No. 17: International Migration and Good Governance in the Southern African Region

Southern Africa has a long history of intra-regional migration, dating back to the mid-nineteenth century. Migration was probably the single most important factor tying together all of the various colonies and countries of the sub-continent into a single regional labour market during the twentieth century. However, entrenched patterns of migration have undergone major restructuring in the last two decades. Southern Africa is now a region on the move (McDonald 2000). Several broader changes underly this shift towards greater and greater intra-regional mobility. First, the end of apartheid, a system designed to control movement and exclude outsiders, produced new opportunities for internal and cross-border mobility and new incentives for moving. The ensuing integration of South Africa with the SADC region brought a major increase in legal and undocumented cross-border flows and new forms of mobility. Second, the region’s reconnection with the global economy has opened it up to forms of migration commonly associated with globalization (Crush and McDonald 2002). Third, growing rural and urban poverty and unemployment have pushed more people out of households in search of a livelihood. One aspect of this has been a significant gender reconfiguration of migration streams (Dodson 1998). Fourth, HIV/AIDS has also impacted considerably on migration. Not only is the rapid diffusion of the epidemic inexplicable without reference to human mobility but new forms of migration are emerging in response (Williams et al. 2003; IOM 2003a). Finally, the countries of the SADC are still dealing with the legacy of mass displacement and forced migration. The impact of the Mozambican and Angolan civil wars continue to reverberate. Recurrent civil strife in the rest of Africa has generated mass refugee movements and new kinds of asylum seeker to and within the region. The cessation of hostilities and threat has confronted countries of asylum with issues of repatriation and integration. Policy responses as the local, national, regional and continental scale must take into account the extraordinary dynamism and instability of migration forms and patterns in the region. Governments wedded to legal frameworks of control and exclusion are finding it increasingly difficult to cope. The fundamental policy challenge is to move the states of Southern Africa to a regionally-harmonized and consistent set of policies that emphasize good governance, sound management and client-centred service delivery (Klaaren and Rutinwa 2004). In addition, because migration is a cross-cutting phenomenon, it needs to be integrated into all facets of state policymaking and planning, including programs and strategies to alleviate poverty and reduce inequality. For this to happen, migration’s key role needs to be documented by researchers and recognized by policy-makers

The use of peer teaching as a technique for cooperative programs between museums and schools.

EducationDoctor of Education (Ed.D.

The Bay\u27s Legal Fund v. Browner: Should The Courts Allow An Agency\u27s Poor Timing To Imperil Endangered Species?

The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently approved the continuing construction of a $310 million tunnel and sewage outfall project in Boston Harbor. The court held that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), did not violate the Endangered Species Act (ESA), by approving the construction of the outfall tunnel. The court specifically found that the evidence failed to show any harm to endangered species, that the environmental impact statements issued by the EPA were sufficient to establish compliance with the requirements of the ESA, and that the ESA does not require a biological opinion from the NMFS prior to the commencement of any construction. Judge Mazzone was the presiding judge, having overseen the outfall project since the court had ordered the cleanup of Boston Harbor in 1985, pursuant to the Clean Water Act. This case provides an example of the judicial confusion over the relationship between the EPA in approving such projects and the NMFS as the agency in charge of implementing the ESA. Judge Mazzone found that halting construction while the NMFS completed its biological opinion would be an exaltation of form over substance. Clearly, his position varies substantially from that of Judge Celebrezze, who wrote the circuit court opinion in the famous case of Hill v. Tennessee Valley Authority. In that case, the court stated that the procedural and substantive requirements of the ESA should be enforced strictly because an error on the side of permissiveness could possibly result in the extinction of a species. The major substantive issue presented in this case is whether the EPA has complied with the mandate of the ESA by allowing construction to proceed without a final biological opinion from the Department of Commerce. It is surprising that the Browner court believed that such compliance was unnecessary when the consequences of proceeding in such a manner are so significant. Vast public resources are invested in these kinds of projects which require federal funding and approval. These funds are at risk if a biological opinion is issued after the onset of construction which requires the discontinuation of the project because it would endanger the existence of a species. In addition, an error in judgment can be irreversible when dealing with a species that is already at risk of extinction. In many cases there are no second chances. Therefore, the protections that Congress has given to endangered species, through the procedures set forth in the Endangered Species Act, should be strictly complied with, even when it appears that following such procedure is merely exalting form over substance. By focusing on the procedural and substantive requirements of the ESA, and exploring the various judicial interpretations of those requirements, this Note will explain why the Browner court erred in its decision. It is imperative that the judicial system mandate strict compliance with the ESAs interagency cooperation requirements. By requiring federal agencies to cooperate under set procedures, Congress affirmatively established a system of checks and balances, affording endangered species the best possible protection. Strict compliance with these procedures allows the nation to grow and develop with minimal economic loss, while providing endangered species the protection that scientific and technological advancements can offer

The Bay\u27s Legal Fund v. Browner: Should The Courts Allow An Agency\u27s Poor Timing To Imperil Endangered Species?

