Pub Date : 2023-02-01DOI: 10.1515/peps-2023-frontmatter1
{"title":"Frontmatter","authors":"","doi":"10.1515/peps-2023-frontmatter1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2023-frontmatter1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135096252","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract By spurring trade, the level of income and consumption and production increase, which consequently causes a more polluted environment. As global economic integration escalates, the possibility of contention becomes more translucent. The foundation of this article is based on the Ricardian model regarding consumption and production pollution function in six scenarios depending on Autarky or trade situation. There is also a difference in the relative labour size of countries. Also, pollution tightness can clarify whether there are any concerns about climate change regarding the production pollution function and consumption pollution function. The theoretical approach proves that unemployment does not occur when we have no concerns about climate change and this tightness of pollution would not impact the level of production and consumption. The emission intensity, relative labour size and tightness of pollution targets are the key elements discussed in both Autarky and trade. The critical point about trade is that it enters specialization, and the home country only produces good 1 and the foreign country only produces good 2. The main finding of this paper, based on a simple theoretical approach, is about the impact of one unit change in relative labour size regarding pollution tightness with respect to the labour force of both home and foreign countries is provided at the end.
{"title":"Production Network and Emission Control Targets-Theoretical Approach","authors":"Reza Eslamipoor, Z. Wang, O. Kolade","doi":"10.1515/peps-2022-0032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2022-0032","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract By spurring trade, the level of income and consumption and production increase, which consequently causes a more polluted environment. As global economic integration escalates, the possibility of contention becomes more translucent. The foundation of this article is based on the Ricardian model regarding consumption and production pollution function in six scenarios depending on Autarky or trade situation. There is also a difference in the relative labour size of countries. Also, pollution tightness can clarify whether there are any concerns about climate change regarding the production pollution function and consumption pollution function. The theoretical approach proves that unemployment does not occur when we have no concerns about climate change and this tightness of pollution would not impact the level of production and consumption. The emission intensity, relative labour size and tightness of pollution targets are the key elements discussed in both Autarky and trade. The critical point about trade is that it enters specialization, and the home country only produces good 1 and the foreign country only produces good 2. The main finding of this paper, based on a simple theoretical approach, is about the impact of one unit change in relative labour size regarding pollution tightness with respect to the labour force of both home and foreign countries is provided at the end.","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47184497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article examines the economic impact of sanctions on North Korea from 2000 to 2020. More specifically, it analyzes the trend of the main economic indicators—namely, GDP and trade—using statistical data from trading partners and international organizations in an effort to evaluate the overall effectiveness of this policy tool. After providing a brief overview on the evolution of the North Korean nuclear program, the first section frames the different types of sanctions imposed on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea by the leading senders over the years. The second part focuses entirely on the analysis of the economic impact of these measures. The descriptive evidence suggests that the sanctions remarkably impacted the North Korean economy and trade. However, the ability of North Korea to establish an efficient mechanism of sanctions busting, backed particularly by China and Russia, has undermined the effectiveness of these sanctions.
{"title":"Sanctions against North Korea: A Descriptive Analysis of their Economic Impact (2000–2020)","authors":"Simone Zani","doi":"10.1515/peps-2022-0042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2022-0042","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines the economic impact of sanctions on North Korea from 2000 to 2020. More specifically, it analyzes the trend of the main economic indicators—namely, GDP and trade—using statistical data from trading partners and international organizations in an effort to evaluate the overall effectiveness of this policy tool. After providing a brief overview on the evolution of the North Korean nuclear program, the first section frames the different types of sanctions imposed on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea by the leading senders over the years. The second part focuses entirely on the analysis of the economic impact of these measures. The descriptive evidence suggests that the sanctions remarkably impacted the North Korean economy and trade. However, the ability of North Korea to establish an efficient mechanism of sanctions busting, backed particularly by China and Russia, has undermined the effectiveness of these sanctions.","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43583150","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract UN peacekeepers are often targeted by rebel groups. The violence they experience hinders the functionality of peacekeeping operations, constituting a major problem for the UN. What conditions make these attacks more likely? How does the local support for UN peacekeeping operations affect the violence against peacekeepers? Using an original data set that includes local trust sentiments towards MONUSCO’s peacekeepers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo from October 2014 to December 2020, this study finds that peacekeepers are attacked more often when they lack local support. In the absence of local support, peacekeepers become vulnerable as they can no longer gather intelligence about rebel activities from the locals and the increased distrust for peacekeepers gives propagandist benefits to rebel groups. This study suggests to the UN that it needs to employ strategies in peacekeeping operations that would legitimize the presence of peacekeepers and cultivate more strengthened civil-military relations.
