This dissertation is an exploration of the ways in which contemporary practices of pluralism are challenging, and being shaped by, concepts of state sovereignty. I explore two very different contexts; the relationship between First Nations and Settlers on that part of Turtle Island sometimes called Canada, and the relationship between the European Union and its Member-States. In both contexts, I explore how political, legal, and economic practices are generating forms of social order that depart to varying degrees from the total, exclusive authority associated with sovereignty. In particular, I show that actors in both settings have actually developed two remarkably similar practices – interpenetrating institutions or co-decision mechanisms, and conditional authority claims. Together, these practices enable actors to contest and coordinate their respective authority claims in ways that do not rely on an overarching sovereign or even a shared understanding of their relationship. Instead, practices of interpenetration and conditional authority make all parties responsive to multiple standards of conduct, allowing diverse actors to seek justice over time in conditions of persistent difference and conflict. / Graduate

À partir de campagnes d’entretiens réalisés auprès d’acteurs publics répondant à la droite radicale en Allemagne et en France, je propose d’expliquer comment les acteurs publics de ces deux Etats participent à la régulation de l’expression du radicalisme de droite. J’ai choisi pour ce faire d’explorer deux pays voisins ayant cadré différemment la place de la lutte contre le radicalisme de droite : les acteurs politiques et administratifs allemands ont construit une politique publique luttant contre le radicalisme politique, ce qui n’est pas le cas de la France où le traitement de la droite radicale se fait avant tout au sein de l’arène politique. L’approche comparée souligne que la gouvernance de la droite radicale par les services de l’Etat fait l’objet d’une construction constante reposant sur une diversité d’acteurs ayant leurs propres cadres de références basés sur des jugements normatifs, des intérêts et expériences institutionnelles. Ce sont les constellations d’acteurs avec différents cadres de référence et la nature de leurs interactions qui permettent d’expliquer les conditions de l’utilisation des instruments de politique publique répondant au radicalisme de droite. Les différences dans la gestion du radicalisme de droite en Allemagne et en France illustrent les rapports que ces sociétés libérales et démocratiques entretiennent avec la politique. / Based on research fieldwork conducted in France and Germany with semi-directed interviews split between different institutional actors responding to right-wing radicalism, this study seeks to explain how public actors have taken part in the regulation of the expression of right-wing radicalism. I thereby chose to compare neighbouring countries, which have framed the struggle against right-wing radicalism differently: German political and state actors have constructed a public policy responding to political radicalism, whereas it has hardly been the case in France where the radical right is primarily handled in the political arena. The comparative approach outlines that the governance of the radical right by state authorities is the object of a continuous political construction undertaken by a variety of actors with distinctive policy frames. These are based on normative judgements, personal interests, and institutional experiences. The constellations of actors with different policy frames and their interactions during the decision-making process enable to explain the modalities of the use of policy instruments that are used to respond to right-wing radicalism. Differences in the handling of right-wing radicalism in France and Germany illustrate the relationships that these liberal and democratic societies have had with politics.

