Poes psychosomatic Turmoil Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Poes psychosomatic Turmoil - Research Paper Example Longings for the affection and love of the nearest and dearest ones were further deteriorated by the animosity of his step-father. In fact, the stepfather soon turns the inferiority-complex in Oedipal Complex. Along with these traumas, Allan Poe has experienced nightmares throughout his whole life. Instead of being afraid he soon learnt to apply the nightmarish effect in his writings, as in his book, Edgar Allan Poe, Vincent Buranelli says: He took to inspecting with meticulous exactitude his psychological states when he hovered between sleep and wakefulness, found his mind occupied with shadows of ideas â€Å"rather Psychical than intellectual,† and learned to some degree to control them. In a letter to Mr. Allan (April, 1833) Poe writes about loveless bleak world where he was suffering from isolation and destitution: â€Å"Without friends, without any means, consequently, of obtaining employment, I am perishing — absolutely perishing for want of aid†¦ For Godâ⠂¬â„¢s sake, pity me and save me from destruction (O’Neill 7). Obviously Poe’s longings for the camaraderie and compassion of the near relatives, together with his stepfather-induced Oedipal-complex greatly help Poe to perceive the revengefulness of the inferior and to conjure up the horrible revenge character like Montressor in â€Å"the Cask of Amontillado†. Though the â€Å"Cask of Amontillado† dominantly echoes the theme of revenge, the ruptured psychological evidences such as inferiority-complex and Oedipal complex, that Allan himself has been familiar with during his lifetime behind Montressor’s revenge. ... Though the â€Å"Cask of Amontillado† dominantly echoes the theme of revenge, the ruptured psychological evidences such as inferiority-complex and Oedipal complex, that Allan himself has been familiar with during his lifetime behind Montressor’s revenge. Indeed these ruptured psychological complexes are evident in almost all of Poe’s characters. If his real life inferiority complex and oedipal complex exhibit through the convulsive personality disorders like alcoholism and murderous intension in â€Å"the Cask of Amontillado†, â€Å"the Black Cat†, â€Å"The Premature Burial†, â€Å"The Tell-tale Heart† etc, the losses of his loved ones and the existential void induced by these losses are vividly emergent through the necrophilic fantasies in works such as â€Å"Ligeia† and â€Å"The Raven.† But the same existential cavity in Poe’s life has helped him to create a bleak world void of love and haunted by the fear of d eath, revenge, injustice and a world where people are affected with hyperesthesia, hypochondria, love-sickness, hypersensitivity to humiliation, abnormally revengefulness, etc. Such bleak world is evident in â€Å"the Fall of the House of Usher†. The loss of Poe’s mother when he was at three years old, the absence of a father, the death of his consumptive wife who soon died, the antagonistic relationship with Mr. John Allan, frustration in love and the subsequent indulgence into gambling and alcoholism etc have influenced his writings in a number of complicated ways. Though specific evidences in any specific piece of work can directed referenced to a traumatic event, experience or object, the traumatic events and experiences in Poe’s life have some effects on the themes

The Medea by Euripides and The Aeneid by Virgil Essay Example for Free

The Medea by Euripides and The Aeneid by Virgil Essay In The Medea by Euripides and The Aeneid by Virgil the characters of Medea and Dido respond to desertion by their husbands, the individual they love most, in the form of a quarrel. Both characters go on to attempt to alleviate their pain via revenge. Their judgments and actions are impaired by each womans great eros and amor. Euripides and Virgil illustrate their vision of passion and love through the effects of Medea and Didos actions under the influence of these emotions. Both women could choose a healthier course for their pain by thinking rationally. Ultimately what matters is Medea is permitted to be distressed because she truly is abandoned by her husband, while Dido, on the other hand, is betrayed and destroyed by a lover she cons herself into believing is her husband. In response to the abandonment of their lovers, both Medea and Dido quarrel with their husband in an effort to sway him into altering his resolution. Medea attempts to make Jason leave his new bride and come back to her while Dido tries to influence Aeneas into staying with her. Each woman vents by launching their monologue with an introduction of insults. Although Medea straight forwardly calls Jason a coward in every way, Dido is more controlled and implies that Aeneas attempts to slip away in silence (Euripides, 465) (Virgil, IV.419). Throughout the remainder of the speeches, they attempt to get the men to bend to their wishes. The women use logic. Medea reminds Jason of the shame he will face as a result of having children wandering as beggars. Dido informs Aeneas of the bad weather he will encounter if he leaves