{"title":"Public Support for UN Missions and Attacks on Peacekeepers: Evidence From the Democratic Republic of the Congo","authors":"B. Giray","doi":"10.1515/peps-2022-0028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2022-0028","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract UN peacekeepers are often targeted by rebel groups. The violence they experience hinders the functionality of peacekeeping operations, constituting a major problem for the UN. What conditions make these attacks more likely? How does the local support for UN peacekeeping operations affect the violence against peacekeepers? Using an original data set that includes local trust sentiments towards MONUSCO’s peacekeepers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo from October 2014 to December 2020, this study finds that peacekeepers are attacked more often when they lack local support. In the absence of local support, peacekeepers become vulnerable as they can no longer gather intelligence about rebel activities from the locals and the increased distrust for peacekeepers gives propagandist benefits to rebel groups. This study suggests to the UN that it needs to employ strategies in peacekeeping operations that would legitimize the presence of peacekeepers and cultivate more strengthened civil-military relations.","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48221357","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract We study the acceptability of war under certain conditions across individuals from Russia and Ukraine on the basis of World Values Survey in 2011. The period of analysis is before the beginning of military confrontations between the two countries (which started with the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation in 2014). We discuss which socio-economic, political and individual characteristics shape the justification of war under certain conditions. Overall, the acceptance of war is relatively low in both countries. Using logistic regressions, we found that there are characteristics that significantly reduce the justification of war in both countries, such as gender and level of happiness. Support in both countries is also significantly larger among respondents who are interested in politics and are married. Additionally, there are conditions which produce different results between the countries, such as religiosity, country aims, employment, confidence in the government, concern over possible war and political orientation.
{"title":"Is It Right to Fight? Evidence from Russia and Ukraine","authors":"M. Farzanegan, S. Fischer","doi":"10.1515/peps-2022-0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2022-0011","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We study the acceptability of war under certain conditions across individuals from Russia and Ukraine on the basis of World Values Survey in 2011. The period of analysis is before the beginning of military confrontations between the two countries (which started with the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation in 2014). We discuss which socio-economic, political and individual characteristics shape the justification of war under certain conditions. Overall, the acceptance of war is relatively low in both countries. Using logistic regressions, we found that there are characteristics that significantly reduce the justification of war in both countries, such as gender and level of happiness. Support in both countries is also significantly larger among respondents who are interested in politics and are married. Additionally, there are conditions which produce different results between the countries, such as religiosity, country aims, employment, confidence in the government, concern over possible war and political orientation.","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48593432","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This paper examines the timing behind the decision of countries to enter into regional trade agreements or interstate military conflicts, considering these two potential actions as substitute strategies. Using bilateral data from 1950 to 2014, I employ survival analysis to examine the factors that determine the likelihood of two countries entering into a regional trade agreement or a military conflict at any point in time. Historical or recent wars are posited to raise the gains from trade and therefore increase the likelihood that two countries choose to join the same trade agreement. On the other side, the existence of a strong trade relationship may raise the opportunity cost of entering into a conflict; bilateral trade flows and common membership in a regional trade agreement are posited to impact the likelihood of conflict. Other explanatory variables that affect the likelihood of either a common trade agreement or a military conflict include economic size, measured as the product of and the difference in the two countries’ GDPs; level of development, measured as the product of and the difference in the two countries’ per-capita GDPs; geography, measured by distance, contiguity, landlocked status, and island status; institutional linkages, represented by a common language, a colonial relationship, or a common legal origin; and political variables, including WTO membership, democracy, military alliances, and being a major oil producer. Results show that economic, geographic, institutional, and political variables all influence the probability that two countries enter into a conflict or join the same regional trade agreement.
