Spelling suggestions: "subject:"foreign policy decisionmaking"" "subject:"foreign policy decisionmaking""
11 |
Academia and Chinese Foreign Policy Decision Making: A Case Study of China’s EU Policy / 中國大陸學界與中共外交政策決策關係之研究─以中共的歐盟政策為例戴熙涵, Dean, Nicola C. Unknown Date (has links)
本論文旨在論述中國大陸學術界在中共外交政策的決策過程中所扮演的角色,並聚焦在值得外界特別關注的個案─中國大陸的歐洲研究學界與中共的歐盟政策。在面對愈來愈複雜的外交關係環境下,無論是在正式或非正式的層面,有更多外圍組織或人員被納入中共的外交決策結構之中,其中最貼切的例子就是學術界。隨著中國大陸地區外交相關科系或研究機構的演變、多元性和優質化的發展,其對外交政策之決策過程與範圍的潛在影響力正在增長。學者與其相關的研究機構透過各種可能影響的途徑、層次和來源,來鞏固其研究的影響力。中國大陸歐洲研究的領域目前正蓬勃發展,有些傑出的專家經常被約見來提供建言或評論。除此之外,2003年中國政府公布了中共的歐盟政策官方文件,這是中共有史以來唯一宣布過的外交政策文件,其展現中歐關係的重要性。本研究除了將論文中所界定的學術影響力框架應用於該歐洲研究的個案之外,也提供學界對此一領域主要研究範圍和學術論述的一個初步調查,以及其對中共的歐盟政策決策上實務性的關聯。 / This thesis discusses the role of academia in foreign policy-decision making in the People’s Republic of China, considering in particular the case of European Studies academia and China’s European Union policy, which merits greater scrutiny by outside observers. Faced with ever more complex foreign relations, the structure of Chinese foreign policy making is incorporating a growing number of external actors at both formal and informal levels. Academic circles are a case in point; as foreign policy research institutes evolve, diversify and optimise, their potential influence within policy making processes and circles is expanding in scope, and academics and their respective institutes are able to consolidate the impact of their research through a range of pathways, levels, and sources of influence. The European Studies field in China is robust and certain noteworthy experts are regularly called upon for advice and comment. What’s more, China’s only ever foreign policy paper in 2003 dealt with European Union policy, demonstrating the significance of Sino-European relations. In addition to applying the framework of academic influence identified herein to the case of the European Studies field, this thesis also provides a preliminary investigation of some of the field’s key research issue areas and current academic discourse, as well as connections with China’s European Union policy decisions in practice.
|
12 |
Reflexões sobre a Islamofobia nos Estados Unidos após onze de setembro de 2001: a construção discursiva da ameaça islâmica e o processo decisório em política externa / Reflections on Islamophobia in the United States after September 11, 2001: the discursive construction of the islamic threat and the foreign policy decision making processGuilherme Antunes Ramos 04 August 2015 (has links)
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / A dissertação objetiva analisar a influência da Islamofobia no processo decisório em política externa nos Estados Unidos após a data de 11 de setembro de 2001 por meio de sua apropriação por atores sociais considerados como potencialmente influentes no referido processo. A Islamofobia será conceituada a partir de um medo cultural que converte as culturas islâmicas em uma fonte de ameaça. Alinhando-se a uma perspectiva teórica que aponta para a força criativa dos discursos, se procederá à análise de alguns discursos ilustrativos para se sugerir a construção da ideia de ameça islâmica, bem como as formas através das quais o medo inspirado por tal concepção de uma ameaça islâmica alcançou as instâncias decisórias em política externa nos Estados Unidos. Por intermédio de uma análise de conteúdo que se utilizará de uma bibliografia de apoio multidisciplinar, serão abordados temas relativos à problemática de se representar as culturas, à dimensão social do medo, e às diretrizes gerais da política externa dos Estados Unidos após os Atentados Terroristas de 11 de Setembro, considerando que o desenvolvimento de tais questões subsidiará o alcance do objetivo principal do trabalho. Trata-se, em última instância, de um estudo que busca conjugar considerações sobre a política externa dos Estados Unidos com uma análise antropológica acerca da problemática das culturas, expressa a partir da conversão de uma cultura determinada em uma fonte de ameaça. Nesse sentido, a dissertação pode ser caracterizada como de natureza exploratória, uma vez que busca situar um tema pouco explorado no horizonte teórico, sobretudo em estudos sobre política externa. / The thesis intends to show the circulation of Islamophobia in the foreign policy decision making process in the United States after September 11, 2001, through its appropriation by social actors considered to be potentially influential in said process. We conceptualize Islamophobia as a cultural fear that converts islamic cultures in a threat source. By aligning with a theoretical perspective that points out the criative force of discourses, we will analyze some illustrative discourses in order to suggest the discursive construction of the islamic threat, so that we can indicate that the fear inspired by the conception of a islamic threat has reached the foreign policy decision-makers in the United States. Through a content analysis that will rely on a multidisciplinar literature, we will approach subjects such as the problem of representing cultures, the social dimension of fear, and the general guidelines of US foreign policy after the September 11 attacks, considering that such questions will subsidize the achievement of the main objective.It is ultimately a study that intends to articulate considerations on United States foreign policy with an anthropological analysis about the problem of cultures, expressed as the conversion of cultures in a threat. In this sense, we consider it to be an exploratory thesis that seeks to situate a subject little explored in theoretical horizon, especially in studies about foreign policy.
