Outside Options and IMF Conditionality∗

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Outside Options and IMF Conditionality∗ Bargain Down or Shop Around? Outside Options and IMF Conditionality∗ Richard Clarky June 23, 2020 Abstract When do overlapping international organizations (IOs) serve as credible outside options to one another? Utilizing an original dataset on cooperation among IOs in the emergency lending space, I find that exit options are only credible when IOs compete as opposed to cooperate with one another. While the literature frames the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as a monopoly organization, I show that it increasingly competes with Regional Financing Arrangements (RFAs). When RFAs compete with the IMF, they become credible forum shopping destinations that member states can leverage in negotiations over conditional lending at the Fund. I first offer original descriptive analysis of patterns of cooperation among these IOs. I then hypothesize that as states become members of competitive IOs, but not cooperative institutions, they ought to receive less intrusive conditionality from the IMF. A series of regressions lend support for my theory, as do supplemental interviews and text analysis. Keywords: outside options, forum shopping, international organizations, IMF, condi- tionality Word Count: 10,808 ∗I thank Allison Carnegie, Don Casler, Lindsay Dolan, Nikhar Gaikwad, Randall Henning, Felicity Vabulas, and Noah Zucker for helpful comments on previous drafts. Participants at the Barcelona Workshop on Global Governance and several workshops at Columbia University also provided valuable feedback. All remaining errors are my own. yRichard Clark (Email: [email protected]) is a Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Political Science, Columbia University, New York, NY. In April 2013, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and Tunisia agreed to a two- year, $1.75 billion Stand-By Arrangement (SBA).1 Disbursement began in June 2013, with Tunisia taking on 20 loan conditions mandating various economic and institutional reforms. Meanwhile, Tunisia was party to a second emergency lending institution – the Arab Monetary Fund (AMF) – which Tunisia co-founded in 1976. The AMF remained on the sidelines as Tunisia negotiated its IMF deal. However, in February 2014, the AMF agreed to join the IMF program as a co-financier.2 That same month, the IMF notified Tunisia that it was increasing the number of conditions that the country had to meet under the loan program from 20 to 35 – an increase of 75 percent.3 Insofar as the number of conditions attached to a loan proxies for its stringency, Tunisia’s obligations suddenly became much more burdensome. I argue that the simultaneous nature of (1) the AMF’s decision to co-finance the loan program and (2) the addition of new conditions to the program is far from coincidental. Rather, when the AMF signed onto the loan, it eliminated Tunisia’s only outside option to IMF lending. Without the credible threat to forum shop at the AMF, Tunisia lost a great deal of bargaining leverage at the IMF, allowing the Fund to mandate additional reforms. This story places a spotlight on the agency of international organizations (IOs) under regime complexity – a situation where multiple, partially overlapping IOs govern a single issue space.4 It therefore contrasts much of the literature, which emphasizes the agency of member states of multiple IOs, as they can secure bargaining leverage by threatening to forum shop or simply select the forum offering the least stringent set of rules.5 Critically, I suggest that the credibility of outside options under regime complexity hinges on whether IOs cooperate or compete with one another. When do overlapping IOs become credible outside options for states seeking forum shop- ping opportunities? I contend that the credibility of outside options under regime complexity 1https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2013/cr13161.pdf 2https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2014/cr1450.pdf 3Conditionality figures come from Kentikelenis, Stubbs and King(2016). 4This is close to the definition offered by Henning(2017, 19). 5See Busch(2007); Davis(2009); Alter and Meunier(2009). 