Academic literature on the topic 'Great Britain vs'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Great Britain vs.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Great Britain vs"
Yakovleva, N. M. "Argentina vs Great Britain: the trajectory of one conflict." Cuadernos Iberoamericanos 10, no. 3 (January 19, 2023): 123–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.46272/2409-3416-2022-10-3-123-135.
Full textSklizkova, Ekaterina V. "Axiological Aspect of Sovereign States Armorial: Russia vs. Great Britain." Genealogy 7, no. 3 (August 21, 2023): 60. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genealogy7030060.
Full textJebb, Susan A., Kirsten L. Rennie, and Tim J. Cole. "Prevalence of overweight and obesity among young people in Great Britain." Public Health Nutrition 7, no. 3 (May 2004): 461–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/phn2003539.
Full textGudaj, R. T., E. Brydl, J. Lehoczky, and I. Komlósi. "Dairy welfare in Hungary and in the United Kingdom vs. National and European Union legislation." Biotehnologija u stocarstvu 28, no. 1 (2012): 11–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/bah1201011g.
Full textHenderson, James P. "Equal Pay vs. Equal Job Opportunity for Women: The Debate in Great Britain from 1891 to 1923." International Journal of Social Economics 19, no. 10/11/12 (October 1992): 298–316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eum0000000000519.
Full textOmelan, Grzegorz. "The Idea of Welfare State vs the Idea of Sustainable Development. The Case for United Kingdom." Studia Krytyczne/Critical Studies, no. 3 (November 3, 2019): 45–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.25167/sk.1418.
Full textShkvorchenko, N. "SEMIOTIZATION OF POLITICAL TOXICITY IN THE MEDIA SPACES OF THE USA, GREAT BRITAIN AND UKRAINE: A MULTIMODAL ASPECT." MESSENGER of Kyiv National Linguistic University. Series Philology 25, no. 1 (August 26, 2022): 142–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.32589/2311-0821.1.2022.263132.
Full textTomlinson, Samuel J., Ulrike Dragosits, Peter E. Levy, Amanda M. Thomson, and Janet Moxley. "Quantifying gross vs. net agricultural land use change in Great Britain using the Integrated Administration and Control System." Science of The Total Environment 628-629 (July 2018): 1234–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.02.067.
Full textDassonneville, Ruth, and Michael S. Lewis-Beck. "A changing economic vote in Western Europe? Long-term vs. short-term forces." European Political Science Review 11, no. 1 (November 21, 2018): 91–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1755773918000231.
Full textCheregi, Bianca Florentina. "The discursive construction of Romanian immigration in the British media: Digitized press vs. Television documentaries." Romanian Journal of Communication and Public Relations 17, no. 2 (July 1, 2015): 54. http://dx.doi.org/10.21018/rjcpr.2015.2.34.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Great Britain vs"
Smart, Matthew James. "Anonymity vs. traceability : revocable anonymity in remote electronic voting protocols." Thesis, University of Birmingham, 2012. http://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/3386/.
Full textO'Neill, Michael A. "Safe with us vs the sacred trust : policy change under Conservative government : health policy under Britain's Thatcher and Canada's Mulroney." Thesis, University of Warwick, 1996. http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/78609/.
Full text鍾國威 and Kwok-wai Andrew Chung. "Urban conservation vs. mega redevelopment: implications to Hong Kong urban designer." Thesis, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong), 2001. http://hub.hku.hk/bib/B31980430.
Full textKARREMANS, Johannes. "State interests vs citizens’ preferences : on which side do (Labour) parties stand?" Doctoral thesis, 2017. http://hdl.handle.net/1814/45985.
