Brazil is renowned worldwide for its remarkable reforms in pharmaceutical regulation, which have enhanced access to essential medicines while lowering drug costs. As part of these reforms, the Generic Drug Act was introduced in 1999. This policy mandates that pharmaceutical products that are no longer protected by a patent must be interchangeable with an innovator (reference) drug. This thesis examines how and why Brazil promoted this large-scale regulatory policy. The literature on pharmaceutical policy often invokes international guidelines that inspire countries to reformulate their regulatory regimes or argues that regulations emerge in order to serve the interests of powerful interest groups. In contrast, this thesis examines how changes in the regulatory environment affect actors’ policy preferences. It argues that as actors adapt and respond to new regulatory environments, they also push the policy path further along the way. This historical qualitative case study relies on in-depth interviews and documentary research to trace the policy process of generic drug regulation in Brazil. It finds that Brazil’s generic drug reform can be attributed to a convergence of the evolution of pharmaceutical regulation, unexpected events (AIDS epidemic and scandal of fake medicines) and political activity of the Minister of Health. In turn, this study demonstrates that the new regulatory development altered the preferences of local pharmaceutical firms, who now support and uphold a policy they once opposed because of the high costs associated with adapting their industrial plants and processes. The regulation of generic drugs has also culminated in other unintended consequences. Public pharmaceutical factories were still unable to fully adjust to the new regulatory environment and patient groups slowly became aware of these limitations. Paradoxically, the generic drug regulation introduced in the name of patients and opposed by local pharmaceutical firms, is today opposed by important patient advocacy groups but solidified by the strong support of local and multinational pharmaceutical firms. These findings suggest although pharmaceutical firms strongly support the generic drug regulation today; they did not control the policy process that created it. Although Brazil’s norms resemble international guidelines, they were developed locally. Brazil’s case demonstrates that evolution of domestic political institutions were the most important determinant of the timing and direction of the regulatory policy. Thus, this thesis concludes that the state still matters for pharmaceutical regulation and that pharmaceutical regulation is only partially influenced by non-state actors.

Thesis advisor: James Hamm / In this thesis I discuss the Cuban American National Foundation (CANF) and its unique success as an ethnic interest group. I explain how the group came to be. I then address a number of reasons that scholars give as to why the CANF still exerts so much influence today. These reasons include but are not limited to: government favoritism during the cold war, the group's influence as a voting bloc, and campaign donations to prominent politicians. I discuss each of these theories and conclude that they all contain a grain of truth, yet none of them is significant enough to fully explain the situation. I conclude by finding the situation to be over-determined. / Thesis (BA) — Boston College, 2008. / Submitted to: Boston College. College of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: College Honors Program. / Discipline: International Studies Honors Program.

none

Our planet is currently in the midst of a mass extinction event. Plants and animals are dying off at a rate undocumented since the dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago. Unlike earlier extinction events, however, the current ecological crisis is primarily being driven by a single species – homo sapiens. Although a seemingly overwhelming issue, environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) have dedicated themselves to ensuring strong species protection. In Canada, these interest groups launched and sustained a successful national campaign for federal endangered species legislation that culminated in the enactment of the Species at Risk Act (SARA). While ENGOs‟ campaign for protective legislation has been well-documented by scholars, there is a dearth of research regarding ENGOs‟ strategies following the passage of SARA. In order to address this knowledge gap, this thesis examines and compares the strategies employed by interest groups in both the pre- and post-passage stages of the Act. After conducting qualitative interviews with seven representatives of Canadian-based ENGOs, this study finds that following the passage of SARA interest groups, dissatisfied with the government‟s weak implementation of the Act, decided to overhaul their strategic approach and shifted the species at risk issue to three new institutional venues: the boardrooms of private corporations, the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), and the domestic judicial arena. The thesis concludes that, despite inherent challenges, shifting institutional venues can be a successful strategy for ENGOs faced with a government reluctant to implement the hard-won legislative commitments. This work may prove to be particularly pertinent for other non-governmental organizations facing similar obstacles. / Graduate

No description available.

No description available.

Amicus curiae participation by interest groups has greatly increased over the past few decades in the Supreme Court despite a limited understanding of their influence. Previous literature has suggested that at the U.S. Supreme Court level, interest groups as amici are no more likely to get justices votes in a liberal or conservative direction than when no amicus brief is provided. Some literature, however, suggests that there are certain types of cases in which amicus briefs may be influential, such as in constitutional, statutory, and civil rights cases. By conducting several comparisons of means tests for the number of justice votes in a certain ideological direction with and without an amicus brief, this study investigates the influence of briefs on justice votes in civil rights and economic cases. The findings support the previous literature that suggests briefs are no more likely to be related to an increased number of votes in the direction of the brief, but finds that civil rights cases may be positively affected by amicus briefs while economic cases are negatively affected. This thesis concludes by explaining that the content of the briefs submitted should change in order to be more effective in influencing justices or that interest groups should use their efforts in other avenues to impact policy. / Master of Arts