Why do revolutions happen? What role do structures, institutions, and actors play in precipitating (or preventing) them? Finally, What might compel social mobilization against a regime in the face of potentially insurmountable odds? These questions are all fundamentally about state-society (strategic) interactions, and elite and societal preference formation over time. The self-immolation of Muhammad Bouazizi in Sidi Bouzid on December 17, 2010, served as a focal point upon which over twenty years of corrupt, coercive authoritarian rule were focused into a single, unified challenge to the Ben Ali regime. The regime's brutality was publicized via social media activism and satellite television, precipitating mass mobilization across Tunisia and, eventually, throughout the region and beyond. In light of the rapid and unforeseen nature of these events, scholars writing about the causes of the Arab Spring have focused their critiques on scholarship that they felt overemphasized the role of institutions and elite-level actors over 'under the radar' changes within society. This paper essentially agrees with this point of view, but is not content to simply 'throw out' institutionalism. As Timur Kuran (1991) argued in the wake of the unforeseen collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, one cannot understand revolution without understanding the 'true' preferences of social actors. In this way, the inevitability of revolutionary surprises seems a given so long as analysts continue to look from the top-down. Yet, this paper contends that institutions do still matter. They matter because different institutional arrangements incentivize and constrain regime strategies, which, in turn, inform the strategic calculations and preference orderings within society. These two societal variables are determined - in part - by the degree of regime flexibility, and they affect whether, how, and where social actors choose to vent their dissent. This paper proposes a model for the development of contentious social mobilization under authoritarianism. In order to do so, two models - one game-theoretic, and the other rooted in the contentious politics subfield of political sociology - are synthesized toward elucidating how altered societal preferences affect strategic interactions between the regime and society over time and during acute contentious episodes. The synthesized model is then illustrated through narrative case studies of two North African states that experienced divergent outcomes in the wake of the Arab Spring: Tunisia and Morocco. The limited spaces and institutions for the expression of dissent in Tunisia gradually changed societal preferences over time. In 2010, Tunisians' preferences shifted from various socioeconomic demands and other issue-specific grievances toward a galvanized demand for the fall of the regime. In Morocco, on the other hand, social actors, by and large, continued to prefer limited reforms to a complete upheaval of the political system. This paper contends that this divergence in preferences and therefore outcomes was in part determined by the variation in the two regimes' respective strategic mixes of concessions and/or coercion. To the extent that such strategies and institutions were more flexible - i.e. were more permissive of (limited) political contention and contestation - social movements were less likely to become emboldened against the regime.

The Bush administration's decision to abandon the Kyoto Protocol can be explained by prospect theory. The change in federal climate policy between the Clinton and Bush administrations was due to the difference in domain that each president operated under. President Clinton operated under a domain of losses as he associated continued fossil fuel use with future socio-economic and environmental damages from climate change. This domain of losses increased President Clinton's risk tolerances and explains his pursuit of the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Conversely, President Bush operated under a domain of gains where he did not connect fossil fuel use with future damages, rather with continued economic growth. President Bush's domain of gains reduced his risk tolerance and resulted in his pursuit of fossil fuel intensive economic development policies. This paper defines the domain that Presidents Clinton and Bush operated under regarding climate change, the independent variable of this analysis. A total of 26 speeches on climate change by these presidents were coded to explicate domain according to two categories of beliefs. The single most salient variable is the decision makers beliefs about the perceived robustness of the current state of scientific knowledge on climate change. The second most important aspect of these decision makers beliefs revolve around the role of fossil fuels in economic growth. Once domain has been defined through the cognitive maps and each decision makers corresponding risk tolerance explicated, the dependent variable of policy preferences are analyzed. Two policy options are analyzed; the business as usual (BAU) option associated with the status quo, as well as a climate protection policy that is reflective of the emissions reductions associated with US compliance with Kyoto. These two policy options are evaluated in three case studies; the economy wide costs of compliance with Kyoto targets for greenhouse gas emissions, the public health impacts of greenhouse gas reductions, and finally against a component of the Kyoto Protocol that allows for international trading of permits to emit greenhouse gases.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis examines public opinion towards membership in the EU, before and after the 2008 global economic crisis, in the newest member states to join the institution in 2004 (the Czech Republic, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia) and 2007 (Bulgaria and Romania). Prior to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1989, socialist economies and communism maintained a citizenry that never experienced unemployment and that did not have a political voice. Because free-market economic policies and democratic values are new to these countries, public opinion regarding membership in a supranational organization that promotes and fosters these ideals is important to study. Data from the Eurobarometer Public Opinion Survey spring waves 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010, the Inter-Parliamentary Union, the World Bank, and Eurostat are used to measure multiple indicators of support for membership in the EU. Ordered logistic regression and means comparison analyses are employed to measure the effect of national-level economic prospects, economic winner/loser status, political party power, age, national identity, gender, and individual-level political ideology on public opinion toward membership. The results demonstrate that multiple indicators affect attitudes toward membership and that a negative shift in public opinion is apparent following the 2008 global economic crisis. At the individual-level of analysis, economic winner/loser status and national identity are significant in the predicted direction in all five models. Age is a significant indicator of support only in 2008, 2009, and 2010. At the aggregate-level, means comparison analyses and t-test statistics indicate that GDP annual growth rates have a positive effect on attitudes toward membership in the EU. As GDP annual growth increases, approval of membership in the EU increases. Eurozone membership and unemployment rates indicate varied support for membership in the EU, and the results of means comparison analyses of political party power at the national-level are inconclusive and exploratory in nature. With all findings considered, future studies can further examine the implications and long-term effects of global financial crises on public opinion towards membership in various international economic organizations.

