Ugyan nem szuken KORNYESZ tema; de ide is vonatkozik.  A kezembe kerult a
Vilagbank (WB) atmeneti orszagokkal foglalkozo hirlevele.  A szeptemberi szam
azzal foglalkozik, hogy mennyire uti a szocialis halo lete (vagy fejlettsege)
a novekedest.  Ugy tunik, hogy a velemenyek igen kulonbozoek.  van, aki
allitja, hogy a leggyorsabb fejlodesre van szukseg ebben a regioban.  Van,
aki
pedig azt, hgoy a szocialis halo (welfare) fenntartasa megakadalyozza a
fejlodest.  A WB 'szakertoi' (ezt csak a kornyesz korokben elterjedt WB
orszag-szagerto definicio miatt tettem idezojelbe:  szoval, hogy lesz
valakibol a WB Magyarorszag-szagertoje?  Hat ugy, hogy mar valaha elrepult
Magyarorszag felett...) viszont ugy hiszik (meglepo modon), hogy bizonyos
egyenloseg egeszsegugyi es oktatasi vonalon tulajdonkepp elosegiti a
fejlodest.   

Olvassatok el, nagyon erdekes a vita (kulonosen, hogy pont vegulis ez donti
el, hogy hogy allnak a kornyezetvedelem prioritasahoz;a
tomegkozelkedesunkhoz,
stb.): 

http://www.worldbank.org/html/prddr/trans/trans.htm

De azert kicsit megrokonyodtem:

1.  fejlodes mindenekfelett?  (ismet.....)  Vagyis, hogy ismet, a fejlodes
ugy
van targyalva, mint egyeduli es szent cel.  Aminek minden ala van rendelve. 
Tehat csak akkor 'hagyjak' CEE-nek, hogy maradhasson valami szoc. halo, ha ez
elosegiti a fejlodest.  Szerintem az oktatasnak, az egeszsegugyi ellatasnak,
a
tiszta kornyezetnek a fejlodes melle, es nem ala! rendelt erteke van
onmagaban
is....

2.  kicsit fura erzes a hirlevelet erintettkent olvasni.  ugy targyaljak a
valtozasokat a CEE orszagokban, mint egy nagy tudomanyos kiserletet: 
beleontsunk-e meg egy kis sosavat; vagy kivagdossunk-e nehany gent.  arrol
mintha szo sem lenne, hogy itt elo embereken, tarsadalmakon folynak a
'kiserletek'; valamint, hogy ezeknek esetleg van sajat velemenyuk is arrol,
hogy mit szeretnenek a tarsadalmukkal......

Nem akarok ujra ragyujtani a hajdani "fejlodes mindenek felett' vitara; de
erdekelne, mi a velemenyetek..... 


Diana

FOREIGN POLICY ON THE SCALE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD

Suppose you lived in a diverse neighborhood -- rich folks, poor folks, people
of all kinds and colors, most of them eager to keep the peace and do business
together.  But no neighborhood is perfect, and yours is plagued by a youth
gang
or two and some drug runners and a couple of well-armed, dangerous thugs.

Suppose you agreed, for the safety of everyone, to form a neighborhood
association to keep the peace.  The association also tries to help the poor a
bit, encourage trade, clean up the streets and stage some cheery
multi-cultural celebrations.  Not a big deal, this association, but a lot
better than
everyone going it alone.

Now suppose that one of the richest members of the neighborhood, after
putting
significant energy and money into getting the association started, suddenly
gets mad because everyone doesn't always do things his way.  He starts making
rude remarks and stomping out of meetings.  He falls behind in his dues,
refuses to do his share of the work and insists that he and he alone should
choose the next association president.

If you can imagine how you would feel about that jerk, then you know how
every
nation of the United Nations feels about us.  The United States, almost $2
billion behind in our UN dues, a laggard in the dirty work of peacekeeping, a
constant critic, is single-handedly blocking the re-appointment of Boutros
Boutros-Ghali to be UN Secretary General.

Boutros-Ghali is not the most popular Secretary General in UN history.  But
the
way we are swinging our weight around is making everyone else support him. 
We
could at least pay our dues before we act like such a bully.  Not to do so,
to
behave so loudly and irresponsibly, is a formula not only for making enemies
all around, but ultimately for weakening, maybe destroying, the neighborhood
association.

Perhaps that's the bully's intention.  If so, he'd better remember what the
neighborhood was like before anyone got together to police it.

lomats will claim that neighborhood analogies are way too simple for the
complex give and take of foreign policy.  But I keep thinking, as I read
about
the behavior of nations, including our own, of none-too-friendly neighbors in
a rough part of town.

or example, imagine that one dark night a household a few streets over, folks
by the name of Hutu, take out after their next door neighbor, named Tutsi,
and
hack a great many of them (900,000 or so) to death.  The Hutus did have a
grievance.  The Tutsis had been lording it over them.  But that massacre is
not
only extreme vengeance, it is horrifying to everyone, a terrible example for
the children, a mess to clean up, and an ominous precedent for other
neighbors
with grievances.