now. Both women remind their lover of all they have sacrificed for him and everything they have not asked for in return. Medeas raging comments continue on about the broken marriage oath. Like Medea, Dido tries to force Aeneas to remain by her side because of the marriage that [they] entered on (Virgil, IV.432). Medea and Dido seem to end their side of the argument with final jabs at manhood of their husbands, but in her last breath, Dido asks for pity on her utterly bereft self (Virgil, IV.454). In the course of her speech Medea is seen as a very angry, vengeful woman while Dido is seen as desolate and pitiful. Both women, however, only want to be with the man they love. As a result of the abandonment of their husbands, both Medea and Dido hope  to quench their furor through revenge. Medea satisfies her thirst by killing four innocent victimsthose closest to Jason. Conversely, Dido constructs a funeral pyre that is a reconstruction of her life with Aeneas and throws herself upon it. Medea seeks revenge on others with the intention of mak[ing Jason] feel pain (Euripides, 1398). In hopes to extinguish her furor through her own demise, Dido stabs herself twice in the chest with the sword she gave to Aeneas; this way she says is a blessed relief to go into the undergloom (Virgil, IV.1048). Medeas rage ends with the satisfaction of innocent lives lost. Dido feels compelled to satisfy herself even further by hoping Aeneas painfully views the funeral pyre from his ship and by cursing Aeneas as well as her own people and all the children of their children (Virgil, IV.875). Ultimately, both women succeed in dousing the burning fury within. It is important to follow the paths these women select to satisfy their hurt because these paths are the result of both women allowing their eros and amor to cloud theirr judgment and influence her actions. While Medeas heart [is] on fire with passionate love for Jason and he returns her love, Medeas power and passion were enlisted for his aid (Euripides, 8). Didos love and passion for Aeneas overcome her passion for that of the city she founded. The moment either woman is betrayed, their passionate love for their husbands becomes passionate hate against them. Consequently, this is the motivation for Medeas bad judgment in her quest for revenge. Like Medea, Dido uses very bad judgment and so projects [are] broken off in Carthage (Virgil, IV.124). Both women refocus all of their eros and amor intended for the good of others to a single selfish purpose. Through Medea and Dido, two maddened lovers, both Euripides and Virgil illustrate their outlook on the effects of eros and amor (Virgil, IV.92). Both women allow their heart to rule, which brings trouble for many people. As a result of Medea following the wishes of her heart, she destroys or alienates her entire family. Because Dido uses her violent heart as a compass, Aeneas is almost derailed from his destiny (Euripides, 38). Aeneas is only back in line with destiny and the gods after he leaves to found Rome and begins to navigate with his head. Both Virgil and Euripides prove that  Medea and Dido create chaos as a result of allowing passion, not reason, to rule. Even in the midst of their turmoil it is feasible that Medea and Dido could choose to begin ruling with their minds and not their passion. Medea could kill Jason as a result of his hurtful act and not destroy four innocent people. If Dido truly loves Aeneas, she could risk going with him even if the consequences could be that she continues to be his mistress or that the Trojans tire of her and throw her overboard, as opposed to senselessly committing suicide. Medea could overcome her barbaric culture and allow Jason to live his life while she cares for her children as a loving mother should. Euripides and Virgil leave many options for both Medea and Dido if they can only get past the desires of their hearts and see past them to what is the superior good. Each development of Medea and Dido builds their similarities, but the crucial difference between the two wives in their justification for their actions and emotions is in the very foundation of their relationship with their husbands. Medea is married to Jason. She has gone through a marriage ceremony viewed by many and contested by none. Conversely, as Juno has intended, Dido misinterpreted the events which took place in the cave after the hunt. Virgil says she called it marriage. Thus, under that name, she hid her fault (Virgil, IV.237-238). Medea reacts to her betrayal atrociously. Although she kills the innocents, Euripides justifies the horrendous actions of Medea because she is married to Jason. He has left her for another woman. Because they had no commitment, Dido cannot justify her suicide and curse with the abandonment from a man she has an affair with and chooses to develop this affair into a liaison. Virgil does not specifically condemn Dido, but the tone of her commentary seems to put the blame on her. While Euripides Medea and Virgils Dido have similar reasons, reactions, and motivations, Medea is understood and Dido is just seen as bitter, vindictive, and pathetic.