1 is shaped by whether the overlapping IOs in question cooperate or compete with one an- other. When IOs compete, member states have credible exit options, and IOs grant them concessions through more lenient policies to prevent forum shopping. By contrast, when IOs cooperate, the credibility of outside options is diminished, and IOs can better constrain state behavior. This paper therefore refines the typical narrative about when states can forum shop. Existing theories suggest that member states can forum shop any time they belong to more than one institution performing similar functions.6 Because cooperation undercuts the cred- ibility of outside options, I argue that forum shopping is only possible for member states when the overlapping IOs in question compete as opposed to cooperate with one another. Therefore, the interactions among institutions under regime complexity are critical for deter- mining whether states can credibly threaten to forum shop. Importantly, cooperation is then distinct from the negotiation of a division of labor or hierarchy, through which IOs seek to minimize substantive overlap in organizational mandates and activities.7 My theory applies to IOs whose operations substantively overlap, which might imply low levels of hierarchy or specialization. In particular, I consider two common types of cooperation: information sharing and co- financing.8 Both are formal, meaning that they are publicly announced – typically through policy papers, project documents, and press releases – and accompanied by changes to IOs’ policies. They can have finite end points, as when development IOs co-finance a single infrastructure project, or they can persist indefinitely, as when IOs sign a memorandum agreeing to share information. Formal cooperation stands in contrast to ad hoc or informal arrangements, such as handshake agreements among bureaucrats.9 I focus on formal coop- eration for feasibility and generalizability reasons – because informal cooperation is often 6See Alter and Raustiala(2018, 341) for a review, though also see Busch(2007); Helfer(2009); Morse and Keohane(2014) for specific examples. 7See Gehring and Faude(2014); Pratt(2018) for examples of such coordination. 8See Keohane and Victor(2011); Abbott et al.(2015) for more on the benefits of cooperation. 9See Henning(2017, 9) for examples of informal governance arrangements in Europe. 2 unobservable, it is difficult to study in a systematic way. While scholars have had some success qualitatively probing single instances of informal cooperation, my goal in this paper is to make generalizable predictions that can be tested across organizations and over time; I further discuss the situations to which my theory applies in the conclusion. My definition of competition, meanwhile, is simply the absence of cooperation among IOs whose activities overlap. This competition is therefore quite passive – if two IOs perform equivalent tasks and serve the same countries but fail to cooperate by sharing information or co-financing, member states can exercise their exit option by threatening to pursue support from the other organization unless more lenient terms are awarded. Competition then implies nothing more than the potential for mutual member states to forum shop. I argue that they can do so when (1) they belong to two or more IOs that perform very similar functions; (2) the outside IO can plausibly offer them more lenient terms; and (3) the IOs are not engaged in cooperation. Existing accounts of when states can forum shop focus only on the first condition.10 Cooperation undercuts the credibility of outside options by either synchronizing the infor- mation upon which IOs make decisions (information sharing) or by forcing IOs to explicitly agree to a common regulatory framework (co-financing). When IOs share private informa- tion, it harmonizes the information environment in which the organizations make decisions. Therefore, IOs that share information should design more similar policies for member states than competing IOs, which limits the extent to which members of these organizations can forum shop for more lenient conditions. Co-financing, meanwhile, occurs when two IOs mutually agree to fund a project governed by a single policy framework instead of offering competing terms to member states, thereby eliminating the exit option. To probe the validity of this theory, I study the emergency lending regime complex, which includes IOs that engage primarily in balance of payments lending. I do so for several reasons. First, scholars have characterized the IMF as possessing a pseudo-monopoly over 10See Alter and Raustiala(2018) for a review. 3 emergency lending (Lipscy 2015, 2017). I contradict this literature by showing that regional financing arrangements (RFAs) like the AMF, whose activities are substantively similar to those performed by the IMF, can serve as credible exit options to the Fund in the absence of cooperation. Second, emergency lending is an area where the stringency of the policies administered by IOs to member states is of the utmost importance. The policy terms attached to loans in this area are called conditionality. Given that conditions from the IMF often incite protests and political upheaval,11 one could argue that the burdensomeness of conditionality is even more important to recipient countries than the dollar amount of the loan. Therefore, countries have strong incentives to bargain down their conditionality burdens when they have the leverage to do so, as when
