistics, economic studies, etc., and that, within these efforts, attention should be given to the study and the evaluation, not only of large mineral deposits, ame-nable to exploitation on a large scale, but also, particularly to the very numerous small deposits that, within our special circumstances, can give employment and economic independence to many Mexican citizens. Mexico should not, and must not, continue to be a country of great eco-nomic contrasts. The adequate distribution of wealth implies as a first step, a more homogeneous development of the different regions of the Country. Mining, one of whose special characteristics is that it cannot choose its location, as this is predetermined by the loca- tion of mineral deposits, can be an important factor in the develop-ment of zones which do not contain other resources; a great help to di-minish economic regional differences, which in some cases are so drastic and so unjust, similar to economic differences between the di-verse sectors of the population. Due to their nature, minerals are non-renewable resources; in other words, they tend to necessarily diminish. In some cases, and above all, when the mine exploiter lacks the necessary social conscience, and does nothing to aleviate and facilitate the transition when mi-neral reserves are exhausted, serious social problems develop that re-quire solutions, even though they may only be temporary solutions, based on operations subsidized by the State. These operations cause the inefficient use of available capital resources, employment and technology, without, in most cases, adequate solutions being found to the problem. It is also undoubtable that the safety in the workings of the mines and the metallurgic instalations are an important part of our mining policy. The life and health of our miners are factors to which top priority must be given. Honorable Mining Engineers, Metallurgists and Geologists of Mexico: When the directors of the Association invited the President of the -6- Republic to attend the Inauguration of your Ninth Convention, Lic. Echeverra emphasized that economic development always implies the combination of natural resources and human resources and that with regard to raining, Mexico is willing to continue making large invest-ments of patience and money to consolidate and perfect the mexicani-zation of mining in Mexico. It is certain that the ideas that I have taken the liberty to explain regarding the mining policy of the Mexican Government do not include all the various important aspects that one might consider within the scope of this topic. Nevertheless, gentlemen, the dialogue has been initiated on the highest level and it only remains for me to request that you continue it, always having as the fundamental objective, the benefit and the progress of our Country and of our profession. Thank you very much. Ing. Luis de la Pea Porth October 25, 1971 Translation FMGS/ebh

Biologically diverse ecosystems in countries served by the World Bank provide an array of valuable economic services. While the benefits of conserving ecosystems frequently outweigh the costs, conversion of these ecosystems to other uses occurs anyway, because many ecosystem benefits are of a public good nature, without markets that would reflect their real value. The objective of this paper was defined at a Concept review meeting held on December 2009 and is to increase the understanding on how biodiversity is incorporated in a development agency such as the World Bank Group (WBG) and how the WBG can enhance its role in biodiversity and ecosystems protection and management as a key ingredient to reach development sustainability. In order to define a reasonable strategy to prepare this paper, two approaches were used: the first was to carry out background and analytical studies, and the second was to consult with a wide range of stakeholders including Bank staff, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and indigenous groups. Biodiversity provides many instrumental benefits, from food and fuel to recreation. But even where biodiversity is not immediately instrumental, it represents global public goods that must be protected, if only for their potential value in the future. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) has been the mainstay of grants implemented by the Bank ($1.4 billion) for biodiversity conservation and management, but the Bank has itself committed $2 billion in loans and has leveraged $2.9 billion in co-financing.