The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently approved the continuing construction of a $310 million tunnel and sewage outfall project in Boston Harbor. The court held that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), did not violate the Endangered Species Act (ESA), by approving the construction of the outfall tunnel. The court specifically found that the evidence failed to show any harm to endangered species, that the environmental impact statements issued by the EPA were sufficient to establish compliance with the requirements of the ESA, and that the ESA does not require a biological opinion from the NMFS prior to the commencement of any construction. Judge Mazzone was the presiding judge, having overseen the outfall project since the court had ordered the cleanup of Boston Harbor in 1985, pursuant to the Clean Water Act. This case provides an example of the judicial confusion over the relationship between the EPA in approving such projects and the NMFS as the agency in charge of implementing the ESA. Judge Mazzone found that halting construction while the NMFS completed its biological opinion would be an exaltation of form over substance. Clearly, his position varies substantially from that of Judge Celebrezze, who wrote the circuit court opinion in the famous case of Hill v. Tennessee Valley Authority. In that case, the court stated that the procedural and substantive requirements of the ESA should be enforced strictly because an error on the side of permissiveness could possibly result in the extinction of a species. The major substantive issue presented in this case is whether the EPA has complied with the mandate of the ESA by allowing construction to proceed without a final biological opinion from the Department of Commerce. It is surprising that the Browner court believed that such compliance was unnecessary when the consequences of proceeding in such a manner are so significant. Vast public resources are invested in these kinds of projects which require federal funding and approval. These funds are at risk if a biological opinion is issued after the onset of construction which requires the discontinuation of the project because it would endanger the existence of a species. In addition, an error in judgment can be irreversible when dealing with a species that is already at risk of extinction. In many cases there are no second chances. Therefore, the protections that Congress has given to endangered species, through the procedures set forth in the Endangered Species Act, should be strictly complied with, even when it appears that following such procedure is merely exalting form over substance. By focusing on the procedural and substantive requirements of the ESA, and exploring the various judicial interpretations of those requirements, this Note will explain why the Browner court erred in its decision. It is imperative that the judicial system mandate strict compliance with the ESAs interagency cooperation requirements. By requiring federal agencies to cooperate under set procedures, Congress affirmatively established a system of checks and balances, affording endangered species the best possible protection. Strict compliance with these procedures allows the nation to grow and develop with minimal economic loss, while providing endangered species the protection that scientific and technological advancements can offer

Essay Checklist: Burning Questions to Ask Before Typing the Final Draft

This instructional handout is a checklist to review before turning in an academic essay

Singulars and Plurals

This instructional handout provides information on singular and plural nouns and pronouns and the appropriate use of apostrophes when making nouns possessive

Punctuation Overview

This handout provides a brief overview of when to use various punctuation marks, including: periods, question marks, exclamation points, commas, semicolons, colons, hyphens, quotation marks, single quotation marks, apostrophes, ellipses, dashes, and brackets

Formatting a Paper Using Modern Language Association Style

This handout provides basic formatting guidelines for papers requiring Modern Language Association (MLA) style, 9th edition

Sentence Fragments 2

This instructional handout addresses the sentence fragment error and suggests ways to correct it

What Student Voice is and is Not: Connecting Dialogue to Evidence-Based Practice and Inclusive Mindsets

Traditional attitudes to student voice are changing which is highlighted in the recent proliferation of student voice manuscripts the Journal is receiving. Student voice literature currently positions students as active dialogue partners in higher education with much to contribute rather than passive consumers or evaluators. As Editors of the Student Experience section, we view this development in higher education as a significant and emerging trend which has the potential to positively impact practice in higher education and also contribute toward meaningful relational changes for the student experience. We offer some guidelines and recommendations for potential authors on what student voice is and what it is not. We welcome manuscripts that leverage student voice by connecting genuine student-teacher dialogue and articulating how student voice has contributed toward collaboration, change, and empowerment. Manuscripts that articulate how an authentic student voice connects to evidence-based practice and creates inclusive mindsets are also welcome