Recommended publications
  • Sustainable Financing Review for Croatia Protected Areas
    The World Bank Sustainable Financing Review for Croatia Protected Areas October 2009 www.erm.com Delivering sustainable solutions in a more competitive world The World Bank /PROFOR Sustainable Financing Review for Croatia Protected Areas October 2009 Prepared by: James Spurgeon (ERM Ltd), Nick Marchesi (Pescares), Zrinca Mesic (Oikon) and Lee Thomas (Independent). For and on behalf of Environmental Resources Management Approved by: Eamonn Barrett Signed: Position: Partner Date: 27 October 2009 This report has been prepared by Environmental Resources Management the trading name of Environmental Resources Management Limited, with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the Contract with the client, incorporating our General Terms and Conditions of Business and taking account of the resources devoted to it by agreement with the client. We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above. This report is confidential to the client and we accept no responsibility of whatsoever nature to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies on the report at their own risk. Environmental Resources Management Limited Incorporated in the United Kingdom with registration number 1014622 Registered Office: 8 Cavendish Square, London, W1G 0ER CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 BACKGROUND 1 1.2 AIMS 2 1.3 APPROACH 2 1.4 STRUCTURE OF REPORT 3 1.5 WHAT DO WE MEAN BY SUSTAINABLE FINANCE 3 2 PA FINANCING IN CROATIA 5 2.1 CATEGORIES OF PROTECTED
    [Show full text]
  • Transport Development Strategy of the Republic of Croatia (2017 – 2030)
    Transport Development Strategy of the Republic of Croatia (2017 – 2030) Republic of Croatia MINISTRY OF THE SEA, TRANSPORT AND INFRASTRUCTURE Transport Development Strategy of the Republic of Croatia (2017 - 2030) 2nd Draft April 2017 The project is co-financed by the European Union from the European Regional Development Fund. Republic of Croatia Ministry of the Sea, Transport and Infrastructure I Transport Development Strategy of the Republic of Croatia (2017 – 2030) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background on development of a Croatian Comprehensive National Transport Plan .................................................. 1 1.2 Objectives of the Transport Development Strategy (TDS 2016) ............................. 4 1.3 Revision of the TDS (2016) Ex-Ante conditionality .................................................. 4 1.4 Methodology for the development of the TDS (2016) ............................................ 5 2 Analysis .................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 General aspects of transport ................................................................................... 7 2.2 Public transport and zero-emission modes ........................................................... 34 2.3 Rail Transport......................................................................................................... 72 2.4 Road transport
    [Show full text]
  • Route Evaluation Report Croatia Eurovelo 8 – Mediterranean Route
    Route Evaluation Report Croatia EuroVelo 8 – Mediterranean Route MEDCYCLETOUR Project Davorin Belamarić April 27th 2018 Contents 1 Background ......................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Mission of the project and report objectives ................................................................. 5 1.2 Organization ................................................................................................................ 7 1.3 Brief methodological explanations ................................................................................ 8 1.3.1 Different phases of the route evaluation ................................................................ 8 1.3.2 ECS – European Certification Standard used for this evaluation ........................... 9 1.3.3 Used tools and equipment, photographs ..............................................................10 1.4 Overview of the sections .............................................................................................10 2 Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................16 2.1 Existing route infrastructure ........................................................................................16 2.1.1 Public transport ....................................................................................................19 2.2 Critical deficiencies .....................................................................................................30
