<p>This essay seeks to discern the motives of the aid allocation of western governments. The aim of the essay is to find differences between three highly similar aid donors: namely Denmark, Norway and Sweden, by doing a comparative case study according to the most similar case method. The research has been conducted by analyzing material from two ministers of each government, the Foreign Ministers and Ministers for International Development, by using a motive-analysis method. Social constructivism and structural realism have been used as a theoretical explanation. These two theories have been helpful in understanding how International Relations work.The results showed that although the three countries were highly similar, they showed some crucial differences in their motivation for aid allocation, especially in the case of Denmark. Theoretically, this could be explained by social constructivism, i.e. that the states have different priorities and experiences.</p>

My thesis looks into development into why European Union provides development assistance. My hypothesis is that it is becoming more pragmatic throughout the period 2014 to 2019. I begin my work with introduction into the topic, literature overview and presentation of the hypothesis. In the second part, I present theoretical framework of constructivism and methodology of motive analysis. Motive analysis is a method developed for studying motives via discourse. I have defined 7 motives in a coding book, which will be analysed in the speeches of EU representatives, concretely European Commission's Presidents and High Representatives / Vice-Presidents responsible for European External Action Service. In the third pat, I provide brief overview and context of EU's aid policies. In the last, analytical part, I analysed the speeches and identified each motives one by one, I have looked into development of motives throughout time and came to conclusion that most of time, all motives are prevalent behind development aid, only their occurrence and importance slightly changes, depending on internal and external factors. It can be seen thant while in 2014 the aid was slightly more tilted towards idealism, in 2019 the aid motives slightly shifted towards pragmatism.

This study is a qualitative case study, with a theory-consuming approach and motive analytical structure that aims to examine Russia's ulterior motives, for the full-scale military invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The analysis is based on a theoretical framework of two different international relations theories: realism and constructivism. Realism highlights security, military power and the survival of state in the international system while constructivism highlights the interactions between different constructed identities, norms and ideas within the international system. Together with the theoretical framework the analysis uses Kremlin's own statements, to see if it corresponds with the theoretical findings. The study concludes that the two theoretical perspectives complement each other in explaining Russia's ulterior motives and that Kremlin's own statements on Ukraine was able to correspond with the theoretical findings.

This essay seeks to discern the motives of the aid allocation of western governments. The aim of the essay is to find differences between three highly similar aid donors: namely Denmark, Norway and Sweden, by doing a comparative case study according to the most similar case method. The research has been conducted by analyzing material from two ministers of each government, the Foreign Ministers and Ministers for International Development, by using a motive-analysis method. Social constructivism and structural realism have been used as a theoretical explanation. These two theories have been helpful in understanding how International Relations work.The results showed that although the three countries were highly similar, they showed some crucial differences in their motivation for aid allocation, especially in the case of Denmark. Theoretically, this could be explained by social constructivism, i.e. that the states have different priorities and experiences.

This study aims to examine the health and care policies of the Moderates, the Christian Democrats, the Liberals and the Sweden Democrats, then compare each policy with the Tidö-agreement and analyze the parties' potential motives for cooperation. To help achieve the purpose of the study, following questions have been formulated: How did the care and care policies of the Moderates, Christian Democrats, Liberals and Sweden Democrats look before the elections in 2018 and 2022 respectively?, in what way, and to what extent, are care and care presented in the Tidö-agreement? and what political motives can explain the Moderates', Christian Democrats', Liberals' and Sweden Democrats' reasons for entering into cooperation with each other? The method is a motive analysis and to find out the possible motives of the parties, and the theory is Wolfgang C. Müller's and Kaare Strøm's theory regarding motives for the parties' actions where the parties are either most policy-seeking or office-seeking. The hypotheses are that the Moderates', Christian Democrats' and Liberals' mostly are office-seeking parties, while the Sweden Democrats' mostly is policy-seeking. However, the study results in only the hypothesis about the Liberals being strengthened, while the remaining hypotheses fall.