xiv, 240 p. : ill. A print copy of this thesis is available through the UO Libraries. Search the library catalog for the location and call number. / The use of rhetoric to frame policy issues often influences the amount of attention countries pay to international issues and the level of support for those issues. Often, domestic and international actors present different descriptions of policy issues in order to advance their own views and change the international agenda. Despite frequent attempts to change the international agenda and the importance of agendas for policy formation, our understanding of the factors that contribute to why particular issues get international attention is limited. This project develops a theoretical understanding of the development of the international agenda, how issues on that agenda are framed, and why agendas change over time. The project contributes to international relations theory by understanding the factors responsible for increasing attention to issues, and the factors that influence how states define the problems on the international agenda that may eventually become part of international treaties and organizations. The project redefines agendas through a constructivist approach where individuals interpret real phenomena through frames. Rhetoric's influence on agenda changes described in this project also demonstrates a mechanism through which the soft power of attraction changes international outcomes. The project takes a positivist approach to analyzing constructivist and realist causes of agenda changes. The project tests specific implications of these theories of international agenda development and issue framing by examining the case of international efforts to address whaling. The project demonstrates the importance of polarity in enabling changes in attention from security to non-security issues and the importance of rhetoric in causing changes in issue frames. / Committee in charge: Ronald Mitchell, Chairperson, Political Science; Craig Parsons, Member, Political Science; Lars Skalnes, Member, Political Science; Jean Stockard, Outside Member, Planning Public Policy & Mgmt

Esta pesquisa tem como objetivo central a identificação e análise dos principais atores e temas envolvidos na internacionalização do conflito armado na Colômbia. Este estudo entende por internacionalização a participação de atores estrangeiros na formulação e/ou implementação das tentativas de resolução do referido conflito. O recorte temporal pertinente aos propósitos da pesquisa estende-se do Governo César Gaviria (1990-1994) ao final do primeiro governo de Álvaro Uribe (2002-2006), na medida em que, no período anterior, não era possível observar um envolvimento externo considerável nos processos de paz na Colômbia. Os atores selecionados para uma análise mais atenta foram: EUA e OEA, cujas agendas correspondem à proposta hemisférica predominante; e UE e ONU, as quais representam as iniciativas globais voltadas à resolução do conflito. A principal conclusão deste estudo incide sobre o agrupamento das propostas internacionais em torno desses dois pólos: hemisféricas (das quais os EUA constituem o principal expoente) e globais (que têm na UE o seu ponto focal). A primeira é dotada de vultosos recursos, apresenta um caráter marcadamente militar e encontra na erradicação das drogas e no confronto às guerrilhas as suas principais estratégias. Por outro lado, o traço preponderante da segunda é a ênfase nos direitos humanos, na ajuda humanitária e na negociação com as guerrilhas. A proposta emergente do pólo europeu não foi capaz de oferecer um contra-peso à intervenção estadunidense, tanto em termos de recursos financeiros, como de fatores geopolíticos. Assim, a principal conclusão desta pesquisa é que a internacionalização do conflito armado não se manifesta de forma homogênea: embora a participação dos atores estrangeiros tenha ocorrido no âmbito global, as iniciativas hemisféricas são predominantes, especialmente se analisarmos as preferências do governo colombiano. / This study aims to identify and analyze the main actors and themes related to the Colombian armed conflict internationalization. It understands internationalization as the participation of foreign players in the designing and implementation of programs regarding the resolution of the conflict. The period of interest to this study dates back to the government César Gaviria (1990-1994) until the end of the first Álvaro Uribe administration, since there was no considerable external participation on Colombia peace processes previously. The selected players for a more detailed approach were: US and OAS, whose agendas correspond to the predominant proposal in the hemisphere; and EU and UN, which represent the global initiatives towards the conflict resolution. The main conclusion of this study is related to the concentration of international proposals around these poles: hemispheric (whose main exponent is the US) and global (concentrated on EU). The first involves a huge amount of resources, presents a markedly military aspect and privileges the illicit crops eradication and confrontation against guerrillas as strategies. On the other hand, the dominant characteristic of the second is the emphasis on human rights, humanitarian aid and the negotiation with the guerrillas. The proposal that emerged from Europe was not able to offer compensation to American intervention in terms of financial resources and geopolitical factors. Therefore, the main conclusion of this study is that the internationalization of the armed conflict is not homogeneous throughout the world: the participation of external actors is global, but the hemispherical initiatives are predominant, especially if we consider Colombian governments preferences.

