Airports are vital national resources. They serve a key role in trans portation of people and goods and in regional, national, and inter national commerce. They are where the nation's aviation system connects with other modes of transportation and where federal respon sibility for managing and regulating air traffic operations intersects with the role of state and local governments that own and operate most airports. Research is necessary to solve common operating problems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into the airport industry. The Airport Coopera tive Research Program (ACRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the airport industry can develop innovative nearterm solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for ACRP was identified in TRB Special Report 272: Airport Research Needs: Cooperative Solutions in 2003, based on a study spon sored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The ACRP carries out applied research on problems that are shared by airport operating agencies and are not being adequately addressed by existing federal research programs. It is modeled after the successful National Coopera tive Highway Research Program and Transit Cooperative Research Pro gram. The ACRP undertakes research and other technical activities in a variety of airport subject areas, including design, construction, mainte nance, operations, safety, security, policy, planning, human resources, and administration. The ACRP provides a forum where airport opera tors can cooperatively address common operational problems. The ACRP was authorized in December 2003 as part of the Vision 100Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The primary participants in the ACRP are (1) an independent governing board, the ACRP Oversight Committee (AOC), appointed by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation with representation from airport operating agencies, other stakeholders, and relevant industry organizations such as the Airports Council InternationalNorth America (ACINA), the American Associa tion of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), Airlines for America (A4A), and the Airport Consultants Council (ACC) as vital links to the airport community; (2) the TRB as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and (3) the FAA as program sponsor. In October 2005, the FAA executed a contract with the National Academies formally initiating the program. The ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport professionals, air carriers, shippers, state and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, other airport users, and research orga nizations. Each of these participants has different interests and respon sibilities, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort. Research problem statements for the ACRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to the TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the AOC to formulate the research pr...

This special issue of Cross-Currents focuses on the region of the Sino-Tibetan borderlands that Tibetans call Kham: a historical frontier where several spheres of authority have competed, expanded or retracted, and sometimes overlapped. It has long constituted a buffer zone between the larger political entities of Central Tibet and China proper, and is an area that crosses cultural, ecological, and political boundaries.Kham is one of three traditional divisions of the geographical space that makes up what is often called "cultural Tibet" or "ethnographic Tibet," together with the central region of Ü-Tsang and the northeastern region of Amdo (see map 1). What makes the history of eastern Tibet special, as Wim van Spengen and Lama Jabb (2009, 7) have rightly argued, is its "relative location" vis-à-vis China and Central Tibet, an in-betweenness that make it a "contingent region" (Tsomu 2015, 1), both an interface and a place in its own right. Despite evidence of the relative autonomy-or even sometimes independence-of the disjointed polities that have made up Kham throughout history, its intermediate location and relationship with the neighboring centers of power have contributed to its evolving topology.The articles in this special issue of Cross-Currents stem from a collaborative project called "Territories, Communities, and Exchanges in the Kham Sino-Tibetan Borderlands." 1 Within the framework of this research project, the authors whose work appears here have avoided naturalizing any particular definition of Kham-although it is an inescapably endogenous category. Regions are the products of contested historical and socio-spatial processes. In Kham, influences from multiple centers have been exercised with varying intensity, and belongings and allegiances themselves have been multiple and variable. As Peter Perdue (2005, 41) contended, "the frontier zone was a liminal space where cultural identities merged and Gros 2 Cross-Currents: East Asian History and Culture Review E-Journal No. 19 (June 2016) • (http://cross-currents.berkeley.edu/e-journal/issue-19)shifted, as peoples of different ethnic and linguistic roots interacted for common economic purposes." These liminal areas can be seen as "microcosms," as Nicola Di Cosmo and Don J. Wyatt (2003) have proposed, where cultures and identities are constantly recomposed. In this issue, we adopt a multipolar approach to the adaptive and intrinsically mixed properties of border areas, which goes against unitary visions of China or Tibet. In doing so, we highlight the timespecific processes that took place in the history of this frontier, especially from the eighteenth century onward.Map 1. Geographical location of Kham. Source: Created by Rémi Chaix, based on data from NASA's Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM).In order to decipher the processes that unfolded on the frontier, it is necessary to look closely at a wide range of issues, including migration, ethnic demographics, trade networks, indigenous notions of power or potency, political negotiations, political a...

We deploy a network of autonomous stations measuring meteorological and soil parameters, as well as the airborne particle size distribution with a focus on the size of Plasmapora Viticola (PV). They provide early warning and detection of PV spore outbursts with high spatial and temporal resolution. We evidence the high spatial inhomogeneity of this pathogen, potentially allowing to limit treatments to the specific times and locations where infection risk is detected.

No abstract

Southernmost Kham, which borders Burma and Yunnan Province, remained at the juncture of several mutually competing political centers until the first half of the twentieth century. On the fringes of Tibetan, Naxi, and Chinese expansion and increasing political control, several Tibeto-Burman-speaking groups such as the Drung and Nung gradually became integrated into their neighbors' polities. Their political dependency often arose from trading with and accepting loans from commercial agents and from the intermediaries of local rulers, Naxi and Tibetans alike. This article addresses this practice of providing credit, which was developed at the expense of impoverished groups who were often obliged to accept the terms of the transaction. The author particularly emphasizes the connections between this system of debt dependency, the relationship between creditors and debtors that has to be considered in terms of exchange and reciprocity, and the question of political legitimacy. Within this broader context of regional interethnic relations, the article provides a detailed analysis of the concrete terms of the political relationship that existed between Drung communities and Tibetan chiefs of Tsawarong, which contributes to an understanding of the workings of this relationship and its economic, territorial, and even ritual components.