Masters Theses in the Pure and Applied Sciences was first conceived, published, and disseminated by the Center for Information and Numerical Data Analysis and Synthesis (CINDAS)* at Purdue University in 1957, starting its coverage of theses with the academic year 1955. Beginning with Volume 13, the printing and dis semination phases of the activity were transferred to University Microfilms/Xerox of Ann Arbor, Michigan, with the thought that such an arrangement would be more beneficial to the academic and general scientific and technical community. After five years of this joint undertaking we had concluded that it was in the interest of all concerned if the printing and distribution of the volumes were handled by an international publishing house to assure improved service and broader dissemination. Hence, starting with Volume 18, Masters Theses in the Pure and Applied Sciences has been disseminated on a worldwide basis by Plenum Publishing Corporation of New York, and in the same year the coverage was broadened to include Canadian universities. All back issues can also be ordered from Plenum. We have reported in Volume 38 (thesis year 1993) a total of 13,787 thesis titles from 22 Canadian and 164 United States universities. We are sure that this broader base for these titles reported will greatly enhance the value of this impor tant annual reference work. While Volume 38 reports theses submitted in 1993, on occasion, certain uni versities do report theses submitted in previous years but not reported at the time.

The typical image of the Gezira Scheme, the large-scale irrigation scheme started under British colonial rule in Sudan, is of a centrally planned effort by a central colonial power controlling tenants and cotton production. However, any idea(l)s of planned irrigation and profit in Gezira had to be realized by African farmers and European officials, who both had their own agendas. Projects like Gezira are best understood in terms of continuous negotiations. This book rewrites Gezira’s history in terms of colonial control, farmers’ actions and resistance, and the broader development debate.

Cited in Sheehy, Chen, and Hurt . Volume 38 (thesis year 1993) reports a total of 13,787 thesis titles from 22 Canadian and 164 US universities. As in previous volumes, thesis titles are arranged by discipline and by university within each discipline. Any accredited university or college with a grad

The theme of 2016 is ”Solidarity in a competing world - fair use of resources”. While on the one hand, one part of the world is profiting from natural resources, the other part of the world is suffering with hunger, malnutrition, human diseases, low income, violence and lately is also challenged through climate change. There is need to rethink and engage in a fair share of all resources between the continents and nations. This includes huge engagement into the management of natural resources to solve the long list of environmental threats expressed through ongoing erosion, loss of soil fertility and loss of biodiversity, and topped by climate change having strong impact on the productivity in agriculture, fishery and forestry, and the use and quality of water and of energy in the South.

Sudan was traditionally one of the world's largest producers of long-stable cotton and medium producer of medium-stable cotton. In the Sudan cotton has been the most important cash crop and foreign-currency earner for the past 50 years. During the seventies and up to late eighties cotton alone contributed between 45 and 65 percent of the total foreign-currency earnings however, it contribution dropped below 3% in 2001. In addition, cotton is considered as a main source of income for about 13 percent of the total labor-force. In spite of the economic importance of cotton for the Sudan economy big fluctuations in cotton area, production and yield occurred. Gezira Scheme (GS) contributes about 60 % of the total cotton produced in Sudan. The study answers the following research questions (1) What are the main driving factors and the reasons for the decrease of cotton production in the GS; (2) Is the cotton yield variability among the tenants in the GS due to random variability or due to the tenants' technical inefficiency or scheme management factors? What are the main factors behind technical inefficiency?; (3) What are the economic losses as a result of cotton production variability in the GS? and (4) If the tenants are free to choose what to produce, what are the crop combinations they will select and how close are they to the current crop combination?