The concerns of preservationist's to protect the built environment from demolition, are heightened in the midst of modern day pressures to develop,.A dilemma arises when deciding which buildings deserve to be historically designated. The efforts of this thesis identify the implications of such an issue. In this realm, problems of conserving the urban landscape are addressed, using three residential structures in Hamilton as the basis for argument. An evaluation of historical, architectural, political and economic merits are put forth to distinguish the attributes of one building as compared to another. When a structure succeeds in all of these factors, conflict may arise when deciding the level of continuity each residential unit maintains. Antiquity is not the only facet considered in support of preservation. A prolonged use for the respective building must exist. Securing our heritage is of grave concern. Without its recognition, reminders of the past will remain obsolete as so too will an era of irreplaceable architectural gems. / Thesis / Bachelor of Arts (BA)

On a rainy summer afternoon a woman turns up on Bernadette's doorstep. Her long, floral dress and brown leather boots tell a story of illfittedness, of shifting in and out of places. Her baby-fine ginger hair spills around her shoulders, too slippery for knots. Her eyes are restless. Flighty like a sparrow. My name is Georgia, she says. I saw you in town and I knew it was you. Bernadette's solititude is punctured for good. Bernadette's sister Andrea sometimes wonders whether they've come from the same stable. Bernadette never had disconnection notices stuffed in her drawer, never spent a night passed out in someone's backyard, got sunburnt, lost track of time, ate so much that she felt like throwing up. There were cracks, no corners where damp was creeping up. But it also made her easy to be with. There were no surprises. And visiting her felt like coming home. Andrea has been singing at the top of her lungs for years and now her voice is hoarse. So she drops in on Bernadette and it's there that she meets Georgia. Shelter is a story about people taking cover from pain and the lengths that they go to, to protect themselves / Master of Arts (Hons) Communication and Media

This essay is a type of case study, it examines if intervention in Kosovo were in accordance with humanitarian intervention criteria. This study gives an understanding that intervention may sometime worsen condition for the people it wants to rescue, and that inability to address humanitarian intervention prevails in diffuse victory. The purpose of this essay is to examine the Kosovo conflict and the approach of humanitarian intervention in 24 March, 1999.  The approach made by NATO was seen as a new international phenomenon that sought to protect values of human rights. The results of this study pose doubt to this notion; it reflects that the intervention rested not only on humanitarian grounds. The most important aspect of humanitarian intervention is promoting security for the people it wants to rescue. The results shows that NATO’s intervention in short term failed to provide security; it is shown that the air campaign had little impact at the beginning prevailing only after much damage and suffering has been done. The result also shows that failure to adopt the issue of Kosovo more adequately at an earlier stage on the international agenda resulted in the ''welfare'' of NATO's intervention. Despite the consequences of NATO’s action, situation prevailed for the better outcome for the Kosovar-Albanian people than what might have been has intervention been absent. FRY: s deliberative plan of expelling the Kosovo-Albanian to the last one would have been finalized if intervention would have been absent.

This Note asserts that natural disaster-affected populations have a right to call on the international community to protect basic subsistence interests where their sovereign government is unable or unwilling to do so in the wake of a catastrophic natural disaster. First, this Note situates the right to international humanitarian assistance following a natural disaster as a legitimate right under modern international human rights law, using the normative framework set out by renowned political theorist Charles Beitz. This Note then illustrates how the international humanitarian law doctrine of the Responsibility to Protect provides a clear and coherent way to operationalize the right to post-natural disaster humanitarian assistance, by providing a previously-determined structure for a definitive, yet circumstantially-flexible, determination of first- and second-level responsibilities for eligible international actors to take action in defence of this right.

The International Commission on Intervention on State Sovereignty was established with the intent of articulating more robust guidelines on how the international community should respond to humanitarian crises. In 2001, the Commission released its official report in which it proposed the creation of new concept called the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). R2P sought to make nations more willing to address humanitarian crises. This thesis examines how the concept of R2P has the potential of impacting state behaviour. Through examining its normative evolution and current impact on state behaviour, this thesis argues that while the concept clearly has led to an increase political will to react, it is occasionally limited by the surrounding political realities.

This Note asserts that natural disaster-affected populations have a right to call on the international community to protect basic subsistence interests where their sovereign government is unable or unwilling to do so in the wake of a catastrophic natural disaster. First, this Note situates the right to international humanitarian assistance following a natural disaster as a legitimate right under modern international human rights law, using the normative framework set out by renowned political theorist Charles Beitz. This Note then illustrates how the international humanitarian law doctrine of the Responsibility to Protect provides a clear and coherent way to operationalize the right to post-natural disaster humanitarian assistance, by providing a previously-determined structure for a definitive, yet circumstantially-flexible, determination of first- and second-level responsibilities for eligible international actors to take action in defence of this right.

The International Commission on Intervention on State Sovereignty was established with the intent of articulating more robust guidelines on how the international community should respond to humanitarian crises. In 2001, the Commission released its official report in which it proposed the creation of new concept called the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). R2P sought to make nations more willing to address humanitarian crises. This thesis examines how the concept of R2P has the potential of impacting state behaviour. Through examining its normative evolution and current impact on state behaviour, this thesis argues that while the concept clearly has led to an increase political will to react, it is occasionally limited by the surrounding political realities.

I have analyzed humanitarian intervention within the framework of Responsibility to Protect (R2P), particularly in relation to the three statements of my thesis. First, the conceptual aspect of humanitarian is discussed in regards to the definition of sovereignty fostered by the norm, and limitations and constraints on the practice. Secondly, inadequacy of the Chapter VII of the UN Charter to understand the nature and dynamics of conflicts today is dealt and whether the gap is looked up to. Third, the partnership with regional organizations and agencies as imagined by the norm is discussed as to find out whether this approach takes real politics in its consideration about conflict solution. Underneath this split analysis lies the single purpose of understanding humanitarian intervention under the light of Responsibility to Protect (R2P).

The aim of this work is to determine whether the concept of Responsibility to Protect is able to explain why in case of the Syrian civil conflict the international community did not intervene in a similar manner as it did in Libya. Primarily, the theoretical framework is defined using the concept of Responsibility to Protect. In order to answer the research question, all criteria applied in the analysis were operationalized in accordance with the Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty and the Outcome Document from 2005. At the same time, concept of state sovereignty and humanitarian intervention is designed. Although the conflicts in Libya and Syria started simultaneously in 2011 during the rule of authoritarian regimes, the intrastate situations were not identical. Based on the analysis of two case studies, I came to the conclusion that the concept of Responsibility to Protect is able to sufficiently explain the different reaction of the international community, which confirmed my hypothesis. Specifically, it is the principle of right authority, which was not fulfilled in Syria, while it is necessary to note the criterion of reasonable prospect becomes with the gradual development of the conflict more and more problematic. In contrast, the intervention in...

No description available.