This thesis seeks to examine why the Lavalas elite faction and its oppositions have failed to make and implement mutual agreements, to resolve regime crises and to create an environment conducive to democratic norms. The study derives explanations stemming from three alternative models: modernization, rational choice and misperception. Three periods of consensus-building attempt between the Lavalas elite and its oppositions (1991-1995: Consensus-Building attempt I; 1996-2000: Consensus-Building attempt II; 2000-2004: Consensus-Building attempt III) are considered. By using interpreted models a la Graham Allison, the thesis applies the criteria produced by each model to help interpret the failure of consensus-building in these three historical periods. The thesis' conclusion then assesses the models' strengths and weaknesses, prompting interesting questions for further research in the near future.

<p>Traditional approaches to the empirical research of human action, rational choice theory dominant amongst them, have implicitly adopted philosophical pre-suppositions about human action that are untenable and in need of correction. In this project, I seek to both (a) diagnose these problems by showing that rational choice theory is insufficiently attentive to both the question of what agents are and of what kind of world they occupy, and (b) overcome these problems by offering a conception of practical reason that is more "realistic" in that it incorporates a philosophically convincing account of world and of the practical agent's relation with it. To that end, I develop a conception of praxis that is centered on the idea that practical agents act within and toward practical horizons rather than exercising a faculty of choice within stable decision spaces.</p> / Dissertation

During the past two decades, community-based hazard mitigation (CBHM) has been newly proposed and implemented as an alternative conceptual model for emergency management to deal with disasters comprehensively in order to curtail skyrocketing disaster losses. Local community members have been growingly required to share information and responsibilities for reducing community vulnerabilities to natural and technological hazards and building a safer community. Consequently they are encouraged to join local mitigation programs and volunteer for collective mitigation action, but their contributions vary. This research examined factors associated with Tulsa Project Impact partners?? contributions to collective mitigation action. In the literature review, self-interest and social norms were identified and briefly discussed as two determinants to guide partners?? behavior by reviewing game theoretic frameworks and individual decision-making models. Partners?? collective interest in building a safer community and feelings of obligation to participate in collective mitigation action were also considered for this study. Thus, the major factors considered are: (1) collective interests, (2) selective benefits, (3) participation costs, (4) norms of cooperation, and (5) internalized norms of participation. Research findings showed that selective benefits and internalized norms of participation were the two best predictors for partners?? contributions to collective mitigation action. However, collective interests, participation costs, and norms of cooperation did not significantly influence partners?? contributions.

<p>The purpose of this study is to illustrate why Norway is not a member of the EU from a rational choice perspective. In order to fulfil this purpose, two questions will constitute the framework of the study. These are:</p><p>1. What are the arguments of the EU-opposers in the Norwegian EU-debate?</p><p>2. Is it rational for Norway to stand outside the EU?</p><p>The first question was answered by analyzing and mapping out the arguments of the Norweigan EU-opponents and then using a critical literature study to analyse them. To demarcate the study, only the arguments of the parliamentary parties that are opposing a Norwegian EU-membership, and the official organisation Nei til EU (No to the EU) were included. The second question was tested by using a rational choice theory and a number of keywords from the classical rational actor model; objectives, alternatives, consequences and choice. These keywords constituted the main analyzing instrument of the study and was applied on the empirical material.</p><p>The main arguments of the opposers of a Norweigan EU-membership, are widely spoken democracy, freedom of action, environment and solidarity. The debate is hard to map out because of its general character but is very homogeneous. The second question is answered partly in the light of the first one and the result shows that it is rational for Norway to stay outside the EU today, but the question may have to be reassessed in the future, and probably will be since the debate is still so fervent.</p>

Government / This report aims to broaden the horizon of research questions in international relations by encouraging a greater appreciation for the complexity of individual and collective motivations. More specifically, the report focuses on why the honor motive is ignored in the discipline and why it deserves more attention. / text

"Audience costs" models of international relations suggest a purely informational role for domestic politics in conflict settings. Here, domestic politics serve as a rich signal of belligerents' true intentions, allowing them to more quickly resolve disagreements, decreasing the likelihood and duration of war. But if belligerents can have different beliefs about publicly available information, then domestic politics might confuse rather than clarify conflict situations, increasing the likelihood and duration of war. I present empirical evidence of conventional "audience costs" models' shortcomings in explaining the dynamics of the US counterinsurgency efforts in Iraq and the response of Iraqi insurgents to those efforts. I then develop a formal model to show how differences in beliefs between insurgents and counterinsurgents about domestic political audiences in Iraq may have contributed to the prolonged nature of the conflict. I argue that the underlying cause of the conflict's duration is disagreement between belligerents about whether and how Iraqi civilians contribute to a successful counterinsurgency, leading belligerents to disagree not only before fighting about who is likely to win, but during fighting about who is actually winning. / text

