Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Contents -- Tables -- Acknowledgments -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Features of Canadian Sanctuary Incidents, 1983-2003 -- 3 Advanced-Liberal Refugee Determination and Resettlement -- 4 Sanctuary as Sovereign Power -- 5 Sanctuary as Pastoral Power -- 6 Sanctuary and Law -- 7 Conclusion -- Postscript -- Appendix -- Notes -- Bibliography -- Index -- A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- Q -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W -- Y.

1907, 1909, 1911, issued in 2 vols., respectively: v. 1, Directory; v. 2, Postal service. 1913-19 issued in 1 vol. Directory. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Abstract
This paper discusses market power effects in ambient permit markets. We consider a dominant firm in a position to exert market power in several markets. A first conclusion is that the distortion observed on manipulated markets spreads to other markets. We find that the manipulated prices could be lower than their competitive level if the dominant firm acts as a monopolist, and higher if it acts as a monopsonist. We show that the efficient outcome is not reached, except if the number of firms is the same as the number of markets whatever the initial endowment of permits. If not, the efficient outcome can be reached by means of initial endowments.

Certainly, one month into the war, it is far too soon to draw far-flung conclusions about domestic outcomes for the Putin regime. The war is definitely not going according to plan, and early monitoring of elite dynamics suggests that some behind-the-scenes turmoil and minor cracks in the elite can indeed be discerned. But as of the time of writing, there appears to be no indication of immediate danger either to Putin's rule or to the regime as a whole.

[2], 99, [1] p. ; Annotation on Thomason copy: "by Mr. Hen: Parker". ; Reproduction of the original in the British Library.

Reuse of record except for individual research requires license from Congressional Information Service, Inc. ; CIS Microfiche Accession Numbers: CIS 79 H521-9 ; Microfiche. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Item 1020-A, 1020-B (microfiche). ; "Serial no. 90." ; Distributed to some depository libraries in microfiche. ; Includes bibliographical references. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Item 1020-A, 1020-B (microfiche). ; "Serial no. 90." ; Distributed to some depository libraries in microfiche. ; Includes bibliographical references. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Differentiation is a foundational premise in the study of middle powers, as evident in the way that the relevant literature distinguishes these states from the great powers and smaller states. Despite the underlying assumption of differentiation, the middle power literature has rarely engaged theoretically with the concept. This paper seeks to make more explicit this basis of differentiation in the study of middle powers, by advancing a new framework for middle power behavior that draws on differentiation theory. The framework makes the case that it is the differentiated structure in international politics – a departure from the dominant neorealist understanding of structure – that enables the behavior of middle powers. The effects of this differentiated structure are activated by the relative, relational, and social power politics that middle powers engage in, in a particular time and place. Through this process, middle powers are able to leverage their 'middlepowerness' in international politics by weakening stratification particularly where the great powers are concerned, and strengthening functional differentiation through taking on key and distinctive roles. By putting differentiation at the core of a framework for middle power behavior, the paper strives to make a constructive contribution to the theorizing of middle powers.