Thesis. 1975. Ph.D.--Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Alfred P. Sloan School of Management. / Vita. / Bibliography: leaves 240-250. / Ph.D.

No description available.

This thesis compares policy instruments in the American and Canadian oil sectors from 1973 to 1977, the years immediately following the Arab oil embargo. Public policy has traditionally emphasized objectives over instruments even though instruments are at the heart of the policy making process. This case study helps to address this deficiency in the policy literature. It begins by providing a review of the instrument choice literature. Doern and Phidd's typology, which arranges instruments in terms of degrees of coercion, subsequently forms the basis for Chapter Two. Chapter Two's analysis of American and Canadian oil policy reveals that both countries agreed upon the security of supply objective. Furthermore, both deployed many similar instruments including suasion, direct expenditures, loans and guarantees, taxation, and regulation to reach the objective. However, one very important difference in instrument choice was made. While Canada deployed the most coercive policy instrument (public enterprise), the United States did not. Chapter Three offers three explanations for this specific difference. They are (1) differences in ideology, (2) market factors, and (3) differences in government institutions. The difference in ideology is the most important explanation. American ideology is decidedly more conservative than Canadian ideology. As such, American governments are less inclined to create government corporations, like national oil companies, than are Canadian governments. Furthermore, ideology is invariably reflected in a nation's party system, and neither of America's mainstream parties advocated the creation of an NOC while Canada's government party did. Market factors are also important. Countries with formidable industrial bases, such as the United States, are less likely to create public corporations than are those with weaker industrial bases. In the particular case of oil, Canada's oil industry was predominantly foreign-owned owing to insufficient pools of domestic capital. America's industry was overwhelmingly domestically-owned. Hence whereas Canada's NOC was the only oil company truly loyal to the Canadian people, an American NOC would have had to compete with home-based multinationals making it relatively unattractive to governing elites, and unnecessary to the American public. Finally, the differences between Canadian and American institutions are stark and important. Canada's parliamentary system of government fosters public corporations because corporations are easy to create and offer significant benefits to their political masters who can control them. The Canadian government set out to create an NOC in the mid-1970s and came across no obstacles. On the other hand, America's presidential system discourages public corporations. Not only did American Presidents and Congressmen not desire an NOC, but they were unable to legislate what comprehensive oil policy they did desire. / Arts, Faculty of / Political Science, Department of / Graduate

Thesis (MA)--Stellenbosch University, 2015. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This study explores the impact of primary energy on the measurement of state power and hegemony. Through an examination of British and American hegemonies, the role of coal, oil and petroleum on the hegemonic cycle is assessed, and the argument is presented for the inclusion of energy as a primary element underpinning the state power base. Utilising the Hegemonic Stability Theory approach to the study of global hegemony, a framework for the assessment of the role of energy on international hegemony is constructed. The Hegemonic Stability Theory approach employed in this study is augmented through the incorporation of several complimentary theoretical approaches, in order to improve the theory’s applicability to multiple cases. Through an examination of the economic, financial, and military/naval ‘pillars’ of the respective hegemonic powers, the study determines that energy has had a marked impact on both British and American hegemonies. Technological developments, notably the steam engine, and the subsequent conversion of the Royal Navy, the cornerstone of British hegemony, from sail to steam, made coal vital to the British Empire. In contrast, the use of oil and petroleum during the United States hegemonic reign indicate that access to oil and petroleum not only benefitted the United States material power base, but has become vital to sustaining American hegemony. This study makes a plausible case for the inclusion of energy as a factor in the assessment of state power, and draws attention to the importance of ensuring energy security and maintaining technological leads. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie verhandeling ondersoek die impak wat grond-energie het as maatstaf op staatsmag en hegemonie. Na afleiding van ‘n gevalle studie van beide Britse en Amerikaanse hegemonies - die rol wat steenkool, olie en petroleum speel op die hegemoniese siklus – stel hierdie navorsingstuk voor dat grond-energie ingesluit moet word as ‘n kriterium van hoe staatsmag gemeet word. Hierdie tesis wend Hegemoniese Stabiliteitsteorie aan om internasionale hegemonie te ondersoek. ‘n Raamwerk om die belang van energie te meet in internasionale hegemonie word opgestel. Die Hegemoniese Stabiliteitsteorie aanslag word aangepas deur verskeie komplimentêre teoretiese benaderings te inkorporeer en sodoende die teorie meer toepaslik te maak op verskeie gevallestudies. Deur die ekonomiese, finansiële en militêle/vloot ‘pilare’ van die onderskeie hegemoniese magte te ondersoek, bevind hierdie verhandeling dat energie ‘n bepalende invloed gehad het op beide Britse en Amerikaanse hegemonies. Tegnologiese ontwikkelings, mees opmerklik die stoomenjin en die gevolglike oorgang van die Koninklike Vloot (die hoeksteun van Britse hegemonie) van seil- na stoomenjins, was die gevolg dat steenkool van uiterse belang geword het vir die Britse Ryk. In kontras word aangedui dat die gebruik van en toegang tot olie en petroleum tydens die hegemoniese bewind van die Verenigde State van Amerika nie net die materiële magsbasis bevoordeel het nie, maar asook bepalend geword het om Amerikaanse hegemonie te handhaaf. Hierdie verhandeling maak die aanneemlike voorstelling dat energie ingesluit moet word as ‘n faktor om staatsmag te meet, en dui die belang daarvan aan om tegnologiese vooruitgang te onderhou en sodoende energie sekuriteit te verseker.