The British Labour Party has spent eighteen years in opposition since 1979. During that time it lost four consecutive general elections to the Conservative Party. In 1997, however, it now looks set to win its first election since 1974. This thesis examines the Labour Party in opposition since 1979, using a theoretical framework informed by Anthony Giddens' structuration theory. Based on a dialectical notion of the structure and agency linkage, a two-tiered framework is constructed which at one level views a political party as consisting of a set of structures which can constrain and enable party leaders in their attempts to make the party electorally successful, and at another level the party is regarded as a collective agent in its own right, which in turn is subject to the effects of larger external structures. By comparing the strategies adopted by the Labour Party and its leaders since 1979, the thesis demonstrates that the apparent recovery in the Party's electoral fortunes has corresponded with an increase in the ability of agents to successfully negotiate structural constraints, whilst taking advantage of enabling structures. However, it is also clear that the transformation of Labour into an electorally viable party in 1997 is not solely the product of agency in the period since the last election; rather, it is the culmination of a longer-term process of party change. / Master of Arts

This thesis describes an exploratory study designed to investigate the beliefs and perceptions of eight English language lecturers about, and their classroom practices in implementing the curriculum change that was enacted in 2010 at the undergraduate level in the public sector colleges in Pakistan. Research indicates that curriculum change is a highly complex and a multifaceted process (Carl, 2009), and its success depends on a number of features. In this respect, it is acknowledged that teachers and their multiple roles contribute significantly to the success or failure of any educational reform or change. Therefore, this exploration focussed on investigating teachers’ implementation of the curriculum change through an analysis of their beliefs about teaching and learning, their perceptions about the curriculum change, and the issues involved in implementation. My approach is interpretive, and thus qualitative research methodology was employed to obtain an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon under investigation. Semi structured interviews and classroom observations were used as data collection instruments. The analysis of the data revealed that, in spite of the lecturers’ generally positive attitude towards the concept of change and their belief in the importance of English for both individual and national progress, there was a limited uptake of the new communicative curriculum. The study indicated that teachers’ beliefs combined with a number of external factors including the student level, educational culture, examination washback, lack of resources and support, and absence of teacher training could be an explanation for contradictions between the intended and the implemented curriculum change. The study concluded that the needs of the teachers must be acknowledged, and measures should be taken to create compatibility between the teachers’ beliefs, contextual factors and the reform policies. Although the study does not provide any explicit solutions to the problem of change and reform implementation, the insights revealed significant implications, clarified some critical issues, and offered some recommendations which might prove beneficial not only for curriculum planning and implementation in the future, but could also be useful in guiding those involved in the present curriculum change. Important areas were also suggested for further research in the field.

Research on organisational learning (OL) was mainly positioned within the psychological and sociological domains. Past and extant research on OL focused on the behavioural, cognitive and intuitive perspectives in addition to a growing track of research grounded on social theory. So far, a countless number of research studies attempted to address inter-organisational learning (IOL) from various perspectives. However, the lack of understanding of how IOL occurs in networks can be observed due to the social tensions that are created at the inter-organisational level such as free-riding and knowledge leakage. This thesis, therefore, aims to draw theoretical explanations of IOL and how it occurs in learning networks, taking into consideration similarities and contradictions amongst a network’s participating organisations. Towards this end, the thesis employs two theoretical lenses, namely structure-agency and social exchange theories to draw conclusions that provide fresh explanations of how networks are helpful in fostering or hindering learning activities in addition to how reciprocity as an efficacy device mediates IOL dynamics. Positioned within a qualitative vein, the thesis employs an interpretive perspective to collect and analyse empirical evidence. The qualitative data were developed through a mixture of participant observations, semi-structured interviews and casual conversations with network administrators and participants. The data were analysed using thematic analysis which generated codes, following which conclusions were drawn. The main contributions of this article are (1) unfolding the network as agency which provides a fresh understanding of how the agential role of networks mediates IOL and (2) drawing a framework of dimensions of reciprocal exchanges that explains how IOL occurs in networks. The first conclusion of this thesis explained how the agential role is socially constructed and how the interpretive device facilitated this construction. The second conclusion of this thesis explained how reciprocal exchanges mediate IOL and provide a framework that suggested IOL can be better understood through temporal, spatial, directional and symmetrical perspectives.

When Turkey became a candidate of the EU in 1999 it had been a problematic applicant for forty years due to residual unpopularity with several member states for cultural, economic, security and normative reasons. However, the Helsinki European Council heralded a change of fortunes for Ankara and by 2005 accession negotiations had opened. This happened in spite of Turkey remaining an unpopular candidate with some member states. Moreover, since 2005, Turkey s standing within the EU has returned to a position akin to its pre-1999 stasis. This thesis thus asks: why did Turkey make such progress between 1999 and 2004/5? What was the specific configuration of structures, processes and actions that enabled that to happen then but not before or after? The thesis approaches this puzzle using a stretched eclectic version of Historical Institutionalism which can incorporate the effects of both structure and agency. In this way it can include the influence of wider structural factors, such as CEEC enlargement, Cyprus and ESDP as well as the agency of Turkey s advocates within the EU. It is a detailed qualitative process-tracing study which uses semi-structured interviews and documentary evidence to make a case for a given explanation. It concludes that a path dependent process, influenced by both structure and agency, can be traced from the Helsinki European Council to that in Brussels five years later which rhetorically entrapped the member states into agreeing to open accession negotiations in spite of Turkey s underlying unpopularity. By adopting this framework for analysis, the thesis makes a contribution to the literature on the Turkey-EU accession process by viewing the time period as a whole and taking a temporal rather than a snapshot approach. In so doing it is possible to explain why and how Turkey was able to make such progress between 1999 and 2004. It is also valuable in the study of present Turkey-EU relations as the ultimate conclusion has to be that there was a unique window of opportunity for both Turkey and the EU during this time and the window may now have closed.

