ECONOMICS 493/693
STUDY ABROAD: EUROPE/EUROPEAN BUSINESS CONDITIONS

Summer II July 2002
Instructor - Professor Robert F. Mulligan
The Hogeschool Brabant, Breda, Netherlands
mulligan@wcu.edu
 http://paws.wcu.edu/mulligan

 

Offered as IBUS 488 or 693 (for graduate students); 3 credit hours

Come see first hand the dynamic changes underway with our largest trading partner, the European Community, in this study tour for business students to the Netherlands and surrounding countries. Not only will you interact with Dutch business faculty and business professionals but you will have numerous opportunities to experience European culture in several of Europe's finest cities: Amsterdam, Paris, Cologne, and the smaller cities of the Netherlands.

The text for the course is A New Europe? published by Foreign Affairs magazine, a collection of articles about the politics, business climate and economy of Europe
 
 

Date

Possible Itinerary--Subject to Change

Sun July 8

Depart for Atlanta Airport approximately 10:30 a.m.

Mon July 9

Arrive Amsterdam Schipol Airport; train to Breda (2 hours), settle in accommodations, Breda orientation 

Tue July 10

European business climate; trip orientation at the Hogeschool Brabant in Breda
Readings: The Case Against Europe by Noel Malcolm; Europe's Rising Regionalism by John Newhouse and Can Europe Work? by George Soros.

Wed July 11

Amsterdam: Canal cruise and free time

Thu July 12

Amsterdam: Anne Frank House, Rijksmuseum, and free time; Return Breda

Fri July 13

Depart for Paris

Sat July 14

Paris tour: Eiffel Tower, Louvre, Tuilleries, Sacre Coeur, Montmartre

Sun July 15

Paris tour: Seine Cruise, Notre Dame, Invalides, Montparnasse. Return Breda

Mon July16

Hogeschool faculty interaction;

Reading: The Trouble with France by Dominique Moisi

Evening: Outdoor cafes of Breda

Tue July 17

Day trip to Cologne, Germany

Wed July 18

 Hogeschool lecture

Reading: The Dollar and the Euro by Fred Bergsten

Thu July 19

Day trip to Bruges, Belgium

Fri July 20

Morning: Hogeschool sessions; readings on European business; Afternoon: bicycle tour of surrounding parks and countryside

Sat July 21

Depart for Schipol Airport

Sun July 22

Early morning: Depart for Atlanta arrive late afternoon Atlanta time, return to Cullowhee.

Fri Aug 3

Due date for submitting final paper (see below)

DETAILS

There is a limit of 15 students for this trip. Space is available on a first come, first served basis. Cost is $2,100 which includes airfare; after March 1 the cost is $2,450. Tuition and some meals are not included. A deposit is required of $150 by March 1.

Pack light but bring at least two pairs of comfortable shoes - one or both pair can be athletic shoes.  Expect to walk twenty miles on a typical day.  Bring a disposable rain poncho.  You may not need it, but if you do, you'll be glad you brought yours.  Bring an umbrella and a sweater or sweatshirt and a reasonably heavy jacket or windbreaker.


 

Study Abroad Photo Tour

Breda  The centerpiece of this historic city is the 100 meter tall tower of the famous Grotekircke, begun in the fourteenth century.  Breda is home to our sister institution, the Hogeschool Brabant, and the Netherlands Royal Military Academy.  Classes take place at the Hogeschool and housing is provided in the Hogeschool's student apartments.  Breda was the place of exile in the Netherlands of Britain's Charles II and formed a base for Spanish occupation of the Netherlands during the Thirty Years War.  Fortifications and canals from this period still dot the cityscape.  The city is guarded by an equestrian statue of King William III of the Netherlands and Great Britain. 

Amsterdam  The capital of the Netherlands, and one of the most exciting and attractive cities of Europe, features scenic canals, historic churches, museums, and palaces.  We visited the Rijksmuseum and the Anne Frank Museum, and enjoyed a cruise on the canals and the Amstel River.

Paris  The capital of France features numerous historic attractions, including the Louvre, the home of the kings of France for nearly one thousand years, today one of the world's largest and most spectacular art museums, the cathedral of Notre Dame on the Ile de la Cite, the Madelaine or church of St. Mary Magdeline, the Assemblee National, the Opera or Palais Garnier, the Arc de Triomphe, and the Sacre Coeur or church of the Sacred Heart in Montmartre, the Dome of the Invalides where Napoleon I is buried, and of course, the Tour Eiffel.  Highlights included a Seine river cruise and a trip to the top of the sixty-story Tour Montparnasse, the tallest office building in Europe.

Rotterdam  The largest and busiest city in the Netherlands is also the busiest port in the world.  Our day trip included a harbour cruise and a walking tour of the downtown area.

Brussels  The capital of Belgium hosts the headquarters of the European Union, NATO, and UNESCO.  Other historic sites include the Place de Ville with its medieval guildhalls, the Palais de Justice, and Palais Royale.  This tri-lingual kingdom includes French, Dutch, and German-speaking groups.

Cologne  The oldest city in Germany, once capital of the Roman province of Colonnia Germania, Cologne - Koeln in German - is dominated by the nearly 200 meter twin towers of the Dom, or Cologne cathedral.  Begun in the thirteenth century to replace Gross St Martin, an ancient romanesque church which still stands, and house the shrine of the three kings, the cathedral was not completed until 1880.  It was the tallest building in the world until the Washington monument was completed.  Maintenence and repair are ongoing.  Our day trip will also feature a Rhine river cruise.

Heinekin Brewery We visited Heinekin's largest brewing facility which produces Heinekin and Amstel beers for European sale.

Phillip Morris  We visited Phillip Morris's facility for producing cigarettes for sale to Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Germany, and Italy. Because each EU country has different taxation systems, cigarettes have to be packaged and revenue-stamped in a special manner for each destination country.

