Spelling suggestions: "subject:"local implementation"" "subject:"focal implementation""
1 |
Multijurisdictional watershed management in Virginia: experiences and lessons learnedCriblez, Matthew 07 October 2005 (has links)
Multijurisdictional agreements among local and regional authorities have emerged as an effective way to manage Virginia’s watersheds. These agreements generally result in the development of goals and objectives for the watershed environment, and the implementation of various strategies designed to achieve these goals. Successful agreements often result in stabilized or improved water quality in the region.
The Environmental Protection Agency has developed the Watershed Protection Approach and recommended it to manage water quality. While accepted, the Approach has not been well demonstrated in practice. Ten Virginia case studies are conducted to determine (1) if the Approach is represented in the program components and (2) if the components are effective in achieving program objectives. The case studies were developed through document review and interviews with program personnel, including local and regional agencies and non-governmental organizations. Critical components of these multijurisdictional approaches are identified and compiled to assist other regions and localities in their watershed management programs.
The EPA Approach identifies four relevant watershed management features; however, these are general and do not describe nor clarify its potential implementation. This thesis four categories corresponding to critical components of watershed management programs identified in the case studies, which illustrate and expand on EPA’s Approach, particularly its implementation: institutional framework and planning, stakeholder involvement, implementation strategies, and monitoring. These case studies demonstrate that regional policies and plans provide the necessary institutional framework; that participation of key stakeholders, especially those involved in implementation is critical in plan development; that local implementation land-use strategies including both regulatory and non-regulatory land-use measures, and structural and non-structural land practices, are most effective in achieving regional watershed management objectives; and that monitoring is needed to measure effectiveness and can effectively engage non-governmental groups and citizen volunteers. / Master of Urban and Regional Planning
|
2 |
Lokale Realisierung von Vektoroperationen auf ParallelrechnernGroh, U. 30 October 1998 (has links) (PDF)
For the basic algebraic vector operations several variants of a local
implementation on distributed memory parallel computers are presented and discussed
systematically. In particular necessary and sufficient conditions are shown for the local realizability
of the multiplication matrix by vector.
|
3 |
Lokale Realisierung von Vektoroperationen auf ParallelrechnernGroh, U. 30 October 1998 (has links)
For the basic algebraic vector operations several variants of a local
implementation on distributed memory parallel computers are presented and discussed
systematically. In particular necessary and sufficient conditions are shown for the local realizability
of the multiplication matrix by vector.
|
4 |
An analysis of local district capacity in the implementation of Oregon's extended application collection of evidence graduation requirementLevy, Theresa A. 06 1900 (has links)
xii, 143 p. : ill. A print copy of this thesis is available through the UO Libraries. Search the library catalog for the location and call number. / Oregon's extended application requirement, adopted by the State Board of Education as a graduation requirement in 2002 coupled with more rigorous state graduation requirements adopted in 2008, have significant capacity implications for local school districts. The purpose of this study was to examine how local school districts in Oregon have implemented the extended application requirement through their existing capacity. District capacity was examined through a survey that asked about four capacity domains: human capacity, organizational capacity, structural capacity, and material capacity. In addition, the survey addressed barriers to implementation as well as capacity needs to support implementation of extended application and new state graduation requirements. A self-administered web-based survey was developed to collect data. The survey was administered to curriculum administrators in all K-12 public school districts ( N =175) in Oregon. The response rate was 50% with representation from districts ranging in size from small to large and from all regions of the state, including rural, suburban, and urban settings. The survey used a five-point scale to determine the extent of extended application implementation, district capacity, and implementation barriers. Two open-ended questions asked participants to comment on their capacity needs. Study results showed that extended application implementation progress ranged from very little progress to great progress in districts across the state. The new graduation requirements were identified as a barrier to extended application and will likely impede implementation progress further. Additionally, in multiple regression analysis, district capacity was a predictor of extended application implementation and reflected that districts lacked the capacity to support implementation. Interrelationships were found between the four district capacity domains and implementation which suggest that capacity should be viewed holistically and comprehensively. Furthermore, district capacity analysis should be more intentional in the policy process in order to inform state policy decisions. Capacity-building needs were identified including: increased state-level guidance, time for teachers and administrators to collaborate, and a need for additional professional development, financial resources, and staffing. A coherent, state-wide strategy is recommended to build district capacity to support implementation of extended application and the new graduation requirements. / Committee in charge: Joe Stevens, Chairperson, Educational Leadership;
Gerald Tindal, Member, Educational Leadership;
David Conley, Member, Educational Leadership;
Jean Stockard, Outside Member, Planning Public Policy & Mgmt
|
Page generated in 0.1596 seconds