My aim in this study is to develop more theoretically informed praxis - and practically informed theory - about two seminal questions:

Adam Smith considered consumption the sole end and purpose of all production. Concerning the measurement of welfare, this requires a sound understanding of the connection between consumption and welfare. The consumerist conceptualization of this connection implies that the amount of consumption equals welfare and the level of production can be an indicator for welfare. The limits and problems of production measures are widely accepted. Yet, indicators like GDP remain the focus of mainstream economic theory and policy. We trace the origin of this lock-in back to the economic model of behaviour and the concept of agency in mainstream economics. The suggested alternative stems from literature about human needs in heterodox economics and psychology. This literature incorporates the relevance of social aspects and cultural change for welfare. It turns out that consumerism can be a threat to well-being and welfare rather than a requirement for it. / Series: SRE - Discussion Papers

Within the last decade, European states, particularly in the post-Communist and post-Soviet region, have elected more rightist-led governments. Poland is no exception and after a surprising election in 2015 led to a Law and Justice Party (PiS) government majority in the state, questions of how this political shift in the "role model" Eastern European state could impact Polish security began to circulate. (Lupitu, 2016, p. 25) This study analyses the PiS's security actions within its first year as the Polish government majority (2015-2016) to discern the potential agency political actors have in determining how regional security organisations function through a structure vs. agency framework. Using NATO as a unit of analysis, the study aims to synthesise regional security implications of Poland's political shift on the Alliance. To do so, a triangulated methodology is applied to four key security events and actions PiS took within 2015-2016 using both a document and news media analyses as well as three elite interviews. These four events include a controversial pardoning of the minister responsible for all Polish Special Services, lustration activities within Polish security agencies, a controversial dismissal of the head of NATO's Centre of Excellence in Warsaw and the Warsaw Summit of 2016. A common...

This research is concerned with Pakistan's participation in the US-led 'war on terror' in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001. The study seeks to explain how Pakistan's state practice in the aftermath of 9/11 was normalised and made possible. In explaining the state practice, the study draws on a constructivist conceptual framework; which is further enhanced by incorporating key theoretical insights from critical realism. In the first instance, the study proposes that Pakistan's participation in the 'war on terror', seen as a set of actions and practices, was an outcome of a specific domestic political discourse. This discourse enabled and legitimised the state's alliance with the US and its abandonment of the Taliban regime. Secondly, the study is concerned with explaining why the particular discourse emerged in the shape and form that it did. In this context, the argument is that a depth 'critical realist' ontological inquiry can reveal underlying and enduring global and domestic social structural contexts, and traces of agential influence as connected to the discourse. Consequently, this study conceptualises Pakistan's actions in the context of the 'war on terror' as emerging from a multi-causal complex in which discourse, structure and agency are complicit. The study represents a departure from realist readings that emphasise a mono-causal relationship between the US and Pakistan. Instead, this research uses a synthesis of critical realism and constructivism to add a fresh perspective in terms of how we may conceptualise Pakistan's political practice in this instance.

Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Geography / Bimal Kanti Paul / Farm-to-school (FTS) programs are promoted as direct-marketing opportunities for farmers. As such, they are regarded by advocates and state and federal agencies as a pathway to rural economic development. The implementation of FTS food procurement poses significant challenges, however. Farmers make decisions regarding whether or not to market products to schools after learning about the program and considering an array of signals from multiscalar policies and governance structures. Research to date has left a gap in understanding farmers’ agency as it relates to governance structures and policy signals. This research on farmers’ engagement with the Oklahoma FTS Program contributes evidence to bridge this gap by examining the experiences not only of producers who participated in a FTS program but also of those who ceased participation or who chose not to participate. Employing a phronetic approach to social science, this explanatory, sequential, mixed-methods case study obtained quantitative and textual data from a mail survey, as well as data from two stints of qualitative fieldwork, in fall 2011 and fall 2012, which involved semistructured interviews and participant observation. Archival research completed the study methods used to gain a deeper understanding of farmers’ perspectives, practices, values, and experiences that informed their decisions to participate or not in a top-down-administered FTS program. Data collection was driven by the concept of farmers’ engagement. As such, eight categories of farmers’ engagement with the Oklahoma Farm to School Program emerged. This research answers these value-rational questions (Flyvbjerg, 2001): (1) Which farmers gain, and which farmers lose, by which mechanisms of power? (2) Is this desirable? (3) What should be done? Results provide evidence of geographically uneven development of a FTS program and incompatibilities between small- to midscale farming and the structure and governance of federal child-nutrition programs.

This is an exploratory study of women’s childbearing decisions and outcomes in non-medically indicated cesarean section childbirths (CS). Focusing on the structure-agency dichotomy, the research is guided by Anthony Giddens’ theory of structuration used in the context of the medicalization framework in order to analyze elements of personal choice and medical jurisdiction in childbearing methods. Quantitative analysis of secondary data and a thematic content analysis of Internet forums are conducted in order to analyze women’s perceptions of autonomy and constraint in their childbearing decisions and outcomes. The findings suggest that the polarization between second- and third wave feminist critiques on medical intervention in childbirth, and between structure and agency, impede our understanding of the complex phenomenon. Applying structuration theory to the medicalization framework helps to work through this polarization, further lending support to third-way feminism.