Thesis (Ph.D.)--Ohio University, June, 2009. / Release of full electronic text on OhioLINK has been delayed until June 1, 2014. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 260-274)

This report explores the gradual disappearance of Gullah-Geechee culture in the South Carolina Lowcountry through the loss of their communally held land, known as heirs’ property. The history of African American land ownership in the South will be uncovered in order to provide a context for the current issues heirs’ property owners and land rights advocates face. The major threats contributing heir’s property loss will be examined in order to gauge an understanding of the origins of distrust Gullah-Geechee landowners harbor against outside entities. Current private and public advocacy movements will be evaluated for their effectiveness in solving the heirs’ property issue in the South Carolina Lowcountry. The report will conclude with suggestions for filling the gap between the heirs’ property community and the private and public efforts designed to preserve the Gullah-Geechee culture and way of life. / text

This report outlines five criteria common to successful value capture programs that support transit; 1) predictable need/unmet demand, 2) authority and capacity to achieve policy adoption and implementation, 3) the financial feasibility of the project, 4) the level of concurrent planning that support the project and lastly 5) the projects level of significance. This report will focus on a logical approach to evaluating the possibility of employing a value capture strategy within the jurisdiction of the Berkeley-Charleston- Dorchester Council of Governments (BCDCOG) using the given criteria. The suggested value capture strategy that emerges from this evaluation recognizes the existing and potential value capture mechanisms that could support a regionally significant transit project if budgeting and select revenues are synergized in the context of the regional plan. / text

<p>This dissertation examines federal farm policy between 1933 and 1965 and its implementation in North and South Carolina. It argues that restricted economic democracy in the Farm State - the full array of agriculture regulations, programs, and agencies associated with the federal government - enabled policy makers to adhere strictly to the principles of progressive farming and parity in the development and implementation of farm policies. These ideals emphasized industrialized, commercial farming by ever-larger farms and excluded many smaller farms from receiving the full benefit of federal farm aid. The resulting programs, by design, contributed significantly to the contraction of the farm population and the concentration of farm assets in the Carolinas. They also steered rural economic development into the channels of agribusiness as a strategy to manage the consequences of those policies. The processes and programs that drove the smallest farms out of business in the early post-war era were beginning to threaten even larger, commercial farming enterprises by the 1960s. In this context, the economic and political interests of farmers became separate from and oppositional to those of industry or consumers and removed incentives to seek common ground. The unwavering pursuit of commercial farming and agribusiness prevented diversified rural development in the Carolinas and contributed to uneven distributions of prosperity in the region. </p><p>Using the methodologies of policy, business, and social history, this work draws upon evidence from a wide variety of sources including the papers of government farm agencies, correspondence of farmers, political office holders, and personnel of the USDA. It also consults the farm press and local press, the writings of farm policy leaders, and Congressional hearings and reports. These documents provide a multifaceted perspective on the development and implementation of farm programs in the Carolinas and offers a new look at the contested process through which farm policy was made and implemented in the post war period.</p> / Dissertation

Thesis (D. Min.)--Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 149-154).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, 2006. / Abstract and vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 149-154).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Columbia Biblical Seminary and Graduate School of Missions, Columbia, S.C., 1998. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 164-171).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Temple Baptist Seminary, 2003. / Abstract. Includes bibliography (leaves 97-99).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Temple Baptist Seminary, 2003. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 97-99).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Temple Baptist Seminary, 2003. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 97-99).