In February 2014, the Russian army invaded Crimea from positions it had established within the region and annexed the Ukrainian peninsula. In the ten years that have passed since then, a beautiful tourist destination has turned into a war zone. The West's handwringing over the events in Crimea, accompanied by little action, told the Kremlin everything it needed to know. A look back at those ten years suggests how bellicosities initially confined to a small geographic area blew up to draw European and North American governments and budgets into a hot war with global ramifications. Background to DesolationCrimea's 1992 constitution affirmed it as part of Ukraine but gave the autonomous republic's state council sweeping powers, including the power to establish relations with other states. The neighboring city of Sevastopol enjoyed similar provisions. Crimea has historically been inhabited by about two and a half million people of various nationalities. The top three are Russians, Ukrainians, and Crimean Tatars, the indigenous people who, after the collapse of the USSR, began returning home from the countries to which Stalin had deported them during World War II.After the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the codifying of a new constitution, Crimeans went about their lives, paying little heed to politics writ large—until 2014. The peninsula was far from Kyiv, and political scandals rarely captured the attention of its inhabitants. Nevertheless, local political life flourished. One of the prominent players was Sergei Aksyonov, leader of the Russian Unity movement and party. In the 2010 elections to the Crimean parliament, Russian Unity garnered only 4 percent of the vote, suggesting it was not particularly popular among Crimeans, unlike Viktor Yanukovych's Party of Regions or Yulia Tymoshenko's bloc. The movement for a Russian Crimea was considered marginal and lacked broad support.However, the Euromaidan, or Revolution of Dignity, which began in the fall of 2013 and ended with President Yanukovych fleeing to Russia on or about February 24, 2014, upset Crimea's political equanimity. Anti-Maidan street demonstrations began, with some publicly calling for Russia to intervene and take Crimea under its wing. Such sentiments spread among Crimeans with unnatural speed. Soon, unmarked Russian military personnel, dubbed "little green men" because they had removed identifying insignia from their military garb, began appearing in the peninsula.The first stage of the takeover was easy because Russia had a military base in Sevastopol, and the public explanation for the arrival of new personnel in mass waves was "routine military exercises." The task of these early arrivals was to prepare Crimea for annexation. Referendum and AnnexationA much-disputed referendum took place in Crimea and Sevastopol in March 2014, barely a month after the Euromaidan ejected Yanukovych. With high voter turnout, the official tally was 95 percent in favor of Crimea integrating with Russia. The number was so high not only because many locals voted for it but also because there was no "against" option on the ballot. The referendum was organized in flagrant violation of the law: only two weeks elapsed between the announcement of the referendum and election day. Many polling stations were closed, and those that were open were guarded by armed men who prevented independent observers from entering.In the run-up to the referendum, the little green men took up key positions throughout the peninsula. They blocked access to Ukrainian military bases and, with the help of local "self-defense" units, suppressed public protests against the referendum and illegally imprisoned pro-Ukrainian activists. The annexation of Crimea was the first such episode in Europe since World War II and a sign of Russian president Vladimir Putin's intent to reshape global power relations.Despite the significance of the moment, Western officials chose restraint. No harsh sanctions were enacted against Russia, and business and diplomatic ties remained, for the most part, in place. The "stand aside" position of the West was perhaps best epitomized by then U.S. president Barack Obama's reticence on the subject: he made it clear that America was not going to intervene in a "local conflict" because the United States did not want a war with Russia. In Ukrainian activist circles, the phrase "deeply concerned" came to symbolize the toothlessness of world leaders.A restrained response to the invasion saved security in the European theater in the short term but severely damaged it in the long term.The First Year of the OccupationAfter the referendum, Russian security services moved quickly to subjugate the locals to their new Russian overlord and destroy institutions. After representatives of Ukrainian security agencies and military officers left the peninsula, Russian bureaucrats began arriving. Passport offices began accepting applications for Russian citizenship, notaries began reregistering real estate, and lawyers began integrating Russian laws. The Russian Unity party merged with United Russia, and on October 9, 2014, Sergei Aksyonov officially became the head of the Crimean Autonomous Republic within the Russian Federation.The FSB (Russian security service) was also active. The practice of conducting security checks in the