925 resultados para SCIENTIFIC COOPERATION
Resumo:
The famous philosopher Leibniz (1646-1716) was also active in the (cultural) politics of his time. His interest in forming scientific societies never waned and his efforts led to the founding of the Berlin Academy of Sciences. He also played a part in the founding of the Dresden Academy of Science and the St. Petersburg Academy of Science. Though Leibniz's models for the scientific society were the Royal Society and the Royal Science Academy of France, his pansophistic vision of scientific cooperation sometimes took on utopian dimensions. In this paper, I will present Leibniz's ideas of scientific cooperation as a kind of religious activity and discuss his various schemes for the founding of such scientific societies.
Resumo:
We investigate digitalization and security of the Bulgarian and Indian cultural artifacts in multimedia archive. In the paper we describe project implementation and methods for intellectual property protection that are result of bilateral cultural and scientific cooperation between research-workers in India and Bulgaria.
Resumo:
In the eighteenth century, the birth of scientific societies in Europe created a new framework for scientific cooperation. Through a new contextualist study of the contacts between the first scientific societies in Sweden and the most important science academy in Europe at the time, l Académie des Sciences in Paris, this dissertation aims to shed light on the role taken by the Swedish learned men in the new networks. It seeks to show that the academy model was related to a new idea of specialisation in science. In the course of the eighteenth century, it is argued, the study of the northern phenomena and regions offered the Swedes an important field of speciality with regard to their foreign colleagues. Although historical studies have often underlined the economic, practical undertone of eighteenth-century Swedish science, participation in fashionable scientific pursuits had also become an important scene for representation. However, the views prevailing in Europe tied civilisation and learning closely to the sunnier, southern climates, which had lead to the difficulty of portraying Sweden as a learned country. The image of the scientific North, as well as the Swedish strategies to polish the image of the North as a place for science, are analysed as seen from France. While sixteenth-century historians had preferred to put down the effects of the cold and claim a similarity of northern conditions to the others, the scientific exchange between Swedish and French researchers shows a new tendency to underline the difference of the North and its harsh climate. An explanation is sought by analysing how information about northern phenomena was used in France. In the European academies, new empirical methods had lead to a need for direct observations on different phenomena and circumstances. Rather than curiosities or objects for exoticism, the eighteenth-century depictions of the northern periphery tell about an emerging interest in the most extreme, and often most telling, examples of the workings of the invariable laws of nature. Whereas the idea of accumulating knowledge through cooperation was most manifest in joint astronomical projects, the idea of gathering and comparing data from differing places of observation appears also in other fields, from experimental philosophy to natural studies or medicine. The effects of these developments are studied and explained in connection to the Montesquieuan climate theories and the emerging pre-romantic ideas of man and society.
Resumo:
Esta dissertação analisa cinco instituições intergovernamentais na cooperação nuclear e científica entre Argentina e o Brasil, que em diferentes etapas evolutivas procuram o aprofundamento do diálogo entre os dois países geradores do processo de integração da América do Sul. Tais organizações encontram-se permeadas por condições econômicas, políticas e de avanço científico, de ordem interno e externo, que definimos nos termos da CEPAL, como típicas da periferia. As instituições estudadas abrangem as décadas de 1991-2011 e analisamos como na procura por uma melhor inserção internacional, elas respondem às potências do centro: por uma parte seguindo as regras impostas e por outra na busca de algum grau de independência. A pesquisa apresenta uma clara preocupação pelo desenvolvimento, que foi entendido pelas lideranças argentinas e brasileiras no âmbito da cooperação e que oferece a possibilidade de formar blocos institucionais que forneçam à região uma maior ação no sistema internacional.
Resumo:
O objetivo geral da pesquisa é compreender por qual motivo e de que forma Brasil e Argentina optaram pela cooperação na área nuclear ainda durante seus governos militares. Segundo a literatura tradicional da área de Relações Internacionais, os ganhos relativos deveriam estar em evidência e, por conseguinte, impediriam a coordenação de posições em uma área tão importante para as estratégias de desenvolvimento e de inserção internacional dos dois países o que não se verificou na prática. Minha dissertação tem como meta entender o porquê. Da finalidade principal, decorrem objetivos específicos. São eles: lançar uma nova percepção acerca das relações Brasil-Argentina, ainda hoje encaradas primordialmente de acordo com padrões de inimizade e de desconfiança; compreender até que ponto as motivações dos países para o domínio da tecnologia nuclear estão relacionados a questões de segurança ou de desenvolvimento nacional; compreender quais foram as bases materiais e ideacionais que permitiram aos dois países integrar-se e, portanto, compartilhar soberania em um tema de high politics; demonstrar que a cooperação não é exclusividade de regimes democráticos; analisar a influência de grupos não políticos na formulação de políticas e do processo decisório; comprovar que não houve corrida armamentista na região ou a intenção de utilizar o aparato nuclear contra o vizinho. O recorte temporal deste trabalho partirá do final dos anos 1964, quando houve coincidência de regimes militares nos dois países, até o ano de 1985, quando a democracia é restaurada no Brasil. O marco temporal não é hermético, já que há referências anteriores a 1964, mormente no tocante à cooperação científica, e após 1985, quando a coordenação nuclear brasileiro-argentina é elevada a um nível superior, com o estabelecimento da ABACC. Na tentativa de responder às perguntas propostas, minha dissertação se baseia na análise de dois atores primordiais: o Estado e as comunidades epistêmicas.