History of the Internet :: Expository Essays Research Papers

History of the Internet The internet has been a fast progressing technology. It is not quite known who exactly invented it because many people helped invent it. The development of the Internet began to progress very quickly after the invention of the satellite. The Russians put sputnik, the first satellite, into space and the US got scared. The cold war helped facilitate the internet because the US had to compete with other technologies being developed by Russia. Versions of the internet were around at the time (like in Britain), but the government wanted the Internet to be explored more because the US saw benefits of it for the military. In order to make a more effective way for military to communicate the US brought in some of the most brilliant people to improve and invent the Internet. Some intentions of researching the networking of computers was potential nuclear war. The government wanted a way that people could communicate and store information without it being destroyed by nuclear war. The scientis ts could not figure out a way for a medium of communication to not be harmed by nuclear explosion but the developers thought that the if the information was not centralized that it would not be able to be destroyed completely. The theory was if the information could be traveling at all times to different nodes and then in turn could not be destroyed by completely. The internet was created through out the 60s by the Department of Defense's Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA). This team of inventors worked relentlessly to make a backbone of the internet that we have today. The internet started out very small but now it is huge. It first only networked a few nodes but now it can has been networked to several nodes including personal computers.   Ã‚  Ã‚   Scientists take advantage of this free system of sharing information because a scientist can access a powerful computer million miles away with little or no cost. Educators can bring the Internet into the classroom to research information that was inaccessible a decade ago. Mostly the internet is used to email and look at news.

Economic progress in Russia in the years 1981-1982 Essay

Despite frequent changes in policy, Russian and Soviet governments were spectacularly unsuccessful in securing sustained economic progress in the years 1881-1982’. Assess the validity of this statement. Between 1981 and 1982, Russia underwent huge changes, particularly the in economy. Russian history is well known for its frequent changes in policy as the country faced revolutions, changes in regime, changes in leadership and not to mention its involvement in various conflicts. As a result, Russia’s economic policy was subject to major change apart from three key areas, industry, agriculture and the tertiary sector. These three areas of the economy remained a constant in its ever changing climate; however, many historians still argue that Russia’s economy was unsuccessful and poorly managed despite its frequent change in policy. Thus begs the question, ‘To what extent is this true?’ The Tsarist regime, for many Russians, was a period of economic instability as agriculture was seen as a secondary concern. Growth rate was not structured and growth rate fell considerably between the late 1890’s and 1905.[1] Meanwhile, other economies expanded leaving Russia struggling to catch up and some historians see agriculture as a reason for Russia’s economic decline. For example, Carol. S. Leonard argued that Russia’s grain production per capita GDP was lagged far behind that of America in 1913.[2] This argument shows how agriculture in Tsarist Russia wasn’t dealt with effectively and as a result, the economy suffered. On the other hand, some historians have pointed out that agriculture in Russia during the late Tsarist years were not so destructive. One argument maintains that actually, Russia’s agriculture grew and developed quite substantially pre- revolution. For example; from 1890 to 1913, cereal production per capita increased by 35%[3]. Although this evidence is hard to ignore, it is also difficult to turn a blind eye to the contrasting evidence which suggests that agriculture suffered under the late Tsarist regime and consequently, affected the economy as a whole. For example: â€Å"There was very little investment in agriculture in Imperial Russia and this lead to small yields and economic volatility when prices rose and fell†¦lack of investment in agriculture frequently caused grain prices to rise which caused famines†[4] Overall, although agriculture grew slightly during the Tsarist regime, ultimately it suffered greatly as did the Russian people. Looking at agriculture alone, Russia’s economy looked bleak however; industry had slightly more success during this time so perhaps the economy was not so bad after all. S J Lee puts forward a simple statement: â€Å"The periods of most rapid growth were in the reign of Nicholas II (1894-1917) as a result of the economic reforms of Sergei Witte (1892-1903)†[5]. This is easy to see, when one considers that in 1914, Russia produced 35 million tons of coal, ranking Russia fifth amongst the main producers.