streets became widespread: informal "self-defense" units, for example, could detain anyone who aroused their suspicion or failed to exhibit the expected ideological alignment with the occupiers. Those who openly demonstrated a pro-Ukrainian stance, supported the resistance movement, or wore Ukrainian symbols came under threat first. For example, in May 2014, the FSB arrested four Crimeans and accused them of creating a terrorist cell that allegedly planned explosions on the peninsula. Among them were filmmaker Oleg Sentsov and photographer Gennady Afanasyev. All four received long prison sentences, and only after five years returned to Ukraine in a prisoner exchange. Both testified that FSB officers had tortured them.Shortly after the annexation, pro-Russia protests began in Donetsk, Luhansk, and various cities in the Donbas region in Eastern Ukraine. Local residents, fueled by Russian political technologists and daily immersion in propaganda, wanted to secede from Ukraine and become autonomous or join Russia. The example of the unpunished and almost bloodless annexation of Crimea inspired those who harbored pro-Soviet sentiments and were dissatisfied with living conditions in a Ukraine struggling economically and trying to gel as a nation.At first, pro-Ukraine citizens tried to act against the separatists, but the situation quickly escalated. The security forces in Donetsk and Luhansk sided with the separatists. In the face of such pressure, civilian resistance faded, and military conflict took root. The same people who had helped organize and execute the annexation of Crimea then went on to organize the occupation of the Donbas. Among them were Igor Bezler, a member of Russia's Intelligence Service (GRU), and Igor Strelkov (Girkin), a former FSB officer. Events on the Mainland Hastened a Rupture. . .In that first year after annexation, Crimea was also buffeted by events on the mainland. With an eye to influencing the Russian leadership, Ukrainian activists and politicians created pressure in a variety of ways to prevent Russia from taking full possession of Crimea. In October 2014, for example, authorities cut off the water supply to the North Crimean Canal, which provided most of the peninsula's water needs. In late 2015, activists, most of whom had fled Crimea, implemented a months-long energy blockade of the peninsula, resulting in blackouts over the winter. The difficulties experienced by Crimeans as a result of activities directed from the mainland led to a rupture of ties between the mainland and the peninsula. Crimea began to be referred to as an island.As Did the OccupationAccording to social psychologists, two years of living under occupation is all it takes to change a person's way of thinking. Residents' habits, reactions, and interpretation of the situation they are in can change dramatically—if the new conditions represent a radical severance with the past.The Russian authorities have done everything possible to completely cut off Crimeans from their past as part of Ukraine, with a shared history and common government. Transport communication with the mainland was stopped. Russian products in supermarkets replaced Ukrainian products, and a Russian passport became mandatory for everyone who wanted to stay in Crimea. The Fate of the PeopleSince Russia annexed Crimea, from 54,000 to 200,000 people have left the peninsula, including more than 30,000 indigenous Crimean Tatars, who had rejected Russian interference from the very beginning. At the same time, about 700,000 Russian citizens have moved from Russia to the annexed territory, replacing some of the displaced local population. From 2014 to 2022, human rights activists recorded more than 5,000 human rights violations, most of them against Crimean Tatars.In February 2022, when Vladimir Putin declared his intention to invade Ukraine and set in motion the current horrific phase of war, it was Crimea that became a key location for the invasion. The military bases and infrastructure built over the years of occupation—one of its most important elements is the Kerch Bridge, the scene of heavy fighting—helped Russian forces invade from the south and hold positions. The occupation of southern and eastern Ukraine in 2022 was the most successful of all the Russian army's operations because through Crimea, Russia has been able to control positions both by land and by sea. Crimea has now become a full-fledged war zone and a high-interest target of Ukraine's military actions.Creeping Global EffectsDuring the ten years of occupation, the Russian government in Crimea has destroyed tens of thousands of economic, political, and personal ties between people, turning one of the most attractive destinations in the world into a front line of war. The international community's mistakes in 2014 have had unanticipated global effects. Crimea's annexation tragically underscored how the West's fear of an aggressive nuclear state ultimately helped create a catastrophe that has now killed hundreds of thousands of people on the European continent. The annexation of Crimea escalated into a protracted war in the Donbas, followed by a full-scale invasion of Ukraine and a genocide that no one knows how to stop.The opinions expressed in this article are those solely of the author and do not reflect the views of the Kennan Institute

