Suchergebnisse

This paper reviews the discipline of the geography of the People's Republic of China & the contributions that China geographers have made to the field of China studies, focusing primarily on the period since WWII & on China geographers working in North America. Outside of the PRC & North America, other key centers are in the UK, Hong Kong, & Taiwan. China geographers (outside of China) are relatively few in number but have been increasingly productive ever since the opening of China in the late 1970s & the resulting expanded opportunities for doing fieldwork & collaboration with scholars there. This paper provides synopses of leading China geographers to offer insights into the scope & evolution of the discipline. The field has become increasingly sophisticated, & the practitioners are increasingly Chinese emigres. Publications have been heavily focused on urban geography, as well as various aspects of economic geography, environmental studies, & cultural geography. Major gaps remain in cultural, historical, social, population, & political geography. These gaps are areas of greatest interest to other China scholars -- thereby accounting, in part, for the low visibility of China geographers. Collaborative research, especially in these areas, greater involvement in the Assoc for Asian Studies (AAS) & similar organizations, & more publications in China studies journals could help to raise visibility. 1 Figure. Adapted from the source document.

Examination of planned and spontaneous land settlement and use of such lands for agriculture and other activities in Taiwan. The upper Ta-chia basin is used as a case study that not only illustrates many facets of resource development in Taiwan but also the development process and problems that Taiwan shares with other Third World countries. (Economische Voorlichtingsdienst)

AbstractPublic administration scholars have largely ignored American Indians and Alaska Natives in their studies of racial disparities in the federal service, despite strong reasons to believe they face discrimination. Using three large federal data sets (the American Community Survey, federal personnel records, and the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey), we compare the status of American Indians and Alaska Natives in the federal service to both Whites and other minorities. We find that, largely due to Indian Preference, American Indians and Alaska Natives are much more likely than Blacks, Whites, Latinos, and Asians to hold federal jobs, but they are highly concentrated in the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service, agencies with which they have a sordid and fraught history. This concentration allows them to work in positions that may advance the interests of their communities and increases their probabilities of being supervisors, but it does not prevent them from being among the poorest‐paid and least‐satisfied employees in the federal service.