The case of the second bridge across the Tagus River: Which points of view were favoured with the decision taken?

Original language	Portuguese
Journal	Cadernos CESUR
Volume	679
Publication status	Published - 1994

Access to Document

• CESUR_679_1994Final published version, 3.1 MB

Cite this

• APA
• Author
• BIBTEX
• Harvard
• Standard
• RIS
• Vancouver

Bana e Costa, C. A., & Fernandes, P. A. N. C. D. C. (1994). The case of the second bridge across the Tagus River: Which points of view were favoured with the decision taken? Cadernos CESUR, 679.

Bana e Costa, Carlos António ; Fernandes, Pedro Afonso Nunes Correia de Costa. / The case of the second bridge across the Tagus River: Which points of view were favoured with the decision taken?. In: Cadernos CESUR. 1994 ; Vol. 679.

@article{164b316861494f959db8f996be1cfbc1,

title = "The case of the second bridge across the Tagus River: Which points of view were favoured with the decision taken?",

author = "{Bana e Costa}, {Carlos Ant{\'o}nio} and Fernandes, {Pedro Afonso Nunes Correia de Costa}",

year = "1994",

language = "Portuguese",

volume = "679",

journal = "Cadernos CESUR",

}

Bana e Costa, CA & Fernandes, PANCDC 1994, 'The case of the second bridge across the Tagus River: Which points of view were favoured with the decision taken?', Cadernos CESUR, vol. 679.

The case of the second bridge across the Tagus River: Which points of view were favoured with the decision taken? / Bana e Costa, Carlos António; Fernandes, Pedro Afonso Nunes Correia de Costa.
In: Cadernos CESUR, Vol. 679, 1994.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The case of the second bridge across the Tagus River: Which points of view were favoured with the decision taken?

AU - Bana e Costa, Carlos António

AU - Fernandes, Pedro Afonso Nunes Correia de Costa

PY - 1994

Y1 - 1994

M3 - Article

VL - 679

JO - Cadernos CESUR

JF - Cadernos CESUR

ER -

Bana e Costa CA, Fernandes PANCDC. The case of the second bridge across the Tagus River: Which points of view were favoured with the decision taken? Cadernos CESUR. 1994;679.