In February 2014, the Russian army invaded Crimea from positions it had established within the region and annexed the Ukrainian peninsula. In the ten years that have passed since then, a beautiful tourist destination has turned into a war zone. The West's handwringing over the events in Crimea, accompanied by little action, told the Kremlin everything it needed to know. A look back at those ten years suggests how bellicosities initially confined to a small geographic area blew up to draw European and North American governments and budgets into a hot war with global ramifications. Background to DesolationCrimea's 1992 constitution affirmed it as part of Ukraine but gave the autonomous republic's state council sweeping powers, including the power to establish relations with other states. The neighboring city of Sevastopol enjoyed similar provisions. Crimea has historically been inhabited by about two and a half million people of various nationalities. The top three are Russians, Ukrainians, and Crimean Tatars, the indigenous people who, after the collapse of the USSR, began returning home from the countries to which Stalin had deported them during World War II.After the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the codifying of a new constitution, Crimeans went about their lives, paying little heed to politics writ large—until 2014. The peninsula was far from Kyiv, and political scandals rarely captured the attention of its inhabitants. Nevertheless, local political life flourished. One of the prominent players was Sergei Aksyonov, leader of the Russian Unity movement and party. In the 2010 elections to the Crimean parliament, Russian Unity garnered only 4 percent of the vote, suggesting it was not particularly popular among Crimeans, unlike Viktor Yanukovych's Party of Regions or Yulia Tymoshenko's bloc. The movement for a Russian Crimea was considered marginal and lacked broad support.However, the Euromaidan, or Revolution of Dignity, which began in the fall of 2013 and ended with President Yanukovych fleeing to Russia on or about February 24, 2014, upset Crimea's political equanimity. Anti-Maidan street demonstrations began, with some publicly calling for Russia to intervene and take Crimea under its wing. Such sentiments spread among Crimeans with unnatural speed. Soon, unmarked Russian military personnel, dubbed "little green men" because they had removed identifying insignia from their military garb, began appearing in the peninsula.The first stage of the takeover was easy because Russia had a military base in Sevastopol, and the public explanation for the arrival of new personnel in mass waves was "routine military exercises." The task of these early arrivals was to prepare Crimea for annexation. Referendum and AnnexationA much-disputed referendum took place in Crimea and Sevastopol in March 2014, barely a month after the Euromaidan ejected Yanukovych. With high voter turnout, the official tally was 95 percent in favor of Crimea integrating with Russia. The number was so high not only because many locals voted for it but also because there was no "against" option on the ballot. The referendum was organized in flagrant violation of the law: only two weeks elapsed between the announcement of the referendum and election day. Many polling stations were closed, and those that were open were guarded by armed men who prevented independent observers from entering.In the run-up to the referendum, the little green men took up key positions throughout the peninsula. They blocked access to Ukrainian military bases and, with the help of local "self-defense" units, suppressed public protests against the referendum and illegally imprisoned pro-Ukrainian activists. The annexation of Crimea was the first such episode in Europe since World War II and a sign of Russian president Vladimir Putin's intent to reshape global power relations.Despite the significance of the moment, Western officials chose restraint. No harsh sanctions were enacted against Russia, and business and diplomatic ties remained, for the most part, in place. The "stand aside" position of the West was perhaps best epitomized by then U.S. president Barack Obama's reticence on the subject: he made it clear that America was not going to intervene in a "local conflict" because the United States did not want a war with Russia. In Ukrainian activist circles, the phrase "deeply concerned" came to symbolize the toothlessness of world leaders.A restrained response to the invasion saved security in the European theater in the short term but severely damaged it in the long term.The First Year of the OccupationAfter the referendum, Russian security services moved quickly to subjugate the locals to their new Russian overlord and destroy institutions. After representatives of Ukrainian security agencies and military officers left the peninsula, Russian bureaucrats began arriving. Passport offices began accepting applications for Russian citizenship, notaries began reregistering real estate, and lawyers began integrating Russian laws. The Russian Unity party merged with United Russia, and on October 9, 2014, Sergei Aksyonov officially became the head of the Crimean Autonomous Republic within the Russian Federation.The FSB (Russian security service) was also active. The practice of conducting security checks in the