[6] Building on Lee’s argument, there seems to be a lot of evidence pointing to Sergei Witte as the main reason for Russia’s industrial boom. Upon taking office, Witte raised massive amounts of capital by securing a loan from France and raising taxes and tariffs and interest rates.[7] However, it is the development of Russian railways which Witte is perhaps most remembered for. Under his guidance the railway network grew from around thirty one thousand km to around fifty three km worth of track.[8] With Witte at the helm, Russia’s industry continued to develop with growth rates comparing well next to those of the United States and Germany. Witte has often been credited with modernizing Russia to such a great extent that its industrial boom continued long after he left his post as Finance Minister in 1903. For example, in 1913, Russia’s steel production stood at 4.9 million metric tons next to France’s 4.7 million, with coal and iron not far behind.[9] On the other hand, Witte’s industrialization policies were not always so successful. For example, between 1890 and 1899, Russia’s industrial growth stood at 8.0% whereas between 1900-06, it reduced to 1.4%[10]. His aims of modernizing came with a heavy cost and it was consumers who had to pay the price. Taxes were raised but only for the lower classes, indeed the wealthier classes were spared from taxation although their money was needed for private capital. Tariffs also caused problems as, although they protected Russian industry, they added to the cost of living.[11] Whatsmore, although some historians have credited Witte’s decision to seek loans from foreign investors, some remain critical. This is because the interest added to the loans had to be paid in a secure medium meaning, in order to pay off their debts, Russia was forced to export grain regularly, including during the famine of 1891.[12] Overall, although Witte made huge strides in modernizing the Russian economy, he was not entirely faultless. Industry picked up, but there were still issues and it was the common man who had to pay. The economy still suffered, although, arguably, not as much as it would have done without Witte. However, the tertiary sector also contributed to the economy. Although some historians critique Russia’s dependence of Western investors, these ties had corresponding benefits in the shape of trade. [13] Business also boomed within Russia with eight large banks emerging in 1899 which owned more than half the total bank capital. This provided free access for foreign capital, controlling important branches of the Russian economy, including the fuel and metallurgical industries. [14] Moreover, according to Robert Service, domestic industrialists and banks were thriving too.[15] This argument can be supported by the growth in towns and cities between 1897 and 1914. For example; the population in St Petersburg grew from 1’300 thousand (1987) to 2’100 thousand (1914)[16]. This shows that the economic growth had a positive impact on society and the country was doing well under the Tsarist regime. However, although to the naked eye Russia seemed to be doing well, their growth wasn’t so great. Compared to the other Great powers of the period, Russia was lagging far behind. Between 1894 and 1913, Austria-Hungary had a 79% increase in national income whereas Russia was lagging far behind with only a 50% increase[17]. This clearly demonstrates that Russia’s overall situation was not so great and actually, Russian people did suffer. When Lenin came to power in 1917, he brought with him a change in regime and economic policy including the introduction of war communism. War communism aimed to socialize the economy through state involvement. Rural areas were subjected to grain requisition which was forcibly removed by the military.[18] This inevitably was unpopular and caused much suffering and peasants who stored their crops were often wrongfully prosecuted. It was not just agriculture which suffered. Factories were nationalized by November 1920 and were geared towards war production.[19] Additionally, private trade was banned and rationing was introduced on consumer goods including food and clothing. War communism was, effectively a self destructive policy. Grain requisitioning meant more than three million people died of starvation by late 1922.