National Academies Press: OpenBook

Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship (2008)

Chapter: Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics

« Previous: Chapter 1 Overview
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 32
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12547.
×
Page 34

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Chapter 2 Characteristics of Applicants, Fellows, and Research Topics USIP began its Fellowship program in 1987. Each year, the Institute has selected between 8 and 17 Fellows (median of 12). As shown in Figure 2-1, a total of 253 Fellowships have been awarded from 1987 through 2007 (7 Fellows received two Fellowships). 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Figure 2-1 Number of Senior Fellowships awarded, 1987-2007 SOURCE: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff An interesting question for USIP to consider is what the “right number” of Fellows is. This question draws attention to USIP’s goals—to what degree is USIP seeking to support individuals as compared with creating a community of scholars and practitioners? Obviously, the answer is directly affected by USIP’s resources. USIP has only partial information on applicants to the program. For the period 1997-2007, USIP received 1,269 applications for Senior Fellowships. Yearly applications have ranged from 70 to 157, with a median of 120 (as shown in Figure 2-2) . 19

180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Figure 2-2 Number of applicants, 1997-2007 SOURCE: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff Notice that the number of applicants appears to have dropped off when comparing the first five-year period to the latter five-year period. Future analysis could examine possible explanations for this trend. Possible explanations that could be tested include, among others: changes in the perception of the program; other opportunities for fellowships in peace and security; USIP efforts to reach out to potential applicants; changes in the overall labor market for potential fellows; and USIP’s resources or goals. From a competitiveness standpoint, USIP has many more applicants than positions (see Figure 2-3). The data collected by USIP, however, do not allow for analysis of the quality of individual applicants, so it is not clear from the information presented to the committee how many of these people would make good candidates for a Senior Fellowship. 20

18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Figure 2-3 Ratio of number of Fellowships to applicants, 1997–2007 SOURCE: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff Each year, USIP selects between 7 and 16 percent (mean of 11 percent) of applicants to become Fellows, and each year one or two of the individuals who are offered the Fellowship decline. Although the numbers are very small, it may be worthwhile for USIP to interview those individuals to ascertain why they declined the Fellowship. USIP could present them with specific choices, such as that the stipend was inadequate; they had pursued other, more attractive fellowships received simultaneously; or family or professional issues precluded their ability to relocate to Washington. Additionally, further analysis could address such topics as: 1. What percentage of applicants is highly qualified for the Fellowship program? 2. What steps does USIP take to reach potential applicants? To what degree are their strategies effective? 3. Is the compensation adequate to attract a good pool of qualified applicants? 4. Should the competition be open to policy-relevant research across the board, or should the Fellows’ research be tied more explicitly to USIP programming in the field? An additional possibility would be to ask applicants how they heard about the program. Collecting information about this could assist USIP is improving its outreach to potential applicants. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS Turning to demographic characteristics, USIP has collected data on the gender of Fellows and applicants and also on their citizenship. Regarding gender, 44 Fellows were women (17 percent where gender is known).1 302 applicants were women (24 percent 1 There was 1 case where there was incomplete information on a Fellow, including that person’s gender. 21

where gender is known).2 Because the program selects few applicants per year, volatility in the percentage of particular groups of Fellows is to be expected. As can be seen in Figure 2-4, the percentage of female Fellows peaked in 1993, 2001, and 2006; it declined in 1998 and 2005. 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Figure 2-4 Percentage female Fellows, 1987-2007, and applicants, 1997-2007 SOURCE: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff The percentage of women among the total number of applicants closely follows the percentage of women among the Fellows, except in 1998, and it assumes that the percentage of women accepting is similar to the percentage of men accepting Fellowship offers. Forty-five percent of Fellows have U.S. citizenship (or dual-citizenship with the United States as one of the countries). The percentage of Fellows in any given year who are U.S. citizens varies widely, between 9 and 75 percent. Among applicants where citizenship is known, 30 percent have been U.S. citizens. As Figure 2-5 notes, a higher percentage of Fellows than applicants are U.S. citizens. 2 There were 32 cases of missing data about gender. 22

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Figure 2-5 Percentage of Fellows, 1987-2007, and applicants, 1997-2007, who were U.S. citizens. SOURCE: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff NOTE: There are no missing data for the Fellows. There are missing data for the applicants. In particular, the drop in applicants who were U.S. citizens in 1998-1999 is due to missing data. Among the countries from which the most non-U.S. applicants come are India, Nigeria, Israel, Russia, Pakistan, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Applicants have come from well over 100 different countries. Among the countries from which the most non-U.S. Fellows come are India, Israel, Russia, and the United Kingdom. Fellows have come from about 50 different countries. Finally, we turn to a consideration of the employment of Fellows and applicants at the time of they applied for the Fellowship (as shown in Table 2-1). 23