Existing literature establishes a connection between elevating the status of women in less developed countries and positive political outcomes including: increased national stability, decreased likelihood of civil conflict, and international stability. In particular, the literature suggests that working within the dominant cultural framework of a country makes development projects more successful. This thesis expands upon these bodies of literature and examines the outcomes of the work of two major development agencies in Afghanistan, the UN and USAID in the area of women's education and healthcare. The thesis analyzes some specific characteristics that influence the effects of these programs in the Afghan context. It argues that when development agencies work within the unique cultural context of Afghanistan, and promote development gains for women within an Islamic framework, they are more likely to be effective than if they do not work within this framework. The thesis tests this hypothesis with a comparative qualitative analysis of the goals and accomplishes of the UN and USAID and compares the results of the analysis with survey data from The Asia Foundation Survey of the Afghan people, which provides data from 2006-2013 regarding attitudes of the Afghan people. Based on a qualitative analysis, the study's results, although tentative, identifies patterns of success using the Islamic framework.

Affirmative action in higher education is a necessary component for ethnic minorities to be afforded postsecondary educational access and opportunities to improve their socioeconomic status. The ban of affirmative action in undergraduate admissions, wherever instituted, has decreased the undergraduate enrollment of ethnic minorities. The broad objective of this research is to demonstrate how the elimination of affirmative action has lessened postsecondary educational access for minorities, who presently account for the majority or near-majority population in several states and will soon account for a much larger segment of the national population. This study will use two series of multiple regression models with scale-level variables to note the effect of the removal of affirmative action and the effectiveness of the Talented Twenty Program in maintaining student diversity at the University of Florida and the Florida State University. The major finding of this research is that the minority enrollment at UF and FSU was significantly related to the change in policy from affirmative action to the Talented Twenty Program. This study and the prior literature strongly suggest that the current diversity levels at these public universities are most likely a result of the university recruitment and outreach programs and population change.

What explains fighter jet export policy to East Asia? The decision to export fighter jets from the United States (U.S.) to foreign countries is an important part of domestic and foreign policy. James Rosenau’s theory of linkage politics suggests that domestic and international variables may work together in complex ways to develop U.S. export policy of fighter jets. This thesis uses a comparative case study approach to examine the domestic and international factors that are influential in determining U.S. export policy of fighter jets to Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. The political actors involved in making U.S. fighter jet export policy include the Executive Branch (primarily the president and Defense Department), Congress, and interest groups representing defense companies and foreign countries. Decisions regarding U.S. export policy of fighter jets to East Asia are influenced by international factors including the need for defense cooperation and diplomacy to enhance the security of the United States and its allies against the perceived threats posed by China and North Korea. These decisions are also impacted by domestic concerns including the desire of politicians to create high paying jobs for U.S. workers, increase contracts and profits for U.S. companies, and improve their chance for reelection. Overall, domestic concerns seems as important or even more important than international concerns when it comes to making decisions about exporting fighter jets to East Asia.