Full textExamining Board: Professor Pepper Culpepper, formerly EUI/University of Oxford (Supervisor); Professor Hanspeter Kriesi, EUI (Co-Supervisor); Professor Ferdinand Müller-Rommel, Leuphana Universität Lüneburg; Professor Maurits Van der Veen, College of William & Mary
This dissertation deals with the question of how the partisan nature of government still matters in the current globalized and post-industrial world. In particular, it compares the representativeness of two contemporary centre-left governments with that of two centre-left executives from the 1970s in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. According to the more provocative theories about the state of contemporary representative democracy, these countries should be forerunners of a general European trend in which governments care more about technical competence rather than political representation and responsiveness. These tendencies are expected to particularly affect the partisanship of Labour ministers. In order to test these theories, I do a comparative content analysis of how Labour finance ministers/Chancellors justify the yearly government budget in front of the parliament. The justifications are divided into those that characterize the government as representative of the partisan redistributive preferences (input-justifications) VS those that profile it as a competent caretaker of public finances (output-justifications). Following the above-mentioned theories, the hypothesis is that today the output-justifications are more important than in the past. As this approach is relatively novel with regards to the study of responsiveness, the thesis also dedicates one chapter to the justification strategies of a technical and a neoliberal government. The purpose of this extra comparison is to have more empirical evidence of what renders an output-justification different from an input-justification. By incorporating these two cases, thus, I get a deeper comparative insight into what is a typical left-wing/partisan discourse characteristic and what constitutes governmental/institutional talk. This extra comparison, consequently, allows me to reflect more deeply on the findings emerging from the overtime comparison of Labour governments. The findings of my research tell a two-sided story. On the one hand, contrary to my hypothesis, the contemporary cases feature slightly more input-justifications than the governments from the 1970s. On the other, the logic of the discourses suggests that, while in the 1970s the responsiveness to social needs was presented as a policy goal per se, today the input-justifications tend to be more subordinated to justifications about economic and financial considerations. The findings thus speak both to theories according to which today we are not witnessing a decline of political representation, but simply a change in kind, as well to the theories speaking of a gradual hollowing out of political competition. In the iv conclusion of my dissertation I reflect on what is right and wrong on the two sides of the debate.
Books on the topic "Great Britain vs"
Britain, Great. Additional article to the treaty between Her Britannic Majesty and the United States of May 8, 1871: Signed at Washington, January 18, 1873. [London?: s.n., 2002.
Find full textProdger, Mick J. Luftwaffe vs. RAF. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Pub., 1998.
Find full textProdger, Mick J. Luftwaffe vs. RAF. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Pub., 1997.
Find full textIrvine, Benedict. England vs Scotland: Does more money mean better health? London: Civitas, Institute for the Study of Civil Society, 2004.
Find full text1916-, Ellis Frank H., Swift Jonathan 1667-1745, and Maynwaring Arthur 1668-1712, eds. Swift vs. Mainwaring: The Examiner and the Medley. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985.
Find full textWhitaker, James. Diana vs. Charles: Royal blood feud. New York: Dutton Signet, 1993.
Find full textHeilenday, Frank. The Battle of Britain, Luftwaffe vs. RAF: Lessons learned and lingering myths from World War II. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 1995.
Find full textWhitaker, James. Diana vs. Charles: Royal blood feud. New York: Dutton, 1993.
Find full textSchanzer, Rosalyn. George vs. George: The American Revolution as seen from both sides. Washington, D.C: National Geographic, 2004.
Find full textArbitration, Permanent Court of. The OSPAR arbitration (Ireland - United Kingdom) award of 2003 / with an introduction by Daniel Bodansky. The Hague: T.M.C. Asser, 2009.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Great Britain vs"
Ferling, John. "“To Recover Self-Government”." In Adams vs. Jefferson, 99–112. Oxford University PressNew York, NY, 2004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195167719.003.0007.
Full textConference papers on the topic "Great Britain vs"
Martinez-Sanz, Inmaculada, Balarko Chaudhuri, Adria Junyent-Ferre, Vincenzo Trovato, and Goran Strbac. "Distributed vs. concentrated rapid frequency response provision in future great britain system." In 2016 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM). IEEE, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/pesgm.2016.7741970.
Full textHassan, S. M., K. A. Ling, and J. W. S. Longhurst. "Local air quality management process in Great Britain in its second round of review and assessment: efficiency vs. effectiveness." In AIR POLLUTION 2006. Southampton, UK: WIT Press, 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.2495/air06019.
Full textHoffman, Danie, Tebogo Hellen Ngele, and Benita Zulch. "Contrasting the profiles of Female vs Male quantity surveyors in South Africa." In 14th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (AHFE 2023). AHFE International, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.54941/ahfe1003906.
Full text