Table 2-1 Type of employment of Fellows, 1987-2007, and applicants, 1997-2007 Percentage Percentage Type of Employment Fellows of Total Applicants of Total Academic/Research 147 58 765 60 Government 29 11 97 8 Diplomacy 20 8 30 2 NGO 17 7 104 8 Legal 3 1 34 3 Political Analysis/Consultancy 5 2 40 3 Journalism/Media 19 8 82 6 Business 1 0 34 3 Military 0 12 1 UN/IGOs 6 2 17 1 Other 0 19 1 Missing 6 2 35 3 Total 253 100 1269 100 Source: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff Overall, most of the applicants and Fellows are male, U.S. citizens, and academics. These demographic characteristics are noted for USIP, but no recommendation is made. It remains for USIP to determine what sort of demographic diversity fits with its goals for the Fellowship. RESEARCH INTERESTS The core of the Fellowship is a Fellow’s research project. This section explores the thematic and geographic areas of the projects. As in the previous section, the foci are described. USIP can compare these trend data with its goals regarding which topics the institute would want to see Fellows address. Subjects USIP identified several foci of research projects that applicants propose, as noted in Table 2-2. 24

Table 2-2 Types of research foci Major Category USIP Categories Conflict Religious/Ethnic Conflict Conflict Gender Issues Terrorism/Political Violence Cycles of Conflict Conflict Management and Resolution (CMR) Conflict prevention, Conflict Prevention/Early Warning management, and Negotiation/Diplomacy resolution Peacekeeping Post-Conflict Activities and Peacebuilding Humanitarian Intervention International Law/Rule of Law Arms Control and Deterrence International law and Human Rights organizations International Organizations United Nations Refugees and Migration Issues International Economics International Foreign Aid economics Economic Development Political Economies Political Systems/International Relations Political systems Democracy Environment and natural resources Environment/Natural Resources Communication Communication Media and Information Technology Education Foreign policy Foreign Policy Other Other 25

As a starting point, these categories were collapsed into nine aggregated categories (as shown in Table 2-3): conflict; conflict prevention, management, and resolution; international law and organizations; international economics; political systems; environment and natural resources; communication; foreign policy; and other. It should be noted that, in the analysis that follows, the topics applicants pursued is partly influenced by the perceived focus of USIP; the topics that fellows pursued is partly influenced by the applicant pool and partly by the review committees that evaluated the applicants and recommended Fellows. Table 2-3 Applicant research focus, 1997-2007 Environ. and natural Conflict prevention, Intl. law and orgs. management, and Political systems Communication Foreign policy Intl. econ. resolution resources Conflict Other Total Year 1997 17 45 23 7 20 12 4 128 1998 20 43 30 3 25 2 4 5 1 133 1999 25 45 26 10 27 1 8 8 150 2000 22 61 22 9 24 3 10 4 1 156 2001 17 37 16 3 26 5 3 107 2002 26 43 15 6 19 5 9 7 1 131 2003 24 33 22 1 25 2 6 4 2 119 2004 31 30 17 1 9 3 10 9 110 2005 18 27 11 2 6 1 2 2 1 70 2006 13 23 8 3 10 1 9 2 1 70 2007 27 23 13 2 15 8 1 89 Total 240 410 203 47 206 18 83 49 7 1263 SOURCE: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff Looking at proportions of topics submitted annually by applicants, conflict represented between 13 and 17 percent from 1997 to 2001, then that topic rose from 2002 to 2007, peaking at about 30 percent in 2004 and 2007. Conflict prevention, management, and resolution topics averaged 34 percent of applicants’ topics from 1997 to 2002 and 30 percent from 2003 to 2007. Minor trends―such as a drop-off in applications on topics related to political systems in 2004-2005 or the rise in topics related to communications in 2006-2007―also occurred, but largely the proportion of topics in each category has been fairly stable over time. Overall, conflict prevention, management, and resolution topics were the most common, followed by conflict, political systems, and international organization and law topics, as noted in Table 2-4. 26

Table 2-4 Applicant research focus by topic Topic Percentage Conflict prevention, management, and resolution 32 Conflict 19 Political systems 16 International law and organizations 16 Communication 7 Foreign policy 4 International economics 4 Environment and natural resources 1 Other 1 Total applicants 1263 Source: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff Similar analysis is presented for the research topics of Fellows in Table 2-5. 27

