درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

<span class="H5CharChar"><span>This research identifies decision-making styles and components of succession planning and examines their relationship.The statistical population (190 people) in the present survey research consists of Pars Special Economic Energy Zone (PSEEZ) Organization managers who were assessed using the Census Method. Scott and Bruce’s general decision-making questionnaire and Kim’s succession planning questionnaire were used with a response rate of 90%. Data was analyzed with the SPSS and Smart Planning softwares. In analyzing the obtained results, the dominant decision-making style is rational, followed respectively by the intuitive, dependent, avoidant, and spontaneous decision-making styles. By investigating succession planning capabilities, the results of the research showed that among items in the succession planning system, candidate evaluation ranked first, followed by policy setting, system evaluation, and candidate development respectively as the priorities of the statistical population. The research hypothesis based on a significant relationship between the decision-making styles and organizational succession planning capabilities was confirmed. In order to improve its human resources and bridge the gap with global standards, it is therefore proposed that the senior management of the organization take serious steps to implement the succession planning program. It is also recommended that other esteemed researchers carry out the present research again after the implementation of the succession planning program in the studied organization and compare the results before and after the implementation of the program.</span></span>

International oil and gas investment disputes constitute an important part of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system. Investment arbitration which considers as a prevalent dispute settlement mechanism in this area is under serious criticisms, since it endures huge costs, causes length of process and devastates the parties’ long-term investment relationship. In the recent years, possibility of applying Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and hybrid dispute settlement mechanisms have largely discussed. Mediation-Arbitration (“ Med-arb”) ; is one of the hybrid and integrated dispute settlement mechanisms which embodies flexibility, non-judicial and negotiate-oriented benefits of mediation and finality advantage of arbitration simultaneously and in a single process ( not in separate processes). In this method, mediation is first attempted by the parties before arbitration could be started, If no settlement is reached during mediation phase, then the appointed neutral or mediator, will act as independent arbitrator(s) and proceed the case under the arbitration process and will render a binding arbitration award. In this method, if parties reach an agreement during the first phase (mediation process), they will not incur huge costs of lengthy investment arbitration. In this method, even If the first stage (mediation process) fails, since mediation process made the disputes more clarified and narrower, then the arbitration process is less lengthy and arbitration will be proceeded more efficiently. Moreover, both investors and host- states in oil and gas investment area, do have strong ambitions to maintain the investment relationships. These goals are achieved better via adopting med-arb proceedings.

Foreign investment contracts are one of the major ways to absorb the technology in the oil and gas industry. Studies show that governments and investing companies prefer to gain more profit, control economic resources and political influence by investing financially and technically in developing countries unless buying foreign technology and intellectual property rights directly. On the other hand, for developing countries, the sum of foreign capital and technology within a contract is a great opportunity for advancement, provided that the choice of technology transfer is made with due regard to the country's needs, requirements and economic future. In this article, after examining the relationship between investment and technology transfer and its various methods in the oil and gas industry, we will analyze the constraints and barriers of technology transfer through foreign investment in developing countries (including Iranian law) and provide a solution. Keywords: Foreign Investment, Technology Transfer, Oil & Gas Industry, Mutual Trade, Intellectual Property Rights.

The purpose of this study is to compare stringency of and compliance with environmental requirements in upstream sector of oil and gas in law of Iran and the USA. This study is conducted using the inter-spinned mix method (qualitative – quantitative). In the qualitative part, library studies are used. In the quantitative part, the studied society is a group of six professionals in the field of oil and gas, who filled out a questionnaire consisted of 34 questions prepared by the Worley Parsons in a similar research approved by jurisdictions of ten countries. The questions are prepared by a team of experts with international experience. The components of stringency and compliance with law during the phases of approval, operation, and closure of a hydrocarbon project are studied using the Delphi method. At the level of stringency, the environmental assessment in the US is carried out with 10 times more human resources and 26 times more costs than in Iran. In the US, with 13 scores, it is more stringent than Iran with 5 scores. In the project closure phase, Iran does not put in place any obligations for rehabilitation and restoration. At the level of compliance, the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) is mandatory in both countries. In Iran, the list of violations and their consequences will not be published. The US regulatory mechanisms of restoration are an appropriate model. Totally, Iran gains 29 and the United States 42 scores. The recommendations are based on these two scores.