[20] Moreover, money lost its value and people got by through a system of barter. Inflation shot up and multiplied 1917 costs by four million in 1922. Additionally, in comparison to the growth in city population during the Tsarist regime, people fled the cities. For example; in December 1920 the population in Petrograd fell by 57.5%[21] Lenin knew that it was time for a change. War communism caused more harm then good so Lenin came up with an alternative, the ‘New Economic Policy’ (NEP). Peasants were allowed to sell grain for profit and they paid tax on what they produced rather than giving it up[22]. Things also changed industrially and in the tertiary sector. Businessmen could own small or medium sized businesses however large firms were still state owned.[23] The NEP basically gave the people of Russia freedom and Lenin hoped that it would boost economic growth as well. However, in 1924, Lenin died and Stalin came to power. Stalin also brought new ideas and his own ways of modernizing the economy. In November 1927, Stalin introduced his policies of industrialisation and collectivisation with the aim of modernising the economy. They were supported by a series of five year plans, the first (1928-32) aimed to improve living standards and the second (1933-37) and third (1938-41) aimed to highlight and thus, amend, Russia’s weaknesses[24]. Industrialisation was relatively successful as by the late 1930’s many workers conditions had improved and they had acquired better paid jobs and unemployment was almost non-existent. Accounts from the time support this view: â€Å"Good progress was made†¦4’500 new factories, plants, mines and power stations were commissioned, three times as many as the first Five-Year period’[25]. On the other hand, industrialisation was harsh and lateness for work often led to employees getting the sack. Many prisoners also paid the price by working on the grand engineering projects and working in appalling and dangerous conditions. For example; around 100’000 workers died building the Belmor Canal[26]. Collectivisation was ultimately unsuccessful and peasants were in a worse position than ever before. The concept of sharing farms and thus, sharing salary meant there wasn’t enough money to go around and crop production fell too. For example: â€Å"†¦Grain shortages, combined with continued forced procurements, led to rural famine†¦Ã¢â‚¬ [27] However, some people benefitted from collectivisation such as Bertha Malnick: â€Å"We have more than 600 hectares†¦our farmers have built 70 new houses for themselves during the last few years†¦Ã¢â‚¬ [28]. However, it is reasonable to conclude overall that collectivisation was unsuccessful given the various sources which provide figures of those who died or badly suffered during Stalin’s reign. Stalin died in 1953 and Khrushchev took over. Khrushchev focused on DeStalinisation, distancing the USSR as far away from Stalin as possible. Khrushchev was keen to adopt a different economic policy with the aim of building on the country’s previous economic growth and amending its weaknesses and one way he did this was by abandoning the five year plans and starting a new, seven year plan (1959-65) which aimed to take advantage of newly discovered mineral resources and fit in with industry[29]. Khrushchev pumped a lot of money into agriculture and overall 40% of investment was put into the neglected eastern regions of the USSR[30]. However, the seven year plan had similar flaws to the previous five year plans such as mistakes in resource distribution. Living standards got worse, the opposite to what Khrushchev had hoped to achieve. For example; only five in one thousand citizens owned a car and in 1963, the USSR was forced to import grain from the capitalist west to compensate shortages.[31] There were successes during this time such as the rise in foreign trade however this can’t compensate for the huge failures experienced during this time. Khrushchev made an honest attempt to improve the economy however his plans backfired and once again the country was left to clean up an economic mess. Eventually, Khrushchev was removed from power and in his place came Brezhnev who did little to change the economy. The era of Brezhnev has often been described as ‘a period of economic stagnation’ but some historians believe that this is not fair. Like Khrushchev, Brezhnev wanted to focus on improving agriculture and living standards in Russia. Historians Gwyneth Hughes and Simon Welfare support this view saying: â€Å"†¦After the terror of Stalin’s reign and the chaos of Khrushchev’s, the Soviet Union was in for a period of stability, and that meant everyone kept their job and their perks for life.