Table 2-5 Research topics of Fellows, 1987-2007 Environ. and natural Conflict prevention, Intl. law and orgs. management, and Political systems Communication Foreign policy Intl. econ. resolution resources Conflict Other Total Year 1987 2 2 1 2 7 1988 1 7 1 1 10 1989 1 6 1 1 2 11 1990 1 5 2 1 3 12 1991 3 4 1 1 9 1992 2 7 3 1 3 1 17 1993 4 4 1 3 12 1994 3 9 1 1 1 15 1995 3 3 1 1 5 2 15 1996 3 4 1 1 5 14 1997 3 6 2 3 2 16 1998 2 1 3 2 1 1 10 1999 3 5 5 1 1 15 2000 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 10 2001 2 5 4 1 1 13 2002 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 10 2003 2 3 2 3 1 1 12 2004 4 6 1 1 12 2005 4 4 2 1 11 2006 1 3 2 1 3 1 11 2007 2 1 2 2 1 8 Total 44 86 39 8 42 4 14 12 1 250 SOURCE: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff Because of the limited number of Fellows annually, it is difficult to discern trends. One approach is to consider what the most frequent research topic was in a given year. In eight separate years—for instance in 1988 or again in 2004―the most frequent topic was conflict prevention, management, and resolution. In three years (1991, 1998, and 2000), international organizations and law was the most frequently researched topics among the Fellows. In 1996, political systems were popular. In the other years―for example in 2007―the topics were tied; one-quarter of the Fellows studied conflict, international organizations and law, and another quarter political systems. Overall, the same four research areas that were most popular among the applicants were most popular among the Fellows, as Table 2-6 illustrates. 28

Table 2-6 Research topics of Fellows by topic area Topic Percentage Conflict prevention, management, and resolution 34 Conflict 18 Political systems 17 International law and organizations 16 Communication 6 Foreign policy 5 International economics 3 Environment and natural resources 2 Other 0 Total research topics 250 Source: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff As the tables show, most applicants and Fellows focused primarily on one of four areas: conflict prevention, management, and resolution; conflict; political systems; and international law and organizations. Geographic Focus The geographic areas of focus that USIP identified are listed in Table 2-7. Table 2-7 Geographic areas of focus Geographic Region Western Europe Eastern Europe/Former USSR North America Central and South America Middle East/North Africa Sub-Saharan Africa East Asia South Asia Southeast Asia and Oceania Global 29

Tables 2-8 through 2-11 look at the geographic focus of applicants and Fellows. Table 2- 8 examines applicants’ proposed research and considers into which region(s) of the world their research topics best fit. Table 2-8 Geographic focus of applicants’ proposed research by year SE Asia and Oceania Sub-Saharan Africa C. and S. America ME/N. Africa N. America W. Europe EE/FSU E. Asia S. Asia Global Total Year 1997 12 19 7 4 12 13 10 7 45 129 1998 8 24 5 5 8 25 4 6 1 47 133 1999 5 29 3 3 19 20 11 18 3 37 148 2000 3 27 5 3 11 28 9 17 6 45 154 2001 1 22 1 2 5 17 5 9 3 41 106 2002 2 13 3 5 9 20 7 18 3 51 131 2003 3 8 5 2 12 24 5 11 1 47 118 2004 3 7 2 5 10 13 3 15 6 46 110 2005 4 9 2 2 15 7 2 11 17 69 2006 2 8 6 8 10 4 10 2 20 70 2007 2 7 7 25 8 4 9 2 25 89 Total 45 173 33 44 134 185 64 131 27 421 1257 Source: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff The most frequent categorization in each year was “global,” suggesting that applicants were approaching particular topics more generally (e.g., negotiation or diplomacy rather than diplomacy in the Middle East). Excluding this category, most applicants from 1997 to 2001 focused on Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union and sub-Saharan Africa. From 2003 to 2006, there was a relative shift in focus towards sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. In 2007, topics about the Middle East and North Africa made up 28 percent of applicants’ proposals. In general, these areas of the world were the most common in applicants’ proposals, as Table 2-9 shows. 30

Table 2-9 Geographic focus of applicants’ proposed research by percentage Region Percentage Global 33 Sub-Saharan Africa 15 EE/FSU 14 ME/N. Africa 11 S. Asia 10 E. Asia 5 W. Europe 4 C. and S. America 4 N. America 3 SE Asia and Oceania 2 Total 1257 Source: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff 31

