<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>SMARTech Community: College of Liberal Arts - Ivan Allen College (IAC)</title>
    <link>http://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/6062</link>
    <description>Ivan Allen College, the liberal arts college of Georgia Tech. By bringing the academic rigor, depth, and scope of the humanities and social sciences to education and research at Georgia Tech, the Ivan Allen College has emerged as an integral part of Georgia Tech's destiny as a center of learning and innovation.</description>
    <textInput>
      <title>The Community's search engine</title>
      <description>Search the Channel</description>
      <name>search</name>
      <link>http://smartech.gatech.edu/simple-search</link>
    </textInput>
    <item>
      <title>Integrating investment and equity: a critical regionalist agenda for a progressive regionalism</title>
      <link>http://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/24217</link>
      <description>Title: Integrating investment and equity: a critical regionalist agenda for a progressive regionalism
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Clark, Jennifer; Christopherson, Susan
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: Since the 1980s different conceptions of regionalism have emerged, reflecting&#xD;
distinct perspectives on place and space, and a variety of policy orientations. The debates&#xD;
in planning over which regional policies are both "equitable" and "democratic" have been&#xD;
intense. This article clarifies these debates through a critical regionalist approach to the&#xD;
two prominent "regionalisms," investment and distributive.&#xD;
This article then proposes how to strengthen the connections between investment&#xD;
and distributive regionalism and build on the successful practices in each arena. We argue&#xD;
that a progressive regionalism requires focus on 1) the labor market as a whole, and 2)&#xD;
multi-scalar coalitions and policy initiatives.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Potential Impacts of Energy and Climate Policies on the U. S. Pulp and Paper Industry</title>
      <link>http://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/24216</link>
      <description>Title: Potential Impacts of Energy and Climate Policies on the U. S. Pulp and Paper Industry
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Brown, Marilyn A.; Atamturk, Nilgun
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: Many energy and climate policies are being debated in the United States that could have significant impact upon the future of the pulp and paper industry. Five of these policies are examined here in terms of their possible directional influences on biomass energy and paper production: (1) a national renewable electricity standard, (2) a U.S. greenhouse gas cap and trade system, (3) stronger renewable fuels standards, (4) expanded state incentives for biomass pilot plants, and (5) more favorable taxation of forest property. The observed trends reinforce the value of forest product diversification through the addition of biomass power generation and transportation fuels/chemicals production as co-products of the pulp and paper industry. Therefore, directing capital expenditures to the increasingly cost-competitive and expanding biopower and biofuels markets would appear to have merit in anticipation of the promulgation of new energy and climate legislation. Accelerated investments in new facilities such as biorefineries and cogeneration units and in energy-efficiency upgrades would position the pulp and paper industry to profit from current trends and likely policy initiatives.</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 08 Jun 2008 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Change and innovation in Georgia manufacturing: a 10 year perspective</title>
      <link>http://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/24215</link>
      <description>Title: Change and innovation in Georgia manufacturing: a 10 year perspective
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Shapira, Philip P.; Youtie, Jan; Hegde, Deepak; Brice, Kathy
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: Small and medium-sized manufacturers in the United States are experiencing increasing challenges in today’s global economy. U.S. manufacturing employment declined by nearly 13 percent from 1998 to 2002. More than 2.25 million manufacturing jobs were lost during this time period. Ninety-eight percent of all manufacturers, or approximately 350,000 enterprises are small or mid-sized, having 500 or fewer employees. These enterprises account for over half of the value of U.S. industrial production, and employ about 10 million jobs or two-thirds of all U.S. manufacturing workers. These workers earn in excess of twice the wages of retail workers.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Maturation of Global Corporate R &amp; D: Theory and Evidence</title>
      <link>http://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/24213</link>
      <description>Title: The Maturation of Global Corporate R &amp; D: Theory and Evidence
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Hicks, Diana; Hegde, Deepak
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: This industry-level study examines the impact of foreign country factors like market size, technological strength, and science and engineering (S&amp;E) capability on the conduct of U.S. overseas R&amp;D during the 1991-2002 period. We find that while overseas markets primarily predict the entry of U.S. R&amp;D, the S&amp;E knowledge base of nations critically determines the level&#xD;
and sophistication of U.S. foreign subsidiaries' innovative activity. We also find important interindustry differences: U.S. electrical, electronics, computers, and communication industries are strongly drawn towards overseas S&amp;E capability; industries including machinery, automobiles, and transport equipment are primarily attracted by the technological strength of foreign nations; U.S. R&amp;D in chemicals mostly follows overseas markets.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

