Mesoporous Ni-alumina catalysts (Ni-alumina-pre and Ni-alumina-post) were synthesized by one-step sol-gel method using micelle complex comprising lauric acid and nickel ion as a template with metal source and using aluminum sec-butoxide as an aluminum source. The Ni-alumina catalysts showed relatively high surface areas (303 m 2 /g for Ni-alumina-pre and 331 m 2 /g for Ni-alumina-post) and narrow pore size distributions centered at ca. 4 nm. Highly dispersed Ni particles were observed in the Nialumina catalysts (ca. 5.2 nm for Ni-alumina-pre and ca. 6.8 nm for Ni-alumina-post) after reduction at 550°C, while a catalyst prepared without a template (NiAl-comp) exhibited inferior porosity with large metal particles (ca. 12.3 nm). Mesoporous Nialumina catalysts with different porosity were obtained by employing different hydrolysis step of aluminum source. When aluminum source was hydrolyzed under the presence of micelle complex, a supported Ni catalyst with highly developed framework mesoporosity was obtained (Ni-alumina-post). On the other hand, when aluminum source was pre-hydrolyzed followed by mixing with micelle solution, the resulting catalyst (Ni-alumina-pre) retained high portion of textural porosity. It was revealed that the hydrolysis method employed in this research affected not only textural properties but also metal-support interaction in the Nialumina catalysts. It was also found that the Ni-alumina-pre catalyst exhibited weaker interaction between nickel and alumina than the Ni-alumina-post, leading to higher degree of reduction in the Ni-alumina-pre catalyst. In the hydrodechlorination of o-dichlorobenzene, the Ni-alumina catalysts exhibited better catalytic performance than the NiAl-comp catalyst, which was attributed to higher metal dispersion in the Ni-alumina catalysts. In particular, the Ni-alumina-pre catalyst showing 1.5 times higher degree of reduction and larger amounts of o-dichlorobenzene adsorption exhibited better catalytic performance than the Nialumina-post catalyst.

This study analyzed the research productivity of Saudi academics using the triple-helix model. In the analysis, we combined domestic and international collaboration by three sectors-university, industry, and government-according to the model of the triple-helix. This approach produces better results than by simply including international collaboration as fourth sector. According to the analysis, research collaboration in Saudi Arabia which is measured by the triple-helix, was ''-'' uncertainty (negative T-value) while scientific productivity has been dramatically increasing since the late 2000s. The triplehelix collaboration does not quite differ between domestic collaboration and ''domestic and international'' collaborations. In our further analysis, we found that technological development was not based on scientific research in Saudi Arabia; rather, the technological development relies on prior technology (patent references). From that point, Saudi Arabia's current long-term strategic plan to develop a scientific base for a knowledge-based industry is well aligned to the current contexts of Saudi Arabia.

This paper offers new qualitative insights into ongoing internationalization processes in Japanese higher education. Drawing on ideas from migration studies and informed by analysis of junior international faculty members' (JIFs) experiences in Japanese universities, we posit a novel, actor-centered typology of internationalization that delineates between integration, assimilation, and marginalization of mobile actors, and considers their implications in practice. Twenty-three interviews were conducted with JIFs from a variety of disciplines and institutions across Japan. Findings indicated a pattern of disillusionment with their role in internationalization, as many perceived themselves to be tokenized symbols of internationalization rather than valued actors within it. Participants identified various barriers which prevented them from participating in the academic "mainstream" and confined them to peripheral roles. We argue that their experiences are indicative of assimilative and marginalizing forms of internationalization, which pose persistent barriers to reform in Japanese universities despite decades of state-sponsored internationalization.

No abstract