streets became widespread: informal "self-defense" units, for example, could detain anyone who aroused their suspicion or failed to exhibit the expected ideological alignment with the occupiers. Those who openly demonstrated a pro-Ukrainian stance, supported the resistance movement, or wore Ukrainian symbols came under threat first. For example, in May 2014, the FSB arrested four Crimeans and accused them of creating a terrorist cell that allegedly planned explosions on the peninsula. Among them were filmmaker Oleg Sentsov and photographer Gennady Afanasyev. All four received long prison sentences, and only after five years returned to Ukraine in a prisoner exchange. Both testified that FSB officers had tortured them.Shortly after the annexation, pro-Russia protests began in Donetsk, Luhansk, and various cities in the Donbas region in Eastern Ukraine. Local residents, fueled by Russian political technologists and daily immersion in propaganda, wanted to secede from Ukraine and become autonomous or join Russia. The example of the unpunished and almost bloodless annexation of Crimea inspired those who harbored pro-Soviet sentiments and were dissatisfied with living conditions in a Ukraine struggling economically and trying to gel as a nation.At first, pro-Ukraine citizens tried to act against the separatists, but the situation quickly escalated. The security forces in Donetsk and Luhansk sided with the separatists. In the face of such pressure, civilian resistance faded, and military conflict took root. The same people who had helped organize and execute the annexation of Crimea then went on to organize the occupation of the Donbas. Among them were Igor Bezler, a member of Russia's Intelligence Service (GRU), and Igor Strelkov (Girkin), a former FSB officer. Events on the Mainland Hastened a Rupture. . .In that first year after annexation, Crimea was also buffeted by events on the mainland. With an eye to influencing the Russian leadership, Ukrainian activists and politicians created pressure in a variety of ways to prevent Russia from taking full possession of Crimea. In October 2014, for example, authorities cut off the water supply to the North Crimean Canal, which provided most of the peninsula's water needs. In late 2015, activists, most of whom had fled Crimea, implemented a months-long energy blockade of the peninsula, resulting in blackouts over the winter. The difficulties experienced by Crimeans as a result of activities directed from the mainland led to a rupture of ties between the mainland and the peninsula. Crimea began to be referred to as an island.As Did the OccupationAccording to social psychologists, two years of living under occupation is all it takes to change a person's way of thinking. Residents' habits, reactions, and interpretation of the situation they are in can change dramatically—if the new conditions represent a radical severance with the past.The Russian authorities have done everything possible to completely cut off Crimeans from their past as part of Ukraine, with a shared history and common government. Transport communication with the mainland was stopped. Russian products in supermarkets replaced Ukrainian products, and a Russian passport became mandatory for everyone who wanted to stay in Crimea. The Fate of the PeopleSince Russia annexed Crimea, from 54,000 to 200,000 people have left the peninsula, including more than 30,000 indigenous Crimean Tatars, who had rejected Russian interference from the very beginning. At the same time, about 700,000 Russian citizens have moved from Russia to the annexed territory, replacing some of the displaced local population. From 2014 to 2022, human rights activists recorded more than 5,000 human rights violations, most of them against Crimean Tatars.In February 2022, when Vladimir Putin declared his intention to invade Ukraine and set in motion the current horrific phase of war, it was Crimea that became a key location for the invasion. The military bases and infrastructure built over the years of occupation—one of its most important elements is the Kerch Bridge, the scene of heavy fighting—helped Russian forces invade from the south and hold positions. The occupation of southern and eastern Ukraine in 2022 was the most successful of all the Russian army's operations because through Crimea, Russia has been able to control positions both by land and by sea. Crimea has now become a full-fledged war zone and a high-interest target of Ukraine's military actions.Creeping Global EffectsDuring the ten years of occupation, the Russian government in Crimea has destroyed tens of thousands of economic, political, and personal ties between people, turning one of the most attractive destinations in the world into a front line of war. The international community's mistakes in 2014 have had unanticipated global effects. Crimea's annexation tragically underscored how the West's fear of an aggressive nuclear state ultimately helped create a catastrophe that has now killed hundreds of thousands of people on the European continent. The annexation of Crimea escalated into a protracted war in the Donbas, followed by a full-scale invasion of Ukraine and a genocide that no one knows how to stop.The opinions expressed in this article are those solely of the author and do not reflect the views of the Kennan Institute