The intention of campaign finance regulations was to reduce the influence of special interest groups while increasing citizen contributions. Critics have suggested an unintentional consequence of this policy of increasing bias in campaign contributions in favor of incumbents. These claims of intentional and unintentional consequences, however, have rarely been tested. My dissertation examines the intentional and unintentional consequences of campaign finance regulations in the American states. This study adopts a theoretical framework emphasizing the different effects of regulations on two distinctive types of contributors. A particularistic contributor, whose motivation is influencing policy, is likely to be affected by contribution limits. A universalistic contributor, motivated by helping his or her favorite candidates, is not likely to respond to regulations. Furthermore, the disparity of contributions is not expected to be affected by contribution limits. Two specific hypotheses reflecting the theoretical consideration are tested: 1) Restrictive contribution limits reduce the number and amount of particularistic contributions and increase the disparity between the numbers as well as the amounts of contributions, and 2) Contribution limits do not affect the number, the amount, or the disparities of universalistic contributions. Individual contribution records on gubernatorial elections are collected from 1990 to 2000 in 42 states. After aggregating individual contribution records by state and candidate, two analyses are conducted at the state and candidate level. The results indicate that campaign finance regulations work without the unintentional consequence of providing a financial advantage to incumbents at both the state and candidate levels. Contribution limits increase the number of total contributors, reduce the number and amount of particularistic contributions, and increase the number of universalistic contributors. In addition, further analyses show a dynamic effect of contribution limits on corporations, labor unions, individuals, parties, and ideology PACs. Restrictive contribution limits reduce the number and amount of corporate contributions, but only reduce the amount of labor union contributions. On the other hand, strict contribution limits encourage individual contributions, but discourage party and ideological PAC contributions. The intentional consequence of campaign finance regulations does not result in the unintentional consequence of increasing bias in favor of incumbents. These findings suggest that current regulations that limit campaign contributions should remain in place.

The case of mobilization against hydraulic fracturing by interest groups provided an opportunity to examine the influence of three factors (mission, audience, and policy context) on diagnostic, prognostic, and motivational framing. A comparative analysis was conducted of the mobilization activities of five national environmental organizations with a local presence in the Pennsylvania and New York Marcellus Shale regions. The organizations varied with respect to organizational mission, the audiences they were targeting (urban and rural), and the policy context in which they worked (pro and anti-hydraulic fracturing). Data came from eleven semi-structured in-depth interviews with organization personnel, and from the organizations' websites and published documents. The results of this research show how the organizations use diagnostic, prognostic, and motivational framing to mobilize citizens against hydraulic fracturing. They illustrate the influence of organizational mission, audience (urban versus rural), and policy context in how the groups take on these framing tasks. Overall, the findings provide insights into the variation in frames and framing that can occur at the organizational level inside a movement. They illustrate the explanatory value of investigating multiple factors as they affect diagnostic, prognostic, and motivational framing.

L’ouverture des négociations d’adhésion avec la Turquie a déclenché un débat et une interrogation au-delà du cadre habituel du processus de candidature à l’Union européenne. La candidature turque a interpellé de larges composantes des sociétés européennes, pas seulement par rapport aux questions suscitées dans le cadre des conditions politiques et économiques formellement fixées par l’Union européenne, mais aussi en raison des effets conjugués de son histoire, de sa géographie et des caractéristiques culturelles et religieuses de sa population. Il existe de nombreuses études sur l’attitude et le rôle des acteurs politiques, économiques ou sociaux face à la question de l’entrée de la Turquie dans l’Union européenne. Cette thèse porte sur l’engagement d’acteurs qui demeurent très peu étudiés malgré l’intérêt qu’ils portent à la question turque et leur présence active auprès de l’Union européenne : les Eglises chrétiennes. Quelle est la position des Eglises dans ce débat sur la candidature turque avec une dimension religieuse saillante et comment s’impliquent-elles dans ce processus politique européen en tant qu’institutions religieuses? A travers cette question, ce travail cherche aussi à analyser les dynamiques de la présence et de l’engagement des Eglises dans la sphère politique au niveau européen. Ce travail se fonde sur des entretiens avec les responsables des organisations européennes des Eglises et sur l’analyse des déclarations, des prises de position et des communiqués des Eglises par rapport à cette question. Cette thèse se propose d’analyser l’action des Eglises auprès de l’UE avec les outils conceptuels des études sur les groupes d’intérêt. / The opening of accession negotiations with Turkey has provoked an intense debate in Europe unlike any other candidate country’s membership process. The questioning is not only about Turkey’s capacity to fulfil formal political and economic conditions set down by the European Union, but also due to the combined effects of Turkey’s history, geography and the religious and cultural characteristics of its population. Although the EU is a secular political institution and religion does not play any role in the EU membership, it takes on an important dimension when it comes to imagine the accession of Turkey. The implications of political, social or economic actors with regard to Turkey’s EU bid have been extensively studied. However, despite their great interest in the Turkish question, Christian Churches in Europe did not draw much attention from researchers. This thesis focuses on the position and the role of the main European Christian Churches in the framework of accession negotiations with Turkey: In a highly secularized Europe, what kind of stance or role could the Churches assume in regards to Turkey’s EU bid and how do they engage in this political process? Around this question, this research also aims to analyze the dynamics of the presence and the participation of religions to modern secular political life at the European Union level. This study is mainly based on the interviews conducted with representatives of Church’s European organizations in Brussels, as well as Church documents, reports, public statements and media interventions. The research uses the interest groups’ conceptual framework to explain the Churches’ action in political sphere.