Similar tables were constructed for Fellows. Table 2-10 Geographic focus of Fellows’ research by year SE Asia and Oceania Sub-Saharan Africa C. and S. America ME/N. Africa N. America W. Europe EE/FSU E. Asia S. Asia Global Total Year 1987 1 2 1 3 7 1988 1 1 2 1 5 10 1989 2 2 2 5 11 1990 1 1 1 1 1 7 12 1991 1 1 3 4 9 1992 4 1 3 1 8 17 1993 1 1 4 1 1 4 12 1994 3 1 2 2 1 2 4 15 1995 4 3 1 1 6 15 1996 1 6 1 2 1 3 14 1997 1 3 1 4 2 5 16 1998 3 1 2 1 3 10 1999 5 1 4 1 1 3 15 2000 3 1 2 1 3 10 2001 1 2 1 1 1 7 13 2002 2 2 1 1 4 10 2003 2 3 1 6 12 2004 1 2 1 2 3 3 12 2005 2 1 3 1 2 1 10 2006 1 1 2 1 1 1 4 11 2007 1 5 2 8 Total 4 47 3 7 41 26 10 16 4 90 248 Source: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff As the table shows, the work of many Fellows also fits within the “global” category. Focus on Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union seemed to peak from 1994 to 2000. Middle East and North Africa foci were popular from 1997 to 2001, and again from 2003 to 2007. (In particular most of the 2007 Fellows were working in this region). A general view echoing these trends is presented in Table 2-11. 32

Table 2-11 Geographic focus of Fellows’ research by percentage Region Percentage Global 36 EE/FSU 19 ME/N. Africa 17 Sub-Saharan Africa 10 S. Asia 6 E. Asia 4 C. and S. America 3 W. Europe 2 SE Asia and Oceania 2 N. America 1 Total 248 Source: Data provided by USIP; tabulations by staff Excluding broadly international projects, applicants and Fellows generally focused on the same areas. This would seem to make sense in that if most applicants were proposing topics in the Middle East and North Africa, one would expect to see more Fellows doing research in that area. Looking at trends over time, applicants and Fellows alike have shown little interest in Southeast Asia and Oceania. Western Europe has been a declining focus among applicants and it has not been a focus for Fellows either. Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union also seemed to show a declining trend for both groups. USIP did collect some data on specific countries of focus, but there are substantial missing data. For applicants, the countries that were most frequently proposed for study were China, India, Iraq, Israel/Palestine, Nigeria, Russia, South Korea, and the United States. Where Fellows focused on individual countries (in about half of the Fellows’ projects), the most frequently studied places were Russia, China, Iran, Iraq, and Israel/Palestine. It is likely that some of the country focus is explained by conflicts that are occurring in or involving those particular countries. As conflict shifted over time from the 1980s to the 2000s, it is likely that the interests of applicants and USIP would change and that this would be somewhat reflected in the work of the Fellows. FINDINGS In response to the first question in the committee’s charge, and based on the data provided by USIP, the committee found: 1. USIP’s data spreadsheet is a useful organizing tool. 2. Each year, USIP selects between 7 and 16 percent (mean of 11 percent) of applicants to become Fellows (Figure 2-3), which could indicate the program is very competitive. 33

3. Most Fellows and applicants are male and academics. Seventeen percent of Fellows are female (where gender is known).On average 45 percent were U.S. citizens (Figures 2-4, 2-5, Table 2-1). 4. Overall, conflict prevention, management, and resolution were the most common topics for Fellows and applicants, followed by conflict, political systems, and international organization and law topics, (Tables 2-3, 2-4, 2-5, and 2-6). 5. In terms of geographic focus, many Fellows work fit into the “global” category. Focus on Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union seemed to peak from 1994 to 2000. The Middle East and North Africa foci were popular from 1997 to 2001, and from 2003 to 2007 (in particular most of the 2007 Fellows were working in this region). Research on sub-Saharan Africa ranked fourth among the areas of geographic focus for Fellows’ research (Tables 2-10, 2-11). 6. Applicants took a somewhat different approach; after global projects, sub-Saharan Africa was the subject of the most proposals, followed by Eastern Europe and Soviet Union/Former Soviet Union, the Middle East/North Africa, and South Asia (Tables 2- 8, 2-9). 34

Next: Chapter 3 Views of Former Fellows »
Assessing the United States Institute of Peace Jennings Randolph Senior Fellowship Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $41.00 Buy Ebook | $32.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The United States Institute of Peace (USIP) is an independent, nonpartisan, national institution established and funded by the U.S. Congress. The goals of the USIP are to help prevent and resolve violent international conflicts; promote post-conflict stability and development; and to increase conflict management capacity, tools, and intellectual capital worldwide. One way the USIP meets those goals is through the Jennings Randolph Program for International Peace, which awards Senior Fellowships to outstanding scholars, policymakers, journalists, and other professionals from around the world to conduct research at the USIP. The Fellowship Program began in 1987, and 253 Fellowships have been awarded through 2007.

This book presents a preliminary assessment of the Fellowship Program, and recommends certain steps to improve it, including more rigorous and systematic monitoring and evaluation of the Fellowship in the future. The committee also makes several recommendations intended to help USIP gain further knowledge about the perceptions of the Fellowships in the wider expert community.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!