 

MORE PHOTOS

 

ECON 493 STUDY ABROAD: EUROPE
ECON 693 EUROPEAN BUSINESS CONDITIONS

European Unification Writing Assignment

Each assigned reading addresses some problems facing European unification.  Some are more negative in their assessment than others.  Some address problems associated with different countries or regions within the EU.  Assigned readings are taken from the Foreign Affairs collection, A New Europe?:

Noel Malcolm

"The Case Against 'Europe'"

John Newhouse

"Europe's Rising Regionalism"

George Soros 

"Can Europe Work? A Plan to Rescue the Union"

C. Fred Bergsten

"The Dollar and the Euro"

Timothy Garton Ash

"Germany's Choice"

Fritz Stern

"Freedom and its Discontents"

Dominique Moïsi

"The Trouble with France"

General Assignment

From the assigned Foreign Affairs readings, select two to compare and contrast in a three-to-five page paper.  Provide a one-half to one-page summary of each of the two readings you are comparing.  Then present, in one to two pages, your discussion of how the two authors agree, how they disagree, and a statement of which view is correct or more persuasive. 

Although in your analysis, you will be presenting your own opinion, your paper will be written in the third person.  No more than two-thirds of your paper may be devoted to summarizing the argument of both readings, and at least one third must be devoted to your analysis.  Perfect grammar and spelling are essential to receive a passing grade.

In summarizing the readings, emphasize the topic the authors discuss so it will be easy to compare and evaluate their positions, particularly if they address the same topic.  Do not get lost on tangents.  If the two readings do not discuss similar aspects of unification, compare their positions on the desirability of unification, its practicality, or both.  Do not exceed the five-page limit.

Summaries

Writing a summary of a journal article requires special reading skills in addition to composing skills. Following the procedure below may assist you in writing concise, clearly organized article summaries. 
              1.  Read the article one time straight through from beginning to end. Locate the main idea of the article.  Sometimes the main idea is at the end of the article, in the middle, or not directly expressed at all. 
              2.  Set the reading aside, and without looking at the original article write one sentence that contains the main idea presented in the article. This sentence will become will become the focus sentence of your summary of that reading. 
              3.  Read the article a second time. This time underline and write marginal notes in an effort to determine support for the main idea. Reread the article until you are confident you understand what it says. The material you located as support for your main idea will become the body of your article summary. 
              4.  Without looking at the original article, write a first draft of your summary. This will keep you from using the wording of the article's author.  Keep in mind that eventually you will have to distill this summary down to one page or less.  In your finished draft, emphasize the author's discussion of issues also addressed by the other author.
              5.  Check the draft against the original article for accuracy. 
                   a. General, overall statement of the main idea.
                   b. Use of the same divisions or format.
                   c. Relationship of the parts to the main idea. 
                   d.  Use of terms from the article where appropriate.  Don't spend time looking up alternative terms for specific terms used in the article.  Simply put quotations around the original words.
              6.  Rewrite, checking for conciseness, control, and sound paragraph and sentence structure (topic sentences and supporting facts). 
              7.  Check the original against your summary. 
              8.  Alert your reader by starting with a statement such as, "According to Dominique Moïsi  in 'The Trouble with France,' . . . . "

Analysis

The analysis part of your paper requires you to compare objectively what the two authors say, noting points of agreement and disagreement.  Emphasize broad themes over details, though you may cite details as examples if space allows.  This section also requires you to present a subjective statement of what parts of the authors' argument is valid, correct, or persuasive.  Here you are presenting your opinion in the third person.  You may not write, "I feel Malcolm's position is right," but you may write something like, "The evidence provides more support for Malcolm's position than for Soros's."

              1.  State whether the two authors address the same issues or different topics.  If they address the same issues, state where they agree and where they do not.  If the two authors address different issues, what are their positions on the desirability of European unification?  How far would they be willing to go?  What practical issues do they raise?  This portion should be brief.  Concentrate on the authors' main points, not details.

              2.  Focus on the assumptions the authors make. State your reaction to, opinion of, or evaluation of these assumptions or assertions.  State this in the third person, and clearly support your reactions so that they do not appear to be arbitrary judgments.  This may be accomplished by support from authority, logic, observation, or personal experience.  What emerges from your analysis? 

              3.  Consider what kind of evidence is presented to support the author's argument.  Is the argument well supported?  Does the evidence provided by the other author show the other author's opinion is more correct?  Can the evidence from the other paper be interpreted as supporting the first?  Is each author's argument logical?  Does the author provide evidence for the conclusions?  Is the evidence persuasive? 

              4.  What are each author's assumptions?  Are they explained or implied?  Are any of the assumptions offensive? What biases pervade each article?  Are the assumptions and biases obvious, or do they lurk behind a stance of neutrality and objectivity?  Do the assumptions and biases affect the validity of the article?  Are there flaws in the author's logic?  What evidence or ideas has the author failed to consider?  (E.g., evidence provided by the other author?)

Introduction and Conclusion

When you have finished the body of your paper, prepare an introduction and a conclusion.   Each should be no more than one-half page, and the introduction should interest the reader in the very important issues addressed  by the authors of the two articles and yourself.  End the introduction with your thesis statement.

Citations

Use American Psychological Association citation format.  As a minimum, cite the two Foreign Affairs articles.

Hofstadter, D.R. (1982, November). Metamagical themas: Default assumptions and their effects on writing and thinking. Scientific American, pp. 18-36. 

Behrens, Laurence and Leonard J. Rosen.  Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum.  Boston:  Little, 1982.

Due date is Friday, August 3 

Email your paper to me at <<mulligan@wcu.edu>>, either as an MS Word attachment or cut-and-paste the text into your email message.