    [Show full text]
  • Autocesta Zagreb – Sisak
    A 11 AUTOCESTA ZAGREB – SISAK Zagreb, ožujak 2006. SEKTOR ZA GRAĐENJE ODJEL ZA PROJEKTIRANJE A 11 AUTOCESTA ZAGREB - SISAK OPĆENITO Programom prostornog uređenja Republike Hrvatske iz 1999. godine autocesta Zagreb - Sisak pripada prvoj skupini prioriteta koji su od važnosti za državu. Trasa počinje na obilaznici Zagreba kod mjesta Jakuševec u čvorištu Jakuševec te završava spojem na postojeću državnu cestu D37 Sisak - Petrinja. Autocesta je duljine ~ 47,5 km uključivo i odvojak za privremeni spoj na D37 duljine ~1,2 km. Grad Sisak će se preko čvora Sisak spojiti na autocestu te je predviđena spojna cesta za Sisak duljine ~ 3 km koja se spaja na glavnu os autoceste. Južni ulaz u grad Zagreb u dužini od cca 1.3 km predviđen je nadvožnjakom iznad ranžirnog kolodvora i spojem na produženu Sarajevsku ulicu. Postojeća prometna infrastruktura (državna cesta D30 i D36) koja spaja Zagreb i Sisak ne zadovoljava potrebe suvremenog prometa, te će se planiranom autocestom povezati najznačajnija gospodarska žarišta u Hrvatskoj koristeći najpovoljnije prirodne mogućnosti za vođenje prometnice. TRASA Trasa je “postavljena” na osnovu dosadašnjih istraživanja koridora Zagreb – Sisak i nalazi se unutar koridora predviđenog za tu autocestu iz prostornih planova Zagrebačke i Sisačko-moslavačke županije. Autocesta ima glavne spojeve na postojeću mrežu u području Zagreb – Velika Gorica (A 3: Bregana – Zagreb – Lipovac, te D 30: Velika Gorica – Petrinja – H. Kostajnica i D 31: Velika Gorica – Pokupsko) i u području Sisak – Petrinja (D 36 Pokupsko – Sisak i D 37: Sisak – Petrinja – Glina). Spomenuti spojevi su čvorišta “Jakuševec” i “Velika Gorica – jug” te priključci Veliko Polje i Velika Gorica u području Zagreb – Velika Gorica, dok su u području Sisak – Petrinja to čvorišta “Sisak” i “Mošćenica”, te čvorišta “Lekenik” kao spoj na D 30 preko Ž 3230 i “Buševec” kao spoj na Ž 3116.
    [Show full text]
  • Etir Code Lists
    eTIR Code Lists Code lists CL01 Equipment size and type description code (UN/EDIFACT 8155) Code specifying the size and type of equipment. 1 Dime coated tank A tank coated with dime. 2 Epoxy coated tank A tank coated with epoxy. 6 Pressurized tank A tank capable of holding pressurized goods. 7 Refrigerated tank A tank capable of keeping goods refrigerated. 9 Stainless steel tank A tank made of stainless steel. 10 Nonworking reefer container 40 ft A 40 foot refrigerated container that is not actively controlling temperature of the product. 12 Europallet 80 x 120 cm. 13 Scandinavian pallet 100 x 120 cm. 14 Trailer Non self-propelled vehicle designed for the carriage of cargo so that it can be towed by a motor vehicle. 15 Nonworking reefer container 20 ft A 20 foot refrigerated container that is not actively controlling temperature of the product. 16 Exchangeable pallet Standard pallet exchangeable following international convention. 17 Semi-trailer Non self propelled vehicle without front wheels designed for the carriage of cargo and provided with a kingpin. 18 Tank container 20 feet A tank container with a length of 20 feet. 19 Tank container 30 feet A tank container with a length of 30 feet. 20 Tank container 40 feet A tank container with a length of 40 feet. 21 Container IC 20 feet A container owned by InterContainer, a European railway subsidiary, with a length of 20 feet. 22 Container IC 30 feet A container owned by InterContainer, a European railway subsidiary, with a length of 30 feet. 23 Container IC 40 feet A container owned by InterContainer, a European railway subsidiary, with a length of 40 feet.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Observance of Standards and Codes