Resumo:
•2011 PICES Science: A Note from the Science Board Chairman (pp. 1-6) •2011 PICES Awards (pp. 7-9) •Beyond the Terrible Disaster of the Great East Japan Earthquake (pp. 10-12) •A New Era of PICES-ICES Scientific Cooperation (p. 13) •New PICES Jellyfish Working Group Formed (pp. 14-15) •PICES Working Group on North Pacific Climate Variability (pp. 16-18) •Final U.S. GLOBEC Symposium and Celebration (pp. 19-25) •2011 PICES Rapid Assessment Survey (pp. 26-29) •Introduction to Rapid Assessment Survey Methodologies for Detecting Non-indigenous Marine Species (pp. 30-31) •The 7th International Conference on Marine Bioinvasions (pp. 32-33) •NOWPAP/PICES/WESTPAC Training Course on Remote Sensing Data Analysis (pp. 34-36) •PICES-2011 Workshop on “Trends in Marine Contaminants and their Effects in a Changing Ocean” (pp. 37-39) •The State of the Western North Pacific in the First Half of 2011 (pp. 40-42) •Yeosu Symposium theme sessions (p. 42) •The Bering Sea: Current Status and Recent Events (pp. 43-44) •News of the Northeast Pacific Ocean (pp. 45-47) •Recent and Upcoming PICES Publications (p. 47) •New leadership for the PICES Fishery Science Committee (p. 48)
Resumo:
•The 2013 Inter-sessional Science Board Meeting: A Note from the Science Board Chairman (pp. 1-4) •ICES/PICES Workshop on Global Assessment of the Implications of Climate Change on the Spatial Distribution of Fish and Fisheries (pp. 5-8) •PICES participates in a Convention on Biological Diversity Regional Workshop (pp. 9-11) •Social and Economic Indicators for Status and Change within North Pacific Ecosystems (pp. 12-13) •The Fourth International Jellyfish Bloom Symposium (pp. 14-15) •Workshop on Radionuclide Science and Environmental Quality in the North Pacific (pp. 16-17) •PICES-MAFF Project on Marine Ecosystem Health and Human Well-Being: Indonesia Workshop (pp. 18-19) •Socioeconomic Indicators for United States Fisheries and Fishing Communities (pp. 20-23) •Harmful Algal Blooms in a Changing World (pp. 24-25, 27) •Enhancing Scientific Cooperation between PICES and NPAFC (pp. 26-27) •Workshop on Marine Biodiversity Conservation and Marine Protected Areas in the Northwest Pacific (pp. 28-29) •The State of the Western North Pacific in the Second Half of 2012 (pp. 30-31) •Stuck in Neutral in the Northeast Pacific Ocean (pp. 32-33) •The Bering Sea: Current Status and Recent Trends (pp. 34-36) •For your Bookshelf (p. 37) •Howard Freeland takes home Canadian awards (p. 38)
Resumo:
Report of Opening Session (p. 1). Report of Governing Council (p. 15). Report of the Finance and Administration Committee (p. 65). Reports of Science Board and Committees: Science Board Inter-Sessional Meeting (p. 83); Science Board (p. 93); Biological Oceanography Committee (p. 105); Fishery Science Committee (p. 117); Marine Environmental Quality Committee (p. 129); Physical Oceanography and Climate Committee (p. 139); Technical Committee on Data Exchange (p. 145); Technical Committee on Monitoring (p. 153). Reports of Sections, Working and Study Groups: Section on Carbon and Climate (p. 161); Section on Ecology of Harmful Algal Blooms in the North Pacific (p. 167); Working Group 19 on Ecosystem-based Management Science and its Application to the North Pacific (p. 173); Working Group 20 on Evaluations of Climate Change Projections (p. 179); Working Group 21 on Non-indigenous Aquatic Species (p. 183); Study Group to Develop a Strategy for GOOS (p. 193); Study Group on Ecosystem Status Reporting (p. 203); Study Group on Marine Aquaculture and Ranching in the PICES Region (p. 213); Study Group on Scientific Cooperation between PICES and Non-member Countries (p. 225). Reports of the Climate Change and Carrying Capacity Program: Implementation Panel on the CCCC Program (p. 229); CFAME Task Team (p. 235); MODEL Task Team (p. 241). Reports of Advisory Panels: Advisory Panel for a CREAMS/PICES Program in East Asian Marginal Seas (p. 249); Advisory Panel on Continuous Plankton Recorder Survey in the North Pacific (p. 253); Advisory Panel on Iron Fertilization Experiment in the Subarctic Pacific Ocean (p. 255); Advisory Panel on Marine Birds and Mammals (p. 261); Advisory Panel on Micronekton Sampling Inter-calibration Experiment (p. 265). 2007 Review of PICES Publication Program (p. 269). Guidelines for PICES Temporary Expert Groups (p. 297). Summary of Scientific Sessions and Workshops (p. 313). Report of the ICES/PICES Conference for Early Career Scientists (p. 355). Membership (p. 367). Participants (p. 387). PICES Acronyms (p. 413). Acronyms (p. 415).
Resumo:
The National Shark Research Consortium (NSRC) includes the Center for Shark Research at Mote Marine Laboratory, the Pacific Shark Research Center at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories, the Shark Research Program at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, and the Florida Program for Shark Research at the University of Florida. The consortium objectives include shark-related research in the Gulf of Mexico and along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the U.S., education and scientific cooperation.