The advent of faster, cheaper, and more powerful computer hardware has led to the widespread integration of GIS technologies into decision making processes within local governments. Most GIS literature has focused on the models and benefits that the technology can produce and not on the impacts that GIS has on the organization. This research explores the political and administrative implications of utilizing a GIS to address a resource allocation problem within the Fire Service Administration of the City of Norfolk, VA. A network model is employed to allocate rescue resources throughout the city in various configurations. The goal of NFPS (Norfolk Fire and Paramedical Services) is to be able to cover the entire City of Norfolk within five minutes of travel time. City and NFPS administrators evaluate various models based upon a provided questionnaire that focuses on the administrative and political viability of each of the models produced. / Master of Science

This study analyzes political, cultural, and social factors that influence democratization using Hong Kong as a case study. Hong Kong is a transitional society which provides a unique set of political and social characteristics for which to study democratic transition. Additionally, reports of political repression from the 2004 Legislative Council election have possibly created a crisis for the democratization process. Drawing from existing literature in theories of democratization, political repression and Hong Kong politics several hypotheses were developed. It was hypothesized that unchecked hegemonic deterrence, antidemocratic elites, and a weak political culture have contributed to a lack of democratization. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that political repression has also contributed to Hong Kong’s lack of democratization. The relationships between unchecked hegemonic deterrence, anti-democratic elites, and weak political repression in limiting democratization were upheld. However, the link between political repression and lack of democratization was not supported due to insufficient evidence.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No / Democratization and its editors have played a valuable role in addressing and analysing the rise of democracy promotion.1 More recently, broader attention has focused on the challenges facing, and the limitations of, the activities that are undertaken by governments and non-governmental organizations with the aim of spreading and upholding democratic forms of government. Concurrent with this questioning of democracy promotion strategies, the 'transitology' paradigm, which is based on the voluntaristic premise that democracy can be cultivated in any environment, has also come under critical analysis.2 This issue aims to build on this body of scholarship, which raises serious doubts as to the democratizing impact of democracy promotion and also the conceptual thinking, such as transitology, that informs these activities.

June 26, 2020 marked the passing of H.R.51 through the House of Representatives, a historic moment in the long fight for DC's statehood. This fight is not merely anchored by an argument about taxation without representation; it is centered on returning voting rights removed from the nation's capital nearly 230 years ago. Statehood is an argument about the reparations of equality being given to a city built on the institution of slavery, embracing parts of a city divided by borders visible and hidden, and revealing cultural contexts hidden in plain sight behind the federal city. Given this complex background, there were numerous essential elements that were paramount to a critical study of what a 51st state capitol building should include. Though this self-designed brief raised a number of questions, none was more central than the relationship between aesthetics and representation within the typology of the American state capitol. The architecture of politics is often the built manifestation of ideals, policies, and values. In times of discord and unrest, we are reminded that architecture can represent the core systems of a society, exhibiting underlying truths that may have been ignored or intentionally concealed. There can be an architecture of slavery as much as an architecture of freedom. There can be architectures of oppression as well as architectures of democracies. The natural starting point for the project began with a comprehensive survey of U.S. state capitols, which share a lineage of classical architectural elements and styles inextricably linked to the Founding Father's desire to embed the United States with an origin story descending from the aesthetic, political, and social ideals of ancient Western civilizations. This thesis asks, for a (new) state that has been denied representation for over 200 years, should these same architectural ideals be embedded in its state building, or should a different symbology, aesthetics, materiality, or origin story be reoriented and introduced? However, it also became clear that site selection would be of critical importance to this project. The result of months of research led me to believe that although the building's aesthetic decisions might challenge normative architectural forms, the appropriate site for a Washington, Douglass Commonwealth State Capitol would also be one that honored and found its place within the context of Washington's symbolic plan. The site of RFK Stadium was ultimately selected because of its accessibility, its planned demolition, and its alignment with the United States Capitol. Through its placement as the epilogue to L'Enfant's unfinished plan for Washington, this site not only recognizes the importance of history and lineage, but also reorients the new state government's political nucleus, ultimately presenting ideas about freedom and democracy through a contemporary interpretation of the classic state capitol's form and planning. Overall, this thesis seeks not to be a final answer, but an investigation of some of the critical issues involved in this topic, a proposal of dissent from the expectations of systematic oppression, and an invitation to start a dialogue about a complex, multifaceted, and prescient design prompt. / Master of Architecture / June 26, 2020 marked the passing of H.R.51 through the House of Representatives, a historic moment in the long fight for DC's statehood. Over 200 years of history led to June 26, but events such as the reduced funding of COVID-19 care, tear gassing of protesters at Lafayette Square, and the subsequent groundbreaking of Black Lives Matter Plaza exacerbated the urgency of Statehood for both DC residents and outside observers alike. This was also the moment I realized what this thesis could be about. It seemed somehow wrong to spend a year tackling a project that did not relate to politics, equality, or social justice; the core passions that drive my pursuit of architecture. During our recent lockdown, I read a number of books that inspired this project, but one in particular came to haunt me. In Isabel Wilkerson's Caste, she writes about an infamous photo taken of a 1930s Hamburg shipyard, a crowd of men raising their arms to salute Hitler. All but one man, who exhibited dissent by not raising his arm. Wilkerson asks, what will we do to be that one man in the crowd? What does it take to not be complicit in the face of genocide and oppression? Watching current events, in relation to the world, the nation, and our profession, made me consider our complicity as architects in systems of racism and oppression, and what we, as designers, can do to raise our voices now instead of later. This project seeks to examine not only the issues that brought Washington, D.C.'s fight for statehood to a boiling point, but also the underlying systemic problems that have framed the argument for it. I've come to respect and support statehood after reading, researching, and listening to the incredible resources (especially Chocolate City), supporting HR51's ratification. This is not merely an argument about taxation without representation; it is about returning voting rights removed from the nation's capital nearly 230 years ago. It is about giving equality, harmony, and belonging to a city built on the institution of slavery. It is about embracing and including the parts of this city divided by borders visible and hidden. It is about honoring a city of vibrant cultures and stories, known for their ability to triumph in the face of adversity. This research has raised a number of questions. Architecturally, what would a capitol building for the 51st state look like? What are the inherent values that would be expressed in its design? The architecture of politics is often the built manifestation of ideals, policies, and values. In times of discord and unrest, we are reminded that architecture can represent the core systems of a society, exhibiting underlying truths that may have been ignored or intentionally concealed. There can be an architecture of slavery as much as an architecture of freedom. There can be architectures of oppression as well as architectures of democracies. The natural starting point for this research is to look at the history of U.S. state capitols, a lineage of classically-inspired buildings based on the philosophical and architectural ideals of Ancient civilizations. Do these architectural symbols signify the things we think they do? The aim of this research is to ask this question: For a (new) state that has been denied representation for over 200 years, should these same architectural ideals be embedded in its state building? I hope that this project can offer an opportunity to start a meaningful dialogue on how the ideals of freedom and democracy can be expressed through architecture, and how to design a building for a new chapter of history. What can we do to be that one (designer) in the crowd? How can a building dissent from a history or system of oppression, and how can we raise our voices for the people and architectures that can't necessarily raise their own?