Technical, organizational and political dynamics of the International Space Station program
Abstract This paper analyzes the dynamics of cooperation of the International Space Station (ISS) program from its inception in 1981 to the final Framework Agreements for cooperation concluded in 1998. These dynamics include technical and organizational arrangements, and policy preferences. Dynamics related to technical arrangements deal with technological and scientific resources, the former governed through mechanisms for control of technology transfer, the latter regulated through intellectual property rights provisions. The dynamics linked to organizational arrangements concern authority patterns—characterized by national and international responses—and bilateral and multilaterial decision-making patterns. The dynamics of policy preferences encompass functional and symbolic dimensions. Functional issues are structured through legal and political regimes that govern the ISS program. The symbolic dimension, which includes prestige, legitimacy, influence and international accountability, frames the nature of the cooperation realized for the ISS program. ISS cooperation has evolved through three stages: (1) coordination, where collaboration is engendered through institutional (International Coordinating Working Group) and ad hoc cooperative relationships (groups of scientists and engineers sharing information); (2) augmentation, which equates with technological enhancements of a national project that involve primarily bilateral arrangements; (3) interdependence, which deals with cooperation in enabling and critical path technologies that are arranged both bilaterally and multilaterally.
Strategy for International Cooperation in Planning the Chinese Space Station
The ultimate challenges facing the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) are how to domestically maintain the power of the state while increasing individual liberties; and facilitating its international rise while avoiding direct confrontation as it is expanding global influence. Within the past decade, China has experienced a steady progression of technology resulting in prestigious accomplishments for the manned space program. To reassure the world of its benign rise China is seeking collaboration in the exploration and utilization of outer space. This paper provides a critical examination of the technology and politics of the Chinese Space Station (CSS) endeavor and investigates areas of conflict that could potentially affect China, such as spheres of influence, status and prestige, resource competition, and fundamental disagreements over the international system. I argue that only if it can be effectively managed as a platform for international cooperation and global leadership CSS can achieve subsidiary benefits for the Chinese government in domestic and foreign policy. In building a prosperous socialist society China must use science, technology, education, and culture as means for achieving political ends. However, inviting international partners in the process of constructing and operating a space station presents an expansively demanding policy problem. China must determine if there are tangible benefits associated with different scales and scopes of space station cooperation. The key policy problem is finding a model that is effective for fair and rational cooperation based on mutual benefit, transparency, reciprocity, and cost sharing, while striking a balance with partners over ownership, intellectual property, and utilization rights. Through first hand professional and cultural experience in China and translations of various Chinese academic journals I construct an analytical assessment of PRC space activities and recommend effective strategies to support scientific and technological innovation for intentional cooperation on CSS.
Cambodian refugee health care beliefs and practices.
Since 1975, when refugees from Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia first began coming to the United States, many articles have been written about Southeast Asian or Indochinese refugees and health care. A careful review of the literature shows that most of these articles have one thing in common: they are written primarily about Vietnamese and do not address the unique health care beliefs and practices of Lao or Cambodian refugees.1 Although some beliefs and practices are common to most Southeast Asians, many are not. Understanding at least that differences exist, and hopefully what some specific differences are, will allow nurses and others to give better care to the various people commonly grouped together as Southeast Asians. This article will introduce readers to some Cambodian beliefs and practices related to health care. Of the principle refugee groups admitted to the U.S. since 1975, the Cambodians are presenting the greatest challenges to health care providers. Cambodians are usually poorly understood by Americans, their health status statistics are hidden among the broad category of "Asian-Pacific Islanders" or "Indochinese Refugees," and cultural and institutional barriers combine to make access to care an overwhelming problem. The end results, of course, are more problems and more expense for the Cambodians, increased stress placed on an already terribly overstressed people, and ultimately greater demands and expense placed on the health care system. One of the most common misunderstandings about Cambodians is that they (and Lao) are basically the same as the Vietnamese. "They speak the same dialect don't they?" There are some similarities, but there are also very significant differences.