|
13 |
The Spratly Islands dispute : decision units and domestic politicsChung, Christopher, Humanities & Social Science, Australian Defence Force Academy, UNSW January 2004 (has links)
This thesis presents a cross-national, cross-regime examination of foreign policy decision-making in the Spratly Islands dispute, focusing on China, Malaysia and the Philippines. It argues that how and why these countries have acted in particular ways towards the dispute relates to the relationship among foreign policy decision-making, government behaviour and domestic politics. The theoretical foundation of the study is foreign policy analysis. It applies the decision units approach advanced by Margaret and Charles Hermann and Joe Hagan to investigate who made foreign policy decisions on the Spratly Islands dispute in the three countries during the period 1991-2002, and how this influenced government behaviour. In addition, the contextual influence of domestic politics is considered. Four case studies inform the empirical analysis: the approaches taken by Malaysia and the Philippines to bolster their respective sovereignty claim, China???s establishment of a comprehensive maritime jurisdictional regime covering the Spratly Islands among other areas, China-Philippines contestation over Mischief Reef and the development of a regional instrument to regulate conduct in the South China Sea. Three conclusions are drawn. First, the decision units approach identifies the pivotal foreign policy decision-makers in each of the countries examined and the process involved. Second, it explains the relationship between decision unit characteristics -- self-contained or externally influenceable -- and each government???s behaviour towards the dispute. Injecting domestic politics into the analysis highlights motivations of and constraints faced by decision-makers, conditioning the form and content of government action. Third, it demonstrates a low predictive capability: the ???fit??? between hypothesised and actual government behaviour is poor. While it is not a comprehensive analytical tool, the combined decision units-domestic politics approach offers deeper insight into government decisions and behaviour on the Spratly Islands dispute than hitherto reported in the literature.
|
14 |
The Spratly Islands dispute : decision units and domestic politicsChung, Christopher, Humanities & Social Science, Australian Defence Force Academy, UNSW January 2004 (has links)
This thesis presents a cross-national, cross-regime examination of foreign policy decision-making in the Spratly Islands dispute, focusing on China, Malaysia and the Philippines. It argues that how and why these countries have acted in particular ways towards the dispute relates to the relationship among foreign policy decision-making, government behaviour and domestic politics. The theoretical foundation of the study is foreign policy analysis. It applies the decision units approach advanced by Margaret and Charles Hermann and Joe Hagan to investigate who made foreign policy decisions on the Spratly Islands dispute in the three countries during the period 1991-2002, and how this influenced government behaviour. In addition, the contextual influence of domestic politics is considered. Four case studies inform the empirical analysis: the approaches taken by Malaysia and the Philippines to bolster their respective sovereignty claim, China???s establishment of a comprehensive maritime jurisdictional regime covering the Spratly Islands among other areas, China-Philippines contestation over Mischief Reef and the development of a regional instrument to regulate conduct in the South China Sea. Three conclusions are drawn. First, the decision units approach identifies the pivotal foreign policy decision-makers in each of the countries examined and the process involved. Second, it explains the relationship between decision unit characteristics -- self-contained or externally influenceable -- and each government???s behaviour towards the dispute. Injecting domestic politics into the analysis highlights motivations of and constraints faced by decision-makers, conditioning the form and content of government action. Third, it demonstrates a low predictive capability: the ???fit??? between hypothesised and actual government behaviour is poor. While it is not a comprehensive analytical tool, the combined decision units-domestic politics approach offers deeper insight into government decisions and behaviour on the Spratly Islands dispute than hitherto reported in the literature.
|
15 |
Uncovering The Sub-Text: Presidents' Emotional Expressions and Major Uses of ForceAssaf, Elias 01 January 2014 (has links)
The global context of decision making continues to adapt in response to international threats. Political psychologists have therefore considered decision making processes regarding major uses of force a key area of interest. Although presidential personality has been widely studied as a mitigating factor in the decision making patterns leading to uses of force, traditional theories have not accounted for the emotions of individuals as they affect political actions and are used to frame public perception of the use of force. This thesis therefore measures expressed emotion and cognitive expressions in the form of expressed aggression, passivity, blame, praise, certainty, realism, and optimism as a means of predicting subsequent major uses of force. Since aggression and blame are precipitated by anger and perceived vulnerability, they are theorized to foreshadow increased uses of force (Gardner and Moore 2008). Conversely, passivity and praise are indicative of empathy and joy respectively, and are not expected to precede aggressive behavior conducted to maintain emotional regulation (Roberton, Daffer, and Bucks 2012). Additionally, the three cognitive variables of interest expand on existing literature on beliefs and decision making expounded by such authors as Walker (2010), Winter (2003) and Hermann (2003). DICTION 6.0 is used to analyze all text data of presidential news conferences, candidate debates, and State of the Union speeches given between 1945 and 2000 stored by The American Presidency Project (Hart and Carroll 2012). Howell and Pevehouse's (2005) quantitative assessment of quarterly U.S. uses of force between 1945 and 2000 is employed as a means of quantifying instances of major uses of force. Results show systematic differences among the traits expressed by presidents, with most expressions staying consistent across spontaneous speech contexts. Additionally, State of the Union speeches consistently yielded the highest scores across the expressed traits measured; supporting the theory that prepared speech is used to emotionally frame situations and setup emotional interpretations of events to present to the public. Time sensitive regression analyses indicate that expressed aggression within the context of State of the Union Addresses is the only significant predictor of major uses of force by the administration. That being said, other studies may use the comparative findings presented herein to further establish a robust model of personality that accounts for individual dispositions toward emotional expression as a means of framing the emotional interpretation of events by audiences.
|
Page generated in 0.0737 seconds