Suchergebnisse

This comment surveys changing trends in Florida environmental law. State regulatory, statutory and decisional law is examined in light of recent federal legislation. The authors suggest that increased federal-state cooperation is the key to promoting greater predictability and consistency in the growing area of environmental law.

"May 1980." ; Cover title. ; Includes bibliographies and indexes. ; Mode of access: Internet.

The UN-Economic Commission for Europe, to which today the large majority of the economically most advanced states in the world belong, has in the 21 years of its existence done work that cannot be gauged merely by tangible results. The Commission has played a vital part in creating the essential climatic conditions for the economic reconstruction of Europe after the war. During the dark days of the "cold war" it remained the only functioning forum for a dialogue between East and West. Its activities range from the regulation of cross-frontier traffic, to researches into long-term economic developments in Europe, to the promotion of East-West trade and even to questions of scientific and technological cooperation, and as such the ECE sets an example of economic coexistence. At the beginning of the third decade of its existence the Commission, firmly rooted as it is in a well-balanced mixture of idealism and realism, can look to the future with confidence. On the occasion of the 23rd meeting of the UN/ECE, which ended in Geneva on the second of May, we discussed with its chairman, Dr Treu, some of the main problems of economic cooperation between Eastern and Western Europe.

L'apparition tardive et le développement de la coopération en Grècesont liés à l'évolution économique, sociale et politique du pays. Sonretard est dû au sous-développement économique et aux rapports deproduction féodaux qui prévalaient encore dans l'économie agrairebien des décennies après l'Indépendance du pays. C'est seulementaprès l'abolition des rapports féodaux dans l'agriculture, avec ladistribution des terres aux paysans, que naissent les conditionsnécessaires au développement du mouvement coopératif.En dépit de son extension dans l'après-guerre, le mouvementcoopératif présente des retards dans les domaines tant de l'organisa­tion ou du fonctionnement que de l'activité, a cause essentiellementde la législation anachronique sur les coopératives, de l'interventiondes services publics, de l'absence d'aide économique et d'assistance dela part de l'État, de l'absence de capitaux et de formation.Aujourd'hui, surtout avec l'entrée de la Grèce dans le Marché com­mun, la coopération peutjouer un rôle important pour la réorganisa­tion de l'agriculture et sonajustement aux conditions de la CEE, pourla croissance du revenu agricole, pour la réduction du sous-emploi etde l'exode rural, pour le développement culturel au village, pour ledéveloppement général des campagnes. ; The late emergence and the development of cooperatives in Greeceare linked to the economic social and political evolution of the coun­try. This is owing to the economic under development and the feudalnature of production relations which were still prevailing in theagrarian economy many decades after the country become indepen­dent. The necessary conditions for the cooperative movement to develop only appeared when feudal relations in agriculture were abolished and land was distributed to the peasants.Though it spread in the post-war period, the cooperative move­ment is behind the times both in its organization and functioning, aswell as in its operations, mainly because of the anachronistic legislation on cooperatives, the interventions of public services, the lack ofeconomic help and assistance from the State and the absence ofcapital and training.Especially with' the entry of Greece into the Common Market,cooperatives can play today an important role in helping toreorganize agriculture and adjust it to the EEC requirements, in­crease the agricultural income, reduce under employment and ruraldepopulation. It can also take part in the cultural development ofvillages and the general development of the countryside.

Also sent to depository libraries in microfiche form under class: X 96-2:S.ex.doc.HH. ; Nov. 14, 1979. ; Mode of access: Internet.

After five years of experience with the Helsinki Final Act, the thirty-five signatory countries are about to hold in Madrid a second follow-up conference to assess the record of implementation and consider what new steps might be taken to further the purposes of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, hereinafter CSCE. Now is a good time to take stock of where CSCE has been and where it is likely to go in the future. The Helsinki process seeks to address the United States basic foreign policy dilemma: how can two competing and largely antagonistic systems co-exist in a manner that protects United States security and at the same time creates opportunities to increase areas of cooperation. The Final Act itself seeks to address the universal desire of all peoples for basic human rights and freedoms. For this reason, the United States does not conceive of the Helsinki process as a bloc-to-bloc confrontation, although we have no illusions that the problem of the East is at present our central consideration. By taking account of the various wishes and hopes of the signatory nations, the Helsinki process helps to keep open channels of communication on sensitive issues in a way which shows promise of encouraging the improvements the United States seeks. This process, however, can only be kept alive through our commitment to make it work and to use its potential continuously to attain our objectives.