†[32] Brezhnev allowed farmers to work on state own plots which motivated them to produce as much as possible in order to sell the surplus[33]. This, in theory, should have been beneficial and shows that Brezhnev was trying to improve the economy through new methods however, he was not so lucky. In 1975, the USSR suffered another poor harvest meaning Brezhnev had to increase foreign exports to keep everyone fed. This was just another disaster in Russia but Brezhnev did little to help. His aim to improve agriculture and living standards meant he neglected industry and production rates continued to rapidly fall[34]. However, arguably his biggest flaw was his inability to change the already ridged economy. Brezhnev had new ideas but couldn’t fight the system and by the end of his reign, Russia had made little improvement. Historian Dmitri Volkognov best sums up the Brezhnev period saying: â€Å"If Lenin and Stalin, and to some extent even Khrushchev, were able to enliven the moribund ideology of Communism, it was quite beyond Brezhnev†¦Ã¢â‚¬ [35]. In conclusion, between 1881 and 1982, Russia experienced much hardship especially surrounding the economy. After analyzing this one hundred year period it is hard to deny that the statement ‘Despite frequent changes in policy, Russian and Soviet governments were spectacularly unsuccessful in securing sustained economic progress in the years 1881-1992’. The economy under the Tsarist regime had its faults and during and after the 1917 revolution, it was widely believed that the country’s economic situation would improve. However, from Lenin to Stalin and Khrushchev to Brezhnev, it seemed that no leader was able to sustain a long-lasting and successful economic policy. The economy grew as quickly as it declined and it has taken many years to make any significant progress since. Therefore, this statement is valid. ________________ [1] Heinemann Advanced History: The Modernisation of Russia 1856-1985 [2] Agricultural Productivity Growth in Russia 1861-1913. From Inertia to Ferment by Carol. S. Leonard [3] The Penguin History of Modern Russia by Robert Service [4] www.historymadefun.co.uk/Tsarism [5] Overview from Russia and the USSR: Autocracy and Dictatorship (questions and answers in History) by Stephen. J. Lee [6] Stephen J Lee [7] http://www.slideshare.net/russeltarr/tsar-nicholas-ii-and-industry [8] The Industrialisation of Russia by M. Falkus [9] http://www.portalus.ru/modules/english_russia [10] M. Falkus [11] A2 History OCR: A Russia and its Rulers 1855-1964 [12] A2 History OCR [13] S. J Lee [14] A History of the USSR [15] Penguin History of Modern Russia [16] M. Falkus [17] The Making of the Revolution, 1881-1905 [18] From Years of Russia and the USSR, 1851-1991 by Evans and Jenkins [19] Evans and Jenkins [20] The Russian Revolutions 1914-1924 [21] Evans and Jenkins [22] The USSR, Germany and the USA between the wars [23] Russia and the USSR 1905-1941 [24] The USSR, Germany and Russia between the wars [25] A Soviet view of the second five year plan from History of the USSR by Y. Kukushkin [26] Stalin and the Soviet Economy [27] European History 1848-1945 by T.A Morris [28] Everyday Life in Russia by Bertha Malnick [29] AQA A2 History Triumph and Collapse: Russia and the USSR 1941-1991 by John Laver & Sally Waller [30] Russia 1855- 1964 Flagship History by D. Murray and T. Morris [31] The Soviet Economy 1917-80 by S J Lee [32] Red Empire. The Forbidden History of the USSR by G. Hughes and S. Welfare [33] www.ibguides.com/history/notes.ccom [34] Years of Russia and the USSR, 1851-1991 [35] The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Empire by D.Volkognov

Bridging the Gender Gap in Oil and Gas

1.0 Introduction For many countries, the extractive industry plays a major role as an economic driver, creating jobs, revenue and opportunities for development and growth. There are also social, economic and environmental risks associated with these industries which affect men and women differently. Research by the World Bank (2009) has indicated that men have the most access to the benefits of these industries, whilst women are more likely to suffer the consequences of the social and environmental harms associated therewith. The different experiences of men and women in these industries significantly affect the ability of women to contribute to active growth and development in their respective economies. The gender gap in the oil and gas industry exists in two separate forms, the first being the top-end employment discrimination where there is a lack of females at the higher end of the employment spectrum seeing very low numbers of female engineers, and science and technology employees (European Com mission, 2009). On the one hand this problem is a reflection of the imbalance of opportunities for adequate education, and on the other is what is referred to as the ‘leaky pipeline’ conundrum which describes the phenomenon of disproportionate numbers of women leaving these professions in each consecutive career stage in this industry. The second form of the gender gap is the very low numbers of female employees at the bottom end of the employment spectrum, that which requires lower education standards, but which may be more physically