{"title":"Conflict or Cooperation: A Survival Analysis of the Relationship between Regional Trade Agreements and Military Conflict","authors":"Teresa L. Cyrus","doi":"10.1515/peps-2022-0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2022-0012","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper examines the timing behind the decision of countries to enter into regional trade agreements or interstate military conflicts, considering these two potential actions as substitute strategies. Using bilateral data from 1950 to 2014, I employ survival analysis to examine the factors that determine the likelihood of two countries entering into a regional trade agreement or a military conflict at any point in time. Historical or recent wars are posited to raise the gains from trade and therefore increase the likelihood that two countries choose to join the same trade agreement. On the other side, the existence of a strong trade relationship may raise the opportunity cost of entering into a conflict; bilateral trade flows and common membership in a regional trade agreement are posited to impact the likelihood of conflict. Other explanatory variables that affect the likelihood of either a common trade agreement or a military conflict include economic size, measured as the product of and the difference in the two countries’ GDPs; level of development, measured as the product of and the difference in the two countries’ per-capita GDPs; geography, measured by distance, contiguity, landlocked status, and island status; institutional linkages, represented by a common language, a colonial relationship, or a common legal origin; and political variables, including WTO membership, democracy, military alliances, and being a major oil producer. Results show that economic, geographic, institutional, and political variables all influence the probability that two countries enter into a conflict or join the same regional trade agreement.","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49371944","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This paper investigates the impact of climate variability on trust in Vietnamese rural households. I contribute to the existing literature, mainly focused on natural disasters, by studying the impact on trust of smooth climate changes. Climate variations are measured using deviations of the minimum temperature in June from the average. I argue that increases in this variable are relevant for the rice, which is the staple food in Viet Nam. Increases in minimum temperatures may reduce rice yields and this, in turn, may affect individuals’ propensity to cooperate. Trust is measured using VARHS survey conducted from 2008 to 2014. Estimation of a linear probability model reveals a significantly positive association between the two variables of interest, which is robust after controlling for several checks.
{"title":"Temperature Variability and Trust in Vietnamese Rural Households","authors":"A. Baronchelli","doi":"10.1515/peps-2022-0020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2022-0020","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper investigates the impact of climate variability on trust in Vietnamese rural households. I contribute to the existing literature, mainly focused on natural disasters, by studying the impact on trust of smooth climate changes. Climate variations are measured using deviations of the minimum temperature in June from the average. I argue that increases in this variable are relevant for the rice, which is the staple food in Viet Nam. Increases in minimum temperatures may reduce rice yields and this, in turn, may affect individuals’ propensity to cooperate. Trust is measured using VARHS survey conducted from 2008 to 2014. Estimation of a linear probability model reveals a significantly positive association between the two variables of interest, which is robust after controlling for several checks.","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43778901","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This paper investigates the impact of militarization on income inequality. The analysis is conducted on a panel of 40 European countries over the period 2000–2017. The degree of militarization of a country is captured by means of the Global Militarization Index (GMI) and we employ the Gini index as a measure of inequality. The main findings show that militarization and inequality are positively associated. The findings appear to be robust. We also consider control variables related to military commitment, namely (i) conscription; (ii) NATO membership; (iii) involvement in an armed conflict. Interestingly conscription appears to be negatively associated with income inequality whereas an armed conflict and NATO membership show the opposite sign. For sake of robustness, we undertake the same estimations on alternative samples of countries and results are confirmed. Eventually, to deal with the issue of endogeneity, we apply the Lewbel, IV–GMM approach and results are confirmed.
{"title":"Militarization and Income Inequality in European Countries (2000–2017)","authors":"Raul Caruso, Antonella Biscione","doi":"10.1515/peps-2022-0026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2022-0026","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper investigates the impact of militarization on income inequality. The analysis is conducted on a panel of 40 European countries over the period 2000–2017. The degree of militarization of a country is captured by means of the Global Militarization Index (GMI) and we employ the Gini index as a measure of inequality. The main findings show that militarization and inequality are positively associated. The findings appear to be robust. We also consider control variables related to military commitment, namely (i) conscription; (ii) NATO membership; (iii) involvement in an armed conflict. Interestingly conscription appears to be negatively associated with income inequality whereas an armed conflict and NATO membership show the opposite sign. For sake of robustness, we undertake the same estimations on alternative samples of countries and results are confirmed. Eventually, to deal with the issue of endogeneity, we apply the Lewbel, IV–GMM approach and results are confirmed.","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42159071","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This paper adopts the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) estimation method to investigate the moderating role of institutional quality in military spending and the unemployment rate nexus in Nigeria for the period from 1984 to 2019. It also tests the direction of causality between military spending and unemployment using the Toda-Yamamoto Granger non-causality method. The causality results show that the direction of causality depends on the measure of military spending used. The main results indicate that military spending only reduces unemployment in the short run and worsens unemployment in the long run. The results further show that institutional quality does not play any significant moderating role in the relationship between military spending and unemployment. Based on our findings, we advocate that the government should allocate its expenditure properly, especially to the most productive sectors of the economy instead of increasing military spending that has no long-run effect on unemployment. Besides, the government needs to strengthen the institutional apparatuses in the country.