    REPORT ON THE OBSERVANCE OF STANDARDS AND CODES CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COUNTRY ASSESSMENT REPUBLIC OF CROATIA This Corporate Governance Assessment of Croatia has been completed as part of the joint World Bank-IMF program of Reports on the Observance of Standards and Codes, (ROSC) which are designed to strengthen the international financial architecture. This ROSC is based upon a template structured around the OECD Principles of Corporate Governance completed by the World Bank team, and the Croatian Securities Commission, based on a review of relevant legislation and discussions with the Croatian Securities Commission, the Ministry of Finance, the Zagreb Stock Exchange, the Varazdin Over-The-Counter Market, the Croatian Privatization Fund, the Central Depository Agency, the Commercial Court of Zagreb, the Croatian Association of Accountants and Financial Experts, the Croatian Employers’ Association, Expandia Privatization Investment Fund, the Law Faculty of Zagreb, Croatian Chamber of Economy, and Zagrebacka banka. The assessment was conducted March through May 2001 by the Europe and Central Asia Regional Department of the World Bank in collaboration with the Corporate Governance Unit of the Private Sector Advisory Services Department of the World Bank. REPORT ON THE OBSERVANCE OF STANDARDS AND CODES Corporate Governance Assessment Republic of Croatia Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY II. DESCRIPTION OF PRACTICE A Capital Market Overview A1 Capital market structure A2 Ownership structure A3 Regulatory framework and professional/best practice
    [Show full text]
  • Croatia National Report 2007
    CROATIA NATIONAL REPORT 2007 I Network The total length of motorway network, as completed by the end of 2007 in Croatia, amounts to 1163.5 km. In 2007, 75,9 km of new motorways and 3,8 km of semi motorways were built (as compared to 43 km that were built in 2006), and 15,7 km of existing roads were upgraded to the full motorway profile: On the Motorway A1: Zagreb - Split - Ploče; Dugopolje-Bisko-Šestanovac Sections (37 km) - opened to traffic in full profile in 06/2007 On the Motorway A2: Zagreb - Macelj Krapina-Macelj Section (17.2 km) –13,4 km was completed as full motorway and 3,8 km as semi motorway On the Motorway A5: Beli Manastir-Osijek-border with Bosnia and Herzegovina Sredanci-Đakovo Section (23 km) – opened to traffic as full motorway in 11/2007 On the Motorway A6: Zagreb - Rijeka - on the Vrbovsko-Bosiljevo Section (8,44 km) – upgrade to the full motorway profile of the viaduct Zeceve Drage, tunnel Veliki Gložac, viaduct Osojnik and viaduct Severinske Drage together with corresponding motorway segments in 06/2007 - on the Oštrovica-Kikovica Section (7,25 km) - upgrade to the full motorway profile in 11/2007 On the Motorway A11: Zagreb – Sisak On the Jakuševec-Velika Gorica South Section – completion of the interchange Velika Gorica South and 2,5 km of a motorway segment in 5/2007 and in 09/2007 In Croatia, motorways are operated by 4 companies, i.e. by Hrvatske autoceste d.o.o. (operates all toll motorways except for those in concession) and by three concession companies BINA-ISTRA d.d.
    [Show full text]
  • Croatia National Report on Motorways 2014
    CROATIA NATIONAL REPORT ON MOTORWAYS 2014 I Current State of the Network As on 31 December 2014, the total length of the motorway network in Croatia amounted to 1,289.4 km. Motorways are operated by 4 companies: - Hrvatske autoceste d.o.o. (operates motorways A1, A3, A4, A5, A10, A11 and Sv.Ilija tunnel), - BINA-ISTRA d.d. (it operates the so called Istrian Y - A8 and A9), - Autocesta Rijeka - Zagreb d.d. (operates motorways A6, A7, part of A1, and the Krk Bridge) and - Autocesta Zagreb - Macelj d.o.o. (operates motorway A2). Company 2013 2014 Total network Total network Total network plan for 2015 1. HAC d.o.o.* 901.4 901.4 925.6 2. ARZ d.d.* 187.03 187.03 187.03 3. BINA-ISTRA d.d. 141.0 141.0 141.0 4. AZM d.o.o. 60.0 60.0 60.0 TOTAL 1,289.43 1,289.43 1,313.63 *revised km according to km of network in service OPENING OF NEW MOTORWAY SECTIONS IN 2014 There were no new openings in 2014 therefore total completed network remain unchanged and amounted to 1,289.4 km Tunnels and Bridges on the Network Total Company Km of Tunnels Km of Bridges Tunnels and Bridges HAC 31.63 8.51 40.14 ARZ 12.88 13.10 25.98 BINA ISTRA 5.31 9.36 14.67 AZM 5.90 7.87 13.77 TOTAL 55.72 38.84 94.56 1 II Works in Progress On 31 December 2014, the works were in progress on: - 26.7 km of motorways, - 23.1 km of fast roads WORKS IN PROGRESS ON 31 DECEMBER 2014 Motorway Section Km Description A5 Beli Manastir-Osijek- B&H Bridge over the Drava River 2.5 Construction work and border supervision A5 Beli Manastir – Osijek - BiH Sredanci-B&H border 3.2 Construction work and supervision A11 Zagreb - Sisak Jakuševac-V.