intensive. The World Bank reports (2009) that in most companies there is a female workforce of less than 10%, as these types of jobs are generally considered to be a ‘man’s job’. This is so because of the inherent physicality required in these work environments and the exposure to chemicals which presents a problem for female employees that are pregnant, meaning more time away from work and the inability to work if pre gnant. This research will consider the existence of the gender gap, the justifications therefore, the effects of the gap and recommendations for closing this gap in the industry in terms of ensuring that the opportunities for growth and development, both economic and social are equally accessible in modern oil and gas industry. 1.1 Background to Research 1.2 Significance of Research 1.3 Research Question & Research Objectives1.3.1 Research QuestionWhat is the extent of the gender gap in the oil and gas industry?1.3.2 Research ObjectivesTo determine the causes of the gender gap in the oil and gas industry. To determine the effect of the gender gap in the industry. To determine a succinct set of recommendations for companies in the industry, as well as regulatory authorities in order to close this gap moving towards equal employment opportunities in this industry. 1.4 Proposed Structure 2.0 Methodology The research is primarily a conceptual research dissertation that focuses on an extensive conceptualization, contextualization, evaluation, and analysis of the key issues relating to Corporate Social Responsibility in the oil and gas industry. A conceptual research employs an analytical framework that is based on â€Å"a set of broad theories and ideas that help the researcher to identify accurately the problem(s) they seek to address, frame their research questions appropriately, and locate appropriate literature on the research subject† (Smyth, 2004: 168). In using the conceptual research method, this research combines theoretical and analytical aspects in order to achieve its aims and objectives and provide pertinent answers to the research objectives. In light of the fact that conceptual research requires access to an extensive pool of resources, there is a great reliance on diverse sources of secondary materials for analysis. In this regard, some of the sources of seconda ry data for the research and analysis include electronic databases such as Questia, Jstor, Emerald Insight, and Google Scholar. Of specific interest are journals that focus on gender issues in extractive industries in general as these are analogous with the oil and gas sector, but particularly those that are based on the study and evolution of the gender gap in oil and gas companies, focusing on developing nations and the Gulf countries, as these represent compounded historical gender issues. 2.1 Qualitative Research 2.2 Content Analysis 2.3 Data Collection 2.4 Reliability and Validity of Research 2.5 Research Limitations 3.0 Literature Review 3.1 The Gender Gap in Developing versus Developed Countries3.1.1 Differences in Socio-economic problems3.1.2 The relevance of education in enforcing this gender gapIf one considers the vast differences in education priority placed in Gulf countries by comparison to African oil-economies such as Nigeria, one can see a very different picture of the relevance of education. On the one hand, Gulf countries are more likely to actively discriminate against female executive employees as there is a larger pool of adequately qualified female candidates, where in developing countries there are fewer qualified candidates, because of the lack of priority given to education and particularly education of females.3.1.3 The difference in the nature of the Gender Gap in different socio-economic conditions3.2 Cultural Sensitivities and Pragmatism In certain regions of oil and gas exploration, companies base their hiring discrimination on ‘cultural sensitivities’ where there is a concern for hiring women in higher-paying jobs would cause a backlash against women by their male colleagues (Musvoto, 2001). This has resulted in communities with soaring unemployment rates of up to 87% of women, despite the female demographic representing over half the local population. Particularly in developing countries, there is a trend towards rural-urban migration of the working population which often sees the breadwinner of a family leaving to work in an urban environment which perpetuates this gender gap by enforcing the role of the female as a caregiver rather than a breadwinner. In addition to these cultural sensitivities is a pragmatic approach taken by oil and gas companies which represents the bottom line in the sector in terms of cost implications. There is an argument to be made either way, with diversity goals becoming a secondary concern in favour of productivity and outcome. Male workers often have had