Now suppose the surviving Tutsis rally and chase the Hutu murderers into the
next house down, where the Zaireans live.  The fleeing Hutus take along their
mothers and grandfathers and cousins, innocent folk except that they happen
to
be related to genocidal gangsters.  They huddle over at the Zaireans for
awhile, but the Zaireans, who have troubles of their own, are not what you
would call hospitable.  So the Hutus finally stream back, refugees and
gangsters alike, to their old house, now inhabited by Tutsis.

The neighborhood association has done nothing but watch the whole time.  We
watched the murders, watched the flight of the Hutus, sent over a little food
to Zaire.  Now we watch the Hutus try to return, wondering who is going to
turn on whom with the machetes this time.

Do we just go on watching?  If it were a real neighborhood, what would we do?

Over on another street we have the smartest, meanest thug, Milosevic by name,
the head of the Serbian clan.  He has impoverished his own family and
organized
gangs to wage war on his immediate neighbors, slaughtering men, raping women,
burning houses.  The rest of us told him to cut it out.  He didn't, so we
watched the carnage, grateful that we didn't live on that unhappy street. 
When
Milosevic paused to catch a breath, we invited him to a peace conference and
praised him for laying off, though his goons continue to run loose, occupying
the property of former neighbors.  We sent in a few police to be sure they
stay there.

Now Milosevic's own family is rising up against him.  The neighborhood
association is doing nothing.  "It's a family affair," some of us say.  "If
we
went in there, some of us might get hurt," says the bully who doesn't pay his
dues.  The bully has been saying that from the beginning, though the bully
can
command thousands of times the manpower and weaponry available to Milosevic.
(But then, we all know that bullies are never really brave underneath their
bluster.)

Our neighborhood, not just the Serbian part or the Hutu part, but all of it,
is
a fearful place.  There are more and more streets where it's not safe to
walk,
day or night.  Innocent people fall under the influence of thugs or get in
the
way of gangs, and when violence starts, they have no recourse.  They dial
911,
they wait and they wait, and nothing happens.

What do you suppose thugs and drug runners and gangs do, when they see a
neighborhood that fails to police itself?  Why can't a world that is
increasingly rich, a world that talks grandly of technical marvels and global
trade and the end of cold war, do something as simple as apprehending
criminals
and keeping peace?  The power of a few thugs is nothing compared with the
combined strength of billions of law-abiding people.  The only moral excuse
for
building up weapons is to protect the weak.  Why don't we use our weapons
that
way?

And why would any nation, especially a rich and strong one that prides itself
on its decency, want to build a reputation as a deadbeat, muscle-bound but
lily-livered, self-centered bully?

 (Donella H. Meadows is an adjunct professor of environmental studies at
Dartmouth College.)

Tellus Institute and the Stockholm Environment Institute - Boston are 
conducting a search to fill a research position.  The successful 
candidate will likely be a recent recipient of a Master's degree or Ph.D. 
in the fields of Energy and/or Environmental Science.  A secondary 
emphasis in economics is desirable.  The work will focus on the energy 
implications of scenarios of socio-economic development over the next 
century at the global and regional scales.  The candidate should have a 
knowledge of how energy is used throughout a variety of sectors such as 
households, transportation, services, industry, agriculture, and 
especially the energy sector itself.  The candidate should be familiar 
with the possibilities and limitations of future energy technologies, and 
should be able to incorporate that knowledge into a systems perspective 
on future development.  The required skills include quantitative modeling 
using spreadsheets such as Excel, and the ability to learn new software, 
such as the Stockholm Environment Institutes' PoleStar package.  To learn 
more about Tellus Institute & Stockholm Environment Institute - Boston, 
visit our web site at http://www.tellus.com.  Tellus Institute is an 
equal opportunity employer; women and minorities are encouraged to apply.

Interested candidates should send cover letter, CV, and supporting 
materials to:
Dave McAnulty, Administrative Director
Tellus Institute & Stockholm Environment Institute - Boston
11 Arlington Street
Boston MA 02116-3411

Eleg gyakran olvasom, hogy ma mar csak az elmaradott Kelet-Europa 
es Del-Azsia epit atomeromuveket. Tudom, hogy nem igy van, de 
mindig lusta voltam konkret adatoknak utananezni. Most egy eleg 
friss adat van a kezemben (Power Engineering International, nov/dec 
1996), ezert - bar senki nem kerdezte - leirom a francia adatokat:

Jelenleg 4db 1400 MW-os blokk all uzembehelyezes ill. epites alatt 
Franciaorszagban:
    Chooz B1:
kozel a francia-belga hatarhoz, elso halozatra kapcsolas 1996 aug. 
30, most a probauzem folyik, teljes uzem 1997 jan.
    Chooz B2:
uzemanyag berakas 1996 szept., elso halozatra kapcsolas 1997 jan., 
uzemi gep 1997 junius,
    Civaux 1:
(Poitiers mellett) mintegy 3 honappal Chooz B2 utan jar,
    Civaux 2:
uzemanyag berakas es uzembehelyezes 1998-ra varhato.

Minden erdeklodot udvozol 
Gacs Ivan