    [Show full text]
  • Autocesta A11 Velika Gorica
    AUTOCESTA A11 ZAGREB - SISAK DIONICA VELIKA GORICA - LEKENIK Poddionica: Velika Gorica - Buševec PUŠTANJE U PROMET AUTOCESTA A11 ZAGREB - SISAK ČVOROVI Sva križanja s postojećom prometnom mrežom riješena su van razine, a spoj s autocestom moguć je u čvoru: - Čvor Buševec u km 18+132 priključak na županijsku cestu Ž3116 i državnu cestu D30 (čvor Buzin – Velika Gorica – Petrinja – Hrvatska Kostajnica) U cilju izbjegavanja prolaska vozila koja silaze s autoceste kroz naselje Buševec, izgrađena je spojna cesta koja spa- ja prometnice Ž3116 i D30. CESTARINSKI PROLAZI Podionica autoceste Velika Gorica (jug) - Buševec bit će pod režimom zatvorene naplate. U čvoru Buševec je izgrađen cestarinski prolaz (CP) Buševec s 3 naplatne kućice, 4 prolaza i prizemnim ob- jektom kontrole naplate, nadstrešnicom za vozila zapos- lenih i objektom za smještaj agregata. U km 12+117 poddionice Velika Gorica (jug) - Buševec nalazi se čeoni cestarinski prolaz Mraclin sa 7 naplat- nih kućica i 8 prolaza, katni objekt kontrole naplate, nadstrešnica za vozila zaposlenih i objekt za smještaj agregata. AUTOCESTA A11 LINIJSKI PRIKAZ LEGENDA: Most DIONICA ČVOR ZAGREB PLANIRANI DOVRŠETAK IZGRADNJE u pripremi -1+275 -1+275 1,275 0+000 0,982 IVANJA RIJEKA 0+982 1,318 2+300 Vijadukt Odra u km 2+071 ; L = 743 m 10,892 u gradnji 6,402 u prometu 8+702 Velika Gorica - jug 9+617 Velika Gorica - jug Most “Kanal Sava - Odra” u km 10+714 ; L = 322 m 9,430 9,00 18+132 18+617 PZZ u km 20+647 ; L = 120 m Vijadukt Burdeljski potok u km 22+720 ; L = 129 m 11,280 11,120 29+412 Lekenik 29+817 Lekenik 10,854 10,830 40+267 SISAK 40+647 Sisak Sisak Sisak 6,261 u planu 5,880 Most Kupa u km 45+737 46+527 46+527 BiH Poddionica VELIKA GORICA (jug) - BUŠEVEC Dionica Velika Gorica (jug) – Lekenik, duljine 20,2 km, Na poddionici Velika Gorica (jug) - Buševec podijeljena je na dvije poddionice: izgrađeno je 14 objekata: Velika Gorica – Buševec duljine 9,0 km - 6 mostova, - 1 vijadukt Buševec – Lekenik duljine 11,2 km.