greater educational opportunities and therefore less training and education is required, as well as less concern for factors of work-life balance. In the current economic climate, cost effective labour solutions are being of primary importance, particularly considering the growing importance of labour standards and quality of work environments which also present greater cost implications. On the other hand, studies have shown that in employment that is non-physical in nature women perform more productively and effectively, coupled with the barrier to private sector growth and development that employment discrimination breeds, increased female representation in the oil and gas sector may prove to be a more economical labour practice. Unfortunately however, despite evidence of long-term benefits of gender equality in the sector, companies choose short-term benefits which perpetuate and enforce this g ender gap.3.2.1 The broader socio-economic effect of the culturally enforced gender gapA theoretical expose on the broader socio-economic effects of the gender gap, e.g. continued lower education levels of women, perpetuated poverty for single parent households, lack of diversity in the workplace.3.2.2 The benefit of a diverse workplace3.2.3 Increased Issues with Work-Life Balance based on Gender3.3 Leaky Pipeline Anomaly and Evolution of Policy to Mitigate the Gender GapThere are a number of potential explanations for this anomalous situation of women in high end oil and gas jobs, one of which is the role of women in many societies as the primary caregiver of their families (United Nations, 2008). Therefore, as women progress through their careers there is a likelihood of their care responsibilities, as well as job responsibilities increasing proportionately and simultaneously, and as a result they are less able to meet the demands of higher level employment. Whilst certain industr y competitors have been recorded as saying that they attempt to incorporate individual career plans that take account of these increasingly personal responsibilities of employees (Al Tukmachy, 2012), the reality is a labyrinth of professional obstacles described as the ‘glass ceiling’ metaphor where female progression in the industry is limited due to concerns of increased need for consideration of factors of the work-life balance that are less present in their male counterparts (European Commission, 2009). As a result, women are often worked out of these executive and management positions, because companies offer incomprehensive policies that do not consider individual career and family outcomes (European Commission, 2009).3.3.1 Current Changes in Policy Direction to Increase Diversity and Retention of Female Staff – A corporate perspective 3.3.2 International Instruments Mandating Diversity in Oil and Gas MNEs4.0 Discussion 4.1 Analysis of the Gender Gap by Reg ion 4.2 Analysis of the Gender Gap by Employment Level4.2.1 Executive 4.2.2 Managerial 4.2.3 Non-managerial 4.2.4 Labour 4.2.5 Discussion 4.3 Current Examples of Corporate Policy for Non-Discriminatory Work Practices 4.3.1 Strengths 4.3.2 Weakness 4.4 Current Examples of Employment Schemes aimed at Female Inclusion in the Workplace 4.4.1 Strengths 4.4.2 Weaknesses5.0 Conclusion The gender gap in the oil and gas sector is very current and topical debate as gender equality in the workplace is becoming a diversity goal around the world. Careful understanding of the causes and effects thereof are imperative for the management of these companies and the greater macro-economic goals of development and growth. This research therefore aims to contribute to the current understanding of these goals in order to further the studies and make concrete recommendations in order to close this gap and further growth and development in the sector. 5.1 Recommendations 5.2 Conclusion References Al Munajjed, M. (2008) Women’s Employment in Saudi Arabia: A Major Challenge, Ideation Center Insight: Booz & Co Al Tukmachy, S. (2012) ‘Interview with Saba Al Tukmachy, Career Development Manager at ENOC’ Leaders of the Future Summit: Bridging the gap in oil and gas, 1 – 12 April 2012, Abu Dhabi: UAE Eftimie, A., Heller, K. & Strongman, J. (2009) Gender Dimensions of the Extractive Industries. The World Bank: Extractive Industries and Development Series European Commission (2009) Women in science and technology: Creating sustainable careers. EUR 23740 EN Musvoto, A. (2001) Gender and Mining: Community. Birnam Park: African Institute of Corporate Citizenship Smyth, R. (2004) â€Å"Exploring the usefulness of a conceptual framework as a research tool: A researcher’s reflection†, Issues in Educational Research, 14(2), 167-180. United Nations (2008) Equal sharing of responsibilities between women and men. United Nations Division for the Advanceme nt of Women. Expert Group Meeting, Geneva, 6-9 October, 2008