{"title":"The Role of Institutional Quality in Military Spending and Unemployment Nexus in Nigeria","authors":"I. Raifu, E. O. Obijole, O. Nnadozie","doi":"10.1515/peps-2022-0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2022-0006","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper adopts the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) estimation method to investigate the moderating role of institutional quality in military spending and the unemployment rate nexus in Nigeria for the period from 1984 to 2019. It also tests the direction of causality between military spending and unemployment using the Toda-Yamamoto Granger non-causality method. The causality results show that the direction of causality depends on the measure of military spending used. The main results indicate that military spending only reduces unemployment in the short run and worsens unemployment in the long run. The results further show that institutional quality does not play any significant moderating role in the relationship between military spending and unemployment. Based on our findings, we advocate that the government should allocate its expenditure properly, especially to the most productive sectors of the economy instead of increasing military spending that has no long-run effect on unemployment. Besides, the government needs to strengthen the institutional apparatuses in the country.","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48600342","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nowadays, it seems that investigating peace and conflict is more crucial than before. The recrudescence of armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine reminded scholars that much remains to be done not only to understand determinants and consequences of wars but also to provide policy-makers with workable solutions to build a long-lasting peace. Albeit apparently novel, the importance of investigating peace andwar is not a novelty for peace economists and peace scientists. In particular, PEPS also has played and keeps playing a role in this field of research. PEPS has been founded byWalter Isard in 1993 with the aim to create a novel outlet for peace scientists and peace economists. In particular, PEPSwas designed to attract contributions from an interdisciplinary community of scholars from awide variety of disciplines such as economics and political science, as well as regional science, geography and mathematics. Moreover, PEPS was intended to combine both positive and normative studies alongside policy-oriented papers. As said above, much remains to be done. First, we are not still fully aware of economic determinants of political violence. In this respect, it is still worth citing some lines in the preface of North et al. (2009) [...] The absence of a workable integrated theory of economics and politics reflects the lack of systematic thinking about the central problem of violence in human societies. How societies solve the ubiquitous threat of violence shapes and constraints the forms that human interaction can take [...]’. Secondly, we also do not have an adequate knowledge of the wide set of costs emerging in the presence of actual and potential violence. On the one hand, we are now aware that the costs of wars in many cases do constitute a life-long burden for polities, societies and people. In this respect, in the latest years as peace scholars we have departed from the accounting approach to armed conflict to take into consideration a broader approach involving long-term economic and political aspects as well as long-term psychological and societal consequences. Such general considerations are only the backbone of a literature
{"title":"PEPS has Gained Further Attention","authors":"R. Caruso","doi":"10.1515/peps-2022-9017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2022-9017","url":null,"abstract":"Nowadays, it seems that investigating peace and conflict is more crucial than before. The recrudescence of armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine reminded scholars that much remains to be done not only to understand determinants and consequences of wars but also to provide policy-makers with workable solutions to build a long-lasting peace. Albeit apparently novel, the importance of investigating peace andwar is not a novelty for peace economists and peace scientists. In particular, PEPS also has played and keeps playing a role in this field of research. PEPS has been founded byWalter Isard in 1993 with the aim to create a novel outlet for peace scientists and peace economists. In particular, PEPSwas designed to attract contributions from an interdisciplinary community of scholars from awide variety of disciplines such as economics and political science, as well as regional science, geography and mathematics. Moreover, PEPS was intended to combine both positive and normative studies alongside policy-oriented papers. As said above, much remains to be done. First, we are not still fully aware of economic determinants of political violence. In this respect, it is still worth citing some lines in the preface of North et al. (2009) [...] The absence of a workable integrated theory of economics and politics reflects the lack of systematic thinking about the central problem of violence in human societies. How societies solve the ubiquitous threat of violence shapes and constraints the forms that human interaction can take [...]’. Secondly, we also do not have an adequate knowledge of the wide set of costs emerging in the presence of actual and potential violence. On the one hand, we are now aware that the costs of wars in many cases do constitute a life-long burden for polities, societies and people. In this respect, in the latest years as peace scholars we have departed from the accounting approach to armed conflict to take into consideration a broader approach involving long-term economic and political aspects as well as long-term psychological and societal consequences. Such general considerations are only the backbone of a literature","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48342437","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：