ABOUT THE COLLECTIONS

Several journals and magazines produced at the University of Arizona, or by groups affiliated with the University, are shared, preserved and archived in the UA Campus Repository.

The University Libraries also publishes several journals using the Janeway platform. Those publications are available at https://journals.librarypublishing.arizona.edu.


QUESTIONS?

Please contact the Scholarly Communication Unit at repository@u.library.arizona.edu with your questions about journals and magazines in the UA Campus Repository, or if you are affiliated with the University of Arizona and are interested in archiving your journal or magazine in the repository or exploring our other journal publishing services.

.

Sub-communities within this community

Recent Submissions

  • Editorial Foreword

    Rysenbry, Elliot (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2024)
  • Table of Contents

    The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2024
  • Title Page

    The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2024
  • United States Air Passenger Rights: Grounded or Cleared for Take-Off? [Note]

    Giar, M. Tanner (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2024)
    The golden age of flying is no longer. ln the last two years, there has been an unprecedented surge in demand for air travel, and with that demand has come an equally unprecedented wave of passenger complaints relating to cancellations, delays, or other interruptions. Much of the allure that flying once possessed has been replaced with uncertainty, dissatisfaction, and frustration with what is and is not considered a passenger's right. This Note examines the current state of airline passenger rights in the United States and the European Union and how government regulation has shaped those rights. This Note delves into the intricacies of the current regulatory landscape in both regions and highlights the divergent approaches to addressing passenger concerns. The United States relies on the variability of carrier-specific contracts, leaving passengers uncertain about their rights and the assistance or compensation they might receive. ln contrast, the European Union's regulatory framework provides uniformity but poses challenges in the cumbersome process of obtaining compensation and creates an environment where airlines will not do more than what is strictly required. This Note posits that neither extreme serves passengers optimally and suggests that an effective solution lies in striking a balance that safeguards consumer interests while allowing airlines operational autonomy. This Note contributes to the ongoing discourse on airline passenger rights by offering a comparative analysis of regulatory approaches in the United States and the European Union. By scrutinizing proposed regulations in the United States, it seeks to provide insights into potential frameworks that could better serve the interests of consumers and the aviation industry, ultimately posing the question: Can a balanced regulatory model be crafted to ensure a win-win scenario for all stakeholders in air travel?
  • The Next Green Investment Bank: Comparing Australia's Clean Energy Finance Corporation with the United States' Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund [Note]

    Brookes, Alexander (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2024)
    The United States needs massive investments in green energy and infrastructure. As part of that investment, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 established the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, a type of green investment bank. In 2012, Australia passed legislation that established the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, also a green investment bank. This Note explores the organization and efficiency of Australia's Clean Energy Finance Corporation and compares it to the possible investment models the United States could use in distributing the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.
  • Money for Justice: Comparing Day Fines in Germany and Maricopa, County AZ [Note]

    Rysenbry, Elliot (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2024)
    This Note examines the concept of day fines and their implementation in two contrasting jurisdictions: Arizona's Maricopa County and Germany. Day fines, a system of monetary sanctions weighted according to a person's income, gained traction in the twentieth century as a means of ensuring substantively equitable punishment regardless of an individual's financial status. Maricopa County, among a handful of other U.S. jurisdictions, experimented with day fines during the early 1990s, only to see its program falter due to legislative constraints and political dynamics. ln contrast, Germany has maintained a robust day fine system for over four decades, with a flexible yet occasionally heavy-handed approach. This Note delves into the historical and operational aspects of day fines, highlighting the differences in implementation between the two jurisdictions. It investigates the reasons behind the failure of the U.S. day fine experiment and its continued success in Germany, considering factors such as political climate, economic considerations, and procedural intricacies. By comparing these experiences, the article offers insights that might inform the potential adoption of day fine systems in the United States-serving as a resource for activists, scholars, and policymakers seeking to enhance the fairness and effectiveness of punitive measures.
  • Evolving Sovereignty Relationships Between Affiliated Jurisdictions: Lessons for Native American Jurisdictions [Article]

    Carter, Vaughan; Ku, Charlotte; Morriss, Andrew P. (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2024)
    Though sovereignty is principally associated with governance over a territory and freedom to act in the international arena, this article examines sovereignty as empowerment. The study tests the applicability to Native American jurisdictions of the experiences of 15 jurisdictions presently associated with the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and France in shared sovereign relationships. The focus is on the evolution of those relationships and opportunities for development where jurisdictions do not attain full control over their affairs. The case studies examine the relationships from the perspectives of political, economic, and cultural sovereignty. The article further examines the relationships in three dimensions: evolutionary, frictions, and interwoven governance. It concludes with identifying factors of political cohesion, leadership, and entrepreneurship; conditions of good governance; and structures of consultation that allow for leveraging even limited degrees of sovereignty for political, economic, and cultural advancement.
  • An Undefined Global Threat: A Brief History and the Human Rights Implications of the Lack of a Universal Definition of Terrorism [Article]

    Horowitz, Samuel I. (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2024)
    This article seeks to stimulate truly critical thought on terrorism by providing a proposed universal definition. The background of this article briefly touches on the history of terrorism-broadly defined for historical analysis as the use of politically motivated violence by a non-state group against governments or the public. It then examines national and regional definitions of terrorism. Lastly, it provides an overview of international efforts aimed at defining, preventing, and criminalizing terrorism. The analysis explains why the lack of a universal definition is such a pressing issue for human rights. This article argues that the problem is one of both over- and under-inclusiveness: over-inclusiveness as to the proscribed conduct and under-inclusiveness as to perpetrators. Finally, the analysis proposes a universal definition of terrorism and presents the framework within which such a definition could be adopted and implemented at the international level.
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Table of Contents Volume 71, Number 6 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-11)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Table of Contents Volume 71, Number 5 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-09)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Table of Contents Volume 71, Number 4 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-07)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Table of Contents Volume 71, Number 3 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-05)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Table of Contents Volume 71, Number 2 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-03)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Table of Contents Volume 71, Number 1 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-01)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Editorial Board Volume 71, Number 6 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-11)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Editorial Board Volume 71, Number 5 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-09)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Editorial Board Volume 71, Number 4 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-07)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Editorial Board Volume 71, Number 3 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-05)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Editorial Board Volume 71, Number 2 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-03)
  • Rangeland Ecology & Management Editorial Board Volume 71, Number 1 (2018)

    Society for Range Management (Society for Range Management, 2018-01)

View more