    [Show full text]
  • Croatia National Report 2008
    CROATIA NATIONAL REPORT 2008 I Current state of the network At the start of 2009, the total length of the motorway network in Croatia amounted to 1.198,7 km. The following new roadways were opened to traffic in 2008: - 41.5 km of new motorways - 36.9 km of widening of existing road sections to the full motorway profile At the motorway A1: Zagreb-Split - Ploče the Šestanovac – Zagvozd - Ravča sections (40 km) - were opened to traffic in full profile in 12/2008. At the motorway A4: Zagreb - Goričan the section from Goričan to Hungarian border (1,5 km) with the bridge over the Mura River was opened to traffic in 10/2008. At the motorway A6: Zagreb-Rijeka the total of 36,9 km were widened to the full motorway profile (Phase II B) A part of the Oštrovica - Vrata section (12,44 km) – in 09/2008 Vrata - Delnice section (8,93 km) – in 06/2008 Delnice - Kupjak section (7,92 km) – in 06/2008 a part of the Kupjak - Vrbovsko section (7,59 km) – in 06/2008 In Croatia, motorways are operated by 4 companies, i.e. by Hrvatske autoceste d.o.o. (operates all toll motorways except for those in concession) and by three concession companies BINA-ISTRA d.d. Pula (operates the so called Istrian Upsilon - A8 and A9), Autocesta Rijeka-Zagreb d.d. (A6 and A7) and Autocesta Zagreb-Macelj d.o.o. (A2). Number of motorway kilometres - Company 2007. 2008. Tolled facilities total Tolled facilities total 1. HAC d.o.o. 780,0 816,0 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Combinatorial Discovery of Small-Molecule 1,2,3-Triazolium
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Combinatorial discovery of small‑molecule 1,2,3‑triazolium ionic liquids exhibiting lower critical solution temperature phase transition Yen‑Ho Chu*, Mou‑Fu Cheng & Yung‑Hsin Chiang Both lower and upper critical solution temperature (LCST and UCST) systems are two typical phase behaviors of thermoresponsive materials with solvents, in which LCST is far less common than UCST. Recent studies on ionic liquids carrying LCST phase transitions have predominantly focused on quaternary ammonium‑ and phosphonium‑based ionic salts. Based on the 1,2,3‑triazole core structure assemblable by azide‑alkyne cycloaddition click reaction, this work reports the combinatorial synthesis of 1,3,4‑trialkylated 1,2,3‑triazolium ionic liquids in three libraries with a total of 160 ionic liquids and demonstrates, for the frst time, their values in temperature‑switchable phase transition with water. In this work, the successful discovery of a new thermoresponsive ionic liquid b26, based on the structure‑and‑phase separation study of b8 and b9, perfectly exemplifed the true value of the tunability of ionic liquid fne structures. For all 160 ionic liquids synthesized, 155 are liquid at room temperature and 22 room‑temperature ionic liquids were found to exhibit thermoresponsive phase transitions having low Tc values in water. To the best of our knowledge, this comprehensive study is the frst report of small‑molecule 1,2,3‑triazolium ionic liquids that exhibit LCST property in water. Based on click chemistry1, this work reports structurally tunable ionic liquids tailored specifcally for concise design and combinatorial synthesis of thermoresponsive ionic liquids (TILs)2–4 carrying lower critical solution temperature (LCST)-type phase transitions.
    [Show full text]
  • Coding and Validation Manual
    TRO EC N L IC E ACCIDENT MENU 2002 VEHICLE MENU FARS CODING AND DRIVER MENU VALIDATION MANUAL U.S. Department PERSON Of Transportation MENU National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ACCIDENT LEVEL VEHICLE LEVEL DRIVER LEVEL PERSON LEVEL APPENDIX LEVEL 2002 MANUAL CHANGES Below is a list of FARS elements that have substantial changes for 2002. These changes, as well as others, are highlighted within the manual by bold/italic type and are marked in the margin with a pointing hand graphic. ELEMENT # ELEMENT NAME NEW/ NEW/ REVISED REVISED COMMENTS VALUES REMARKS A15 Global Positioning X Geo-Locator tool A18 Manner of Collision X X All new codes and remarks A29 Traffic Control Device X New code 41-Electronic Warning Sign A33 Hit-and-Run X X Revised wording of Code 2 New code 4 A39 Related Factors-Accident X X New layout for codes (Example Level Table moved to front of element) New or combined codes Deleted codes V7, V8, V9 Make/Model/Body Type X Updated for 2002 Vehicles Table V16 Vehicle Maneuver X X Code 09 – Controlled Maneuver to Avoid… V21 Vehicle Role X Relating to front-to-front (head- on) collisions V29 Gross Vehicle Weight X Coding of element on power Rating unit only. V34 Related Factors-Vehicle X X New layout for codes (Example Level Table moved to front of element) New or combined codes Deleted codes D12 Driver Height X Revised remarks D13 Driver Weight X Revised remarks D14-18 Driver Level Counters X Previous Recorded Suspensions and Revocations – Can code up to 10 instances without being questioned by Edit Check D22 Related Factors-Driver X X New layout for codes (Example Level Table moved to front of element) New or combined codes Deleted codes P9 Seating Position X X Code 51 should be used for coding passengers in 5th row of 15-seat, 5-row vans.
    [Show full text]