Suchergebnisse

The article examines the intent of the Japanese for their Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. It relies on documents that the Japanese government prepared in September 1942 which set forth prospective policy towards Thailand as a member of the Co-Prosperity Sphere. The proposals in these documents specified the political and diplomatic relations Japan expected to have with Thailand, and they were very specific regarding Japan's control over Thailand's economy as a part of the Co-Prosperity Sphere. The documents indicate that the Japanese were aiming at establishing a well-organized, well-regulated sphere as a unity under the direction of Japan. The organic nature that the Japanese envisioned for the Co-Prosperity Sphere was patterned on the same organic unity that they had applied to building and controlling their empire between 1895 and 1940.

In the wake of their rapid advance into Southeast Asia after 8 December 1941, the Japanese began to implement a new monetary policy in the region to replace the long-established Western financial order that was being swept away. The purpose of this article is to discuss aspects of this monetary policy, in particular how it was carried out in regards to Thailand during the first year of the war, the period during which Thai–Japan wartime relations became established. In the wake of their rapid advance into Southeast Asia after 8 December 1941, the Japanese began to implement a new monetary policy in the region to replace the long-established Western financial order that was being swept away. The purpose of this article is to discuss aspects of this monetary policy, in particular how it was carried out in regards to Thailand during the first year of the war, the period during which Thai-Japan wartime relations became established. With the outbreak of war the most urgent need of the Japanese in their relations with Thailand was to convert that country into a suitable rear area for their campaign in Malaya and for the one upcoming against Burma. To this end the Japanese and Thai governments signedon 8 December an agreement permitting Japanese forces to pass through Thai territory to attack Malaya; but equally important the agreement also stipulated that Thailand would afford the Japanese forces all necessary convenience for their passage through Thailand. This stipulation was the key that opened the way for the Japanese to pursue their plans towards Thailand. By passage, of course, the Japanese did not simply mean the travel of their army through Thai territory to attack Malaya and later Burma (although superficially this is what was implied).

Thailand's relations with Japan during the months surrounding the outbreak of the war in the Pacific are a topic of controversy in Thai historiography; and despite a growing number of studies which have endeavoured to explain, or at least shed light on, the rapid shift in Thai policy from neutrality on 8 December 1941 to an alliance and then declaration of war on the side of Japan by 25 January 1942, little progress or development in the debate has taken place over the decades since the war. This unsatisfactory situation has been largely due to the very limited knowledge available about the diplomatic activities that took place between Thailand and Japan during the period in question. The bulk of our information to date has come from records and recollections of Thais and Europeans involved in the events, and this has concentrated almost entirely on the activities and interplay of Thais and Europeans. The result has been to relegate Japan's presence in events of the period to some dimly perceived undertakings conducted by sinister characters who were nothing more than Thailand's enemies bent on absorbing that country into Japan's new East Asian order. The following article is an effort to redress this imbalance somewhat by directing attention toward Thai-Japanese relations. I have relied greatly on a number of dispatches that passed between Bangkok and Tokyo during the autumn of 1941. Some of the most important of these are available only from "Magic", the files of intercepted and deciphered Japanese diplomatic messages accumulated by the United States government. The Japanese Foreign Ministry archive files on diplomatic correspondence with Thailand are extremely incomplete, and none of the messages I used from "Magic" are contained in the Japanese files.