Local governments during the past few years have been increasingly hard-pressed to make ends meet. Fiscally conservative times are now a political reality with which all of government must learn to cope. Many local officials have responded to this problem by introducing some new and innovative management techniques. But despite its potential economic and political advantages, interlocal cooperation has not received adequate attention as a cutback management technique. This study is therefore designed to increase our understanding of interlocal cooperation by: (1) updating the information currently in existence on interlocal cooperation in the state of Virginia; (2) analyzing, evaluating and describing the administrative processes and structures of illustrative examples of interlocal cooperation in the state; and (3) assessing the relationship between interlocal cooperation and various political, social, economic and demographic characteristics of the states political subdivisions. The methodology used in this study includes: (1) state-wide mail survey, (2) data analysis, (3) examination of illustrative examples of interlocal cooperation, and (4) literature review. Major research findings were: 1. There appears to be a relationship between population size, population growth, education, median household incomes, per capita income and per capita market values of real estate and interlocal cooperation in the State of Virginia, but the relationship is very weak indeed. 2. There is no appreciable differentiation by local governmental units in Virginia with regard to interlocal cooperation. 3. There is no appreciable difference between metropolitan and non-metropolitan jurisdictions in Virginia with regard to interlocal cooperation. 4. Virginia cities tend to use written agreement and contract more often than do either counties or towns. Counties are more apt to use contributions of cash and/or other resources than are either cities or towns. Towns, more often than cities or counties use unwritten/informal agreement. 5. Metropolitan jurisdictions used written agreement and contract more often than any other form of interlocal agreement. Non-metropolitan localities were found to use unwritten/informal agreement most often. 6. Virginia cities tend to cooperate more in the functional area of health and welfare, while towns form more agreements in the areas of administration and public safety. 7. There is more interlocal cooperation between counties and towns than between any other combinations of governmental units in the state. 8. Virginia counties and towns participate more often in interlocal agreement than do cities. 9. An overwhelming majority of local officials in the state considered economies of scale to be the major driving force behind their communities interlocal agreement. 10. Surprisingly, fear of annexation was not considered by Virginia local officials as the major reason for their communities reluctance to enter into interlocal cooperation. 11. In the state of Virginia, joint operation occurs more frequently in those public services requiring large capital outlays. ; Ph. D.

The task of the article is a comparison of theoretical findings of the conception of the international economic cooperation of the CMEA member states with the premises of their economic policies in this scope and with the previous course of integrational processes in the CMEA group. In the first part of the study, three basic theoretical concepts of economic cooperation are presented which can be related to differing views of economists on the part played by planning and international market in the socialist economy. In the second part of the study a system of the international economic cooperation adopted in the premises of the economic policies of the CMEA member states is analyzed. The author's attention is focused mainly on those elements of the international cooperation system which are compromising opposing pursuits of the particular member states of securing themselves most favorable conditions for balancing necessary means with needs stated autonomously in the national plans of economic developement. The third part of the study is devoted to the analysis of features of functioning of the present system of international cooperation of the CMEA states. The actual distribution of competence and roles in the system of relations between various levels of domestic and international institutions and organizations are characterized. The scope of implementation of resolutions and recommendations of the CMEA on the developement of the international specialization and productional cooperation is evaluated. The excessive build up of the consulting and negociating activities almost on all the levels of economic organizations of the member states and of the CMEA organs is also indicated. The identification and analysis of structure of interdependence of economic interests in the sphere of realization of international economic cooperation in the CMEA are performed. Particularly, following groups of interests can be singled out: Party and government governing bodies, central economic administration, productional and trade enterprises, international organs of the CMEA. In the final remarks factors diminishing the ability to control a mechanism of the international cooperation are presented, this can well account for the lack of developement in real integrational ties and related organizational structures in the system of cooperation of the CMEA states. ; Digitalizacja i deponowanie archiwalnych zeszytów RPEiS sfinansowane przez MNiSW w ramach realizacji umowy nr 541/P-DUN/2016

"December 1977." ; "Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations." ; At head of title: 95th Congress, 1st session. Committee print. ; Mode of access: Internet.

The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, which opened at Helsinki on 3 July 1973 and continued at Geneva from 18 September 1973 to 21 July 1975, was concluded at Helsinki on August 1975 by the High Representatives of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Finland, France, the German Democratic Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany, Greece, the Holy See, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Yugoslavia. During the opening and closing stages of the Conference the participants were addressed by the Secretary-General of the United Nations as their guest of honour. The Director-General of UNESCO and the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe addressed the Conference during its second stage. During the meetings of the second stage of the Conference, contributions were received, and statements heard, from the following non-participating Mediterranean States on various agenda items: the Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria, the Arab Republic of Egypt, Israel, the Kingdom of Morocco, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia. Motivated by the political will, in the interest of peoples, to improve and intensify their relations and to contribute in Europe to peace, security, justice and co-operation as well as to rapprochement among themselves and with the other States of the world.

"August 3, 1965." ; Caption title. ; Mode of access: Internet.

"B-163058." ; "PSAD-79-26." ; Cover title. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Record is based on bibliographic data in CIS US Congressional Committee Hearings Index. Reuse except for individual research requires license from Congressional Information Service, Inc. ; Indexed in CIS US Congressional Committee Hearings Index Part VII ; Mode of access: Internet.

"February 1978." ; "Prepared by the staff of the Subcommittee on Foreign Assistance for the members of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations." ; At head of title: 95th Congress, 2d session. Committee print. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Considers D.C. law enforcement and crime prevention activities, including D.C.-Federal authorities implementation of D.C. crime preventive activities recommended by President's Commission on Crime and D.C.-state cooperation in preventing crime from spreading into neighboring suburbs. Appendix includes Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments report "Program Design for Regional Law Enforcement, Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Planning in the Washington Metropolitan Area," Jan. 1969 (p. A-9 - A-171). ; Record is based on bibliographic data in CIS US Congressional Committee Hearings Index. Reuse except for individual research requires license from Congressional Information Service, Inc. ; Indexed in CIS US Congressional Committee Hearings Index Part VIII ; Considers D.C. law enforcement and crime prevention activities, including D.C.-Federal authorities implementation of D.C. crime preventive activities recommended by President's Commission on Crime and D.C.-state cooperation in preventing crime from spreading into neighboring suburbs. Appendix includes Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments report "Program Design for Regional Law Enforcement, Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Planning in the Washington Metropolitan Area," Jan. 1969 (p. A-9 - A-171). ; Mode of access: Internet.