The sustainable development concept has entered the urban planning agenda of Turkey mainly after Habitat II Conference held in Istanbul in 1996. Turkey is trying to adopt the experiences of developed countries to improve the planning system including the sustainable development criteria. In this study, planning experience of Mugla is selected as a case study to criticize and evaluate on the changing planning process of cities in Turkey in terms of sustainable development criteria, which requires new approaches that are integrative and participative between local and global context. In the case of Mugla, the urban form has shaped according to the development areas declared in the plans as additional districts to the traditional city since 1930s / that is, the result was not sustainable in the long run because of some environmental, socio-economic and political values. In the thesis, the problems of the case related to planning experience through sustainable development objectives are stated and solutions are proposed for a sustainable city.

Esta pesquisa tem como objetivo central a identificação e análise dos principais atores e temas envolvidos na internacionalização do conflito armado na Colômbia. Este estudo entende por internacionalização a participação de atores estrangeiros na formulação e/ou implementação das tentativas de resolução do referido conflito. O recorte temporal pertinente aos propósitos da pesquisa estende-se do Governo César Gaviria (1990-1994) ao final do primeiro governo de Álvaro Uribe (2002-2006), na medida em que, no período anterior, não era possível observar um envolvimento externo considerável nos processos de paz na Colômbia. Os atores selecionados para uma análise mais atenta foram: EUA e OEA, cujas agendas correspondem à proposta hemisférica predominante; e UE e ONU, as quais representam as iniciativas globais voltadas à resolução do conflito. A principal conclusão deste estudo incide sobre o agrupamento das propostas internacionais em torno desses dois pólos: hemisféricas (das quais os EUA constituem o principal expoente) e globais (que têm na UE o seu ponto focal). A primeira é dotada de vultosos recursos, apresenta um caráter marcadamente militar e encontra na erradicação das drogas e no confronto às guerrilhas as suas principais estratégias. Por outro lado, o traço preponderante da segunda é a ênfase nos direitos humanos, na ajuda humanitária e na negociação com as guerrilhas. A proposta emergente do pólo europeu não foi capaz de oferecer um contra-peso à intervenção estadunidense, tanto em termos de recursos financeiros, como de fatores geopolíticos. Assim, a principal conclusão desta pesquisa é que a internacionalização do conflito armado não se manifesta de forma homogênea: embora a participação dos atores estrangeiros tenha ocorrido no âmbito global, as iniciativas hemisféricas são predominantes, especialmente se analisarmos as preferências do governo colombiano. / This study aims to identify and analyze the main actors and themes related to the Colombian armed conflict internationalization. It understands internationalization as the participation of foreign players in the designing and implementation of programs regarding the resolution of the conflict. The period of interest to this study dates back to the government César Gaviria (1990-1994) until the end of the first Álvaro Uribe administration, since there was no considerable external participation on Colombia peace processes previously. The selected players for a more detailed approach were: US and OAS, whose agendas correspond to the predominant proposal in the hemisphere; and EU and UN, which represent the global initiatives towards the conflict resolution. The main conclusion of this study is related to the concentration of international proposals around these poles: hemispheric (whose main exponent is the US) and global (concentrated on EU). The first involves a huge amount of resources, presents a markedly military aspect and privileges the illicit crops eradication and confrontation against guerrillas as strategies. On the other hand, the dominant characteristic of the second is the emphasis on human rights, humanitarian aid and the negotiation with the guerrillas. The proposal that emerged from Europe was not able to offer compensation to American intervention in terms of financial resources and geopolitical factors. Therefore, the main conclusion of this study is that the internationalization of the armed conflict is not homogeneous throughout the world: the participation of external actors is global, but the hemispherical initiatives are predominant, especially if we consider Colombian governments preferences.