VTT Technology 93 ; This report is concerned with 5 case studies investigating the adoption of non-technical innovations in the retrofit of UK housing. The study was undertaken as part of the ApRemodel project, which investigated the retrofit of multi-occupancy buildings in the Finnish context. The aim of the study was to identify how UK organisations were addressing the finance and delivery of retrofit, considering non-technical issues such as assessment, process, finance and behavioural aspects of their projects to ensure effective delivery. The 5 case studies, selected from an initial 18 cases, represent UK exemplars of innovative practice in the UK. The UK has identified its existing housing stock as a major opportunity for improvement to help it achieve it energy goals. The UK Government has made a legislative commitment to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, with housing targeted for even greater reductions. UK housing is predominated by older stock with an estimate that 70% of the properties that will be standing in 2050 are already built. This means that there are many properties that have been built with little or no consideration to their energy consumption. New policies, such as the Green Deal, which looks to fund improvements through energy savings, and the Energy Company Obligation (ECO) have been designed to kick start the market for sustainable retrofit. However, the market is still immature in the UK; lack of supply chains, skills, consumer awareness and an understanding of how retrofit might be delivered at scale all present major issues for the UK. These case studies identify how organisations, chiefly in social housing, which has been identified as a test-bed for sustainable retrofit, address these non-technical issues to ensure that effective adoption and delivery can be addressed. The case studies show that the problem is a socio-technical one. This means that there are technical elements of technology and physical changes to the building, but a more holistic understanding of the problem drives successful delivery. Delivery organisations must be aware not only of the technical choices they make, but also consider issues such as delivery processes, trust and branding, procurement and resident awareness. These cases show us that innovation in sustainable retrofit often required a number of innovations to ensure delivery. Effective delivery processes needed to be aligned with effective procurement, resident engagement and finance models that interlinked to provide a beginning to end process. Lack of attention to any part of this meant that there was a risk of non-delivery. None of the innovations presented here could be viewed as "radical". They were often adaptations of existing solutions, with incremental changes to support the delivery of residential retrofit. The complexity arises in the number of small-scale innovations that have to be combined to ensure a successful beginning-to-end retrofit project. The case studies show that the UK is still in a developmental stage in the delivery of residential sustainable retrofit. The innovations have been designed to mitigate this immaturity or to develop new skills. Dominant solutions have yet to emerge for retrofit at scale; the case studies discussed here show the first steps in moving towards more developed models to meet the challenges of addressing the wider UK housing stock. ; This report is concerned with 5 case studies investigating the adoption of non-technical innovations in the retrofit of UK housing. The study was undertaken as part of the ApRemodel project, which investigated the retrofit of multi-occupancy buildings in the Finnish context. The aim of the study was to identify how UK organisations were addressing the finance and delivery of retrofit, considering non-technical issues such as assessment, process, finance and behavioural aspects of their projects to ensure effective delivery. The 5 case studies, selected from an initial 18 cases, represent UK exemplars of innovative practice in the UK. The UK has identified its existing housing stock as a major opportunity for improvement to help it achieve it energy goals. The UK Government has made a legislative commitment to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, with housing targeted for even greater reductions. UK housing is predominated by older stock with an estimate that 70% of the properties that will be standing in 2050 are already built. This means that there are many properties that have been built with little or no consideration to their energy consumption. New policies, such as the Green Deal, which looks to fund improvements through energy savings, and the Energy Company Obligation (ECO) have been designed to kick start the market for sustainable retrofit. However, the market is still immature in the UK; lack of supply chains, skills, consumer awareness and an understanding of how retrofit might be delivered at scale all present major issues for the UK. These case studies identify how organisations, chiefly in social housing, which has been identified as a test-bed for sustainable retrofit, address these non-technical issues to ensure that effective adoption and delivery can be addressed. The case studies show that the problem is a socio-technical one. This means that there are technical elements of technology and physical changes to the building, but a more holistic understanding of the problem drives successful delivery. Delivery organisations must be aware not only of the technical choices they make, but also consider issues such as delivery processes, trust and branding, procurement and resident awareness. These cases show us that innovation in sustainable retrofit often required a number of innovations to ensure delivery. Effective delivery processes needed to be aligned with effective procurement, resident engagement and finance models that interlinked to provide a beginning to end process. Lack of attention to any part of this meant that there was a risk of non-delivery. None of the innovations presented here could be viewed as "radical". They were often adaptations of existing solutions, with incremental changes to support the delivery of residential retrofit. The complexity arises in the number of small-scale innovations that have to be combined to ensure a successful beginning-to-end retrofit project. The case studies show that the UK is still in a developmental stage in the delivery of residential sustainable retrofit. The innovations have been designed to mitigate this immaturity or to develop new skills. Dominant solutions have yet to emerge for retrofit at scale; the case studies discussed here show the first steps in moving towards more developed models to meet the challenges of addressing the wider UK housing stock.

The physical upgrading of the existing domestic and industrial building stock to improve energy performance is an essential part of a transition to a low carbon society. Successfully retrofitting buildings to improve energy performance is not simply a technological challenge, it is a complex socio-technical problem that needs to be addressed in a co-ordinated way, utilising skills and knowledge from a range of industrial and academic backgrounds. Within both the academic and practitioner communities there is a growing understanding of the scale and nature of the problem, one which encompasses issues such as policy and regulation, people and behaviour, supply chain and process, as well as issues of technology. Retrofitting the Built Environment discusses the factors that impact on the retrofit problem, providing a clear analysis of the main issues that the academic and industrial communities must engage with to resolve the problems of domestic energy and retrofit. The book is divided into four broad sections: Understanding the Problem Policy and Regulation Implementing and Evaluating Retrofit People and Communities Academic and industrial researchers, policy makers and industry practitioners will find each section covers a mix of policy, technical and social science issues, presented by both academic and industry authors, giving a wide and detailed perspective of the issue. The Editors Will Swan is a Senior Lecturer in Buildings Retrofit in the School of the Built Environment at the University of Salford. He leads a number of projects in the field of sustainable retrofit, covering a number of topics including monitoring, behaviour and retrofit project delivery, as part of Salford's Applied Energy and Buildings Research Group. He sits on the Greater Manchester Buildings Group and also is Chair of the Retrofit Innovation Group. Philip Brown is