The study explores the possibility of conflicts between conservation of wetlands and semi-natural grasslands in the county of Stockholm. Both habitats are important to protect from a biodiversity perspective. The species rich semi-natural grasslands have been created by agricultural practices like grazing and mowing. At the same time, wetlands have diminished due to earlier drainage in order to increase the area of arable land. Both habitats are incorporated in the Swedish Environmental Objectives and are parts of the EU’s Agri-Environmental Schemes (AES), where farmers get financial support to maintain or restore valuable habitats. Wetland conservation/restoration often requires raised water tables, but also maintenance with cattle grazing in certain areas. On the other hand, raised water tables can act as hinder for grazing animals and lead to conflict situations. Using a mixed method approach, this study scrutinized if the use of different management tools can result in conflicts between actors and objectives. The study is based on a literature review, interviews and the use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS). Institutionalism and the Institutional Analysis and Development framework are used to analyze and evaluate the situation in the county of Stockholm. The quantitative results reveal that 12,8 % of all semi-natural grasslands of high biological value intersects with wetlands. However, these areas are maintained with environmental support to a larger extent than semi-natural grasslands outside wetlands. This indicates there is no conflict between wetland and semi-natural grassland conservation, a perception shared by authorities. From farmers’ perspective the situation is described differently, rule compliance for environmental support is hard to obtain specifically in wet areas. Increased dialogue between authorities and farmers rather than harsh inspections would be preferable as the county of Stockholm needs more farmers and grazing cattle to maintain biologically important habitats. Grazing in wetlands is needed from a biodiversity perspective but can at the same time disturb the wetlands functioning of nutrient reduction. There is a risk of authorities prioritizing water quality in front of biodiversity in conflicting situations. Water, as a common-pool recourse, is surrounded by stricter regulation and also easier to monitor.

The thesis includes two essays on asset pricing. In the first essay, "Asset Pricing in a Monetary Economy with Heterogeneous Beliefs", we shed new light on the role of monetary policy in asset pricing by focusing on the case where investors have heterogeneous expectations about future monetary policy. Under heterogeneity in beliefs, investors place bets against each other on the evolution of money supply, and as a result, the sharing of wealth in the economy evolves stochastically over time, making money non-neutral. Employing a continuous-time, general equilibrium model, we establish these fluctuations to be rich in implications, in that they majorly affect the equilibrium prices of all assets, as well as inflation. In particular, we find that the stock market volatility may be significantly increased by the heterogeneity in beliefs, a conclusion supported by our empirical analysis. The second essay is titled with " Asset Pricing and Welfare Analysis with Bounded Rational Investors". Motivated by the fact that investors have limited ability and insufficient knowledge to process information, I model investors' bounded-rational behavior in processing information and study its implications on asset pricing. Bounded rational investors perceive "correlated" information (which consists of news that is correlated with fundamentals, but provides no information on them) as "fundamental" information. This generates "bounded rational risk". Asset prices and volatilities of asset returns are derived. Specially, the equity premium and the stock volatility are raised under some conditions. I also analyze the welfare impact of bounded rationality.

Increased possibilitiesof choosing one’s school of preference hasbeen raised as a key factor in many countries to promote equal opportunitiesand higher quality of education. This has been endorsed by policymakers whoassume that students make well-informed rational choices and that students only stress academic quality whendeciding which school to attend. If this is true, it will benefit schools ofhigh academic quality, rendering improved school quality overall. To date,little research has examined the validity of these assumptions despite theprofound effects they have had for changing the school systems in manycountries. This study employs an experimental approach to investigate therelative importance of attributes in school choice. Specifically the study isbased on experimental data from 587 prospective high school students inHalmstad, Sweden. The purpose is to contrast the principal school qualityattributes behind the policy change (academic reputation and programfeasibility), with the presence of friends and geographical attributes such asdistance, location and accessibility, while controlling for individualcharacteristics. The results are disturbing as they reveal flaws in theassumptions that motivated the school choice policy reform. The study presents evidence of differencesin preferences and that grades are the most important background characteristic for this difference. The study also shows that all studentsare not rational to the same extent as theory predicts. Hence theSwedish school reforms have been based on a slightly biased theory. Finally, the study indicates that differentgeographic contexts (e.g. where the studentslive) affect students' preferences.

Sexual violence in armed conflict is not a new phenomenon. Although it has a long history, it's only in recent years from 1990 that is has been given more attention in science and media. I will in my thesis look at the conflicts of former Yugoslavia and Congo (DRC) and I will use two theories to investigate how the use of conflict-related sexual violence best can be explained. The two theoretical frameworks I have chosen are Feminist theory and Rational Choice theory. The conflicts will be at the center of analysis. My aim is to create an awareness of the problem with sexual violence in war and conflict. Feminist theory claims that environment and upbringing are important factors for the creation of gender. Gender is a social and cultural construct. Rational Choice argues that human beings are rational and make decisions that promote self-interest and minimize their own losses. My conclusion is that the social and cultural constructions which, among other things, created a patriarchal society for a long time in both conflicts. Along with traditional family values, this is a strong reason that sexual violence against women occurred during the conflicts. Another reason is the fighting for resources where sexual violence became a means to an end.