This thesis is a study of the cultural history of children’s reading. It is argued that it is important to apply a wider historical perspective to the contemporary debate on the rapid changes in children’s and young people’s reading habits, and that existing historical research rarely deals with reading as a practice, but rather with its institutional and textual conditions such as the school, the library system and children’s literature. The thesis thus aims to explore the practice of reading and its relations to historical circumstances.Through a close reading of 30 retrospective interviews conducted in the 1970’s and 80’s, the analysis deals with some of the experienced motives, inter- pretations, materialities and social dimensions of children’s reading practices experienced in the first decades of the 20th century. It offers a discussion of these practices as related to wider historical contexts. Theoretically, the analysis is in- spired by the conceptualizations of a ‘history of reading’ in the works of Roger Chartier, Robert Darnton and Jonathan Rose.It is concluded that even if the informants in principle had access to different models, motives and genres for reading, the practice of reading often had to take on the character of improvisation in contexts where material resources and soci- al sympathies for reading were lacking. Furthermore, in relation to the complex social tensions and dynamics surrounding reading, the practice may also be defined by its degree of legitimacy and/or autonomy in a given context.These results imply that further research and debate is needed on the con- nections between the value attributed to reading in relation to changing concepts of work and “usefulness”, on the collective historical experiences of cultural progression, and on issues of the identity of the modern children’s library. / Akademisk avhandling som med tillstånd av Forsknings- och utbildningsnämnden vid Högskolan i Borås framläggs till offentlig granskning klockan 13.00 fredagen den 16 december 2011 i sal M506, Högskolan i Borås

In 1994 Ethiopia introduced a federal system of government as a national level approach to intra-state conflict management. Homogenisation of cultures and languages by the earlier regimes led to the emergence of ethno-national movements and civil wars that culminated in the collapse of the unitary state in 1991. For this reason, the federal system that recognises ethnic groups¿ rights is the first step in transforming the structural causes of civil wars in Ethiopia. Against this background this research examines whether the federal arrangement has created an enabling environment in managing conflicts in the country. To understand this problematic, the thesis conceptualises and analyses federalism and conflict management using a qualitative research design based on in-depth interviewing and content-based thematic analysis ¿ taking the case study of the Benishangul-Gumuz regional state. The findings of the study demonstrate that different factors hinder the federal process. First, the constitutional focus on ethnic groups¿ rights has led, in practice, to lessened attention to citizenship and minority rights protection in the regional states. Second, the federal process encourages ethnic-based elite groups to compete in controlling regional and local state powers and resources. This has greatly contributed to the emergence of ethnic-based violent conflicts, hostile intergovernmental relationships and lack of law and order along the common borders of the regional states. Third, the centralised policy and decision making process of the ruling party has hindered genuine democratic participation of citizens and self-determination of the ethnic groups. This undermines the capacity of the regional states and makes the federal structure vulnerable to the dynamics of political change. The conflicts in Benishangul-Gumuz emanate from these causes, but lack of territorial land use rights of the indigenous people and lack of proportional political representation of the non-indigenous people are the principal manifestations. The research concludes by identifying the issues that determine the sustainability of the federal structure. Some of them include: making constitutional amendments which consider citizenship rights and minority rights protection; enhancing the democratic participation of citizens by developing the capacities of the regional states and correcting the organisational weakness of the multi-national political parties; encouraging co-operative intergovernmental relationships, and maintaining the territorial land use rights of the Benishangul-Gumuz indigenous people. / Addis Ababa University

This study explores US foreign policy toward national movements (NMs), focusing on Kurdish groups across all parts of Kurdistan: Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey. It investigates the central question of why the US views certain Kurdish NMs as strategic allies while labeling others as terrorists. The PKK and PYD—sister organizations sharing the same ideology and leader—serve as a prime example of this inconsistency: the PKK is designated a terrorist organization, while the PYD has emerged as a key US partner. Similarly, Iraq's Kurdish ruling parties were initially placed on the third-tier terrorist list, only to later become Washington's most reliable allies in Iraq. The study reveals that this discrepancy is mainly due to the impact of joint combat operations. Driven by US strategic interests, these operations strengthen ties with NMs partners. Positive joint operations, free of insider attacks, are instrumental in building rational trust that evolves into affective trust over time. This trust elevates them to in-group status, fostering a shared identity. The affective bonds forged during these combat experiences shape policy makers' perceptions, further reinforcing these relationships. Furthermore, diplomatic engagements in the post-combat phase complement this process, deepening trust and enabling the US and NMs to address challenges collaboratively while advancing broader strategic objectives. / Doctor of Philosophy / This study examines US foreign policy towards national movements (NMs), focusing on Kurdish groups in Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey. It investigates why the US sees some Kurdish groups as strategic allies while labeling others as terrorists. A key example is the PKK and PYD—two related organizations with the same ideology, symbols and ideological leader. The PKK is considered a terrorist group, while the PYD has become an important US partner. Similarly, Iraq's Kurdish ruling parties were once on a third-tier terrorist list but later became the United States' most reliable allies in Iraq. The study finds that this inconsistency is largely due to the impact of joint combat operations. These operations, driven by US strategic interests, help strengthen ties with NM partners. Positive joint operations, where there are no insider attacks, build trust. Over time, this trust evolves into stronger, emotional bonds, turning these groups into in-group partners with a shared identity. These bonds influence policymakers' views and deepen the relationship. Additionally, diplomatic engagement after these combat operations further strengthens trust, allowing the US and NMs to work together on challenges while advancing broader strategic goals.

In 1994 Ethiopia introduced a federal system of government as a national level approach to intra-state conflict management. Homogenisation of cultures and languages by the earlier regimes led to the emergence of ethno-national movements and civil wars that culminated in the collapse of the unitary state in 1991. For this reason, the federal system that recognises ethnic groups' rights is the first step in transforming the structural causes of civil wars in Ethiopia. Against this background this research examines whether the federal arrangement has created an enabling environment in managing conflicts in the country. To understand this problematic, the thesis conceptualises and analyses federalism and conflict management using a qualitative research design based on in-depth interviewing and content-based thematic analysis - taking the case study of the Benishangul-Gumuz regional state. The findings of the study demonstrate that different factors hinder the federal process. First, the constitutional focus on ethnic groups' rights has led, in practice, to lessened attention to citizenship and minority rights protection in the regional states. Second, the federal process encourages ethnic-based elite groups to compete in controlling regional and local state powers and resources. This has greatly contributed to the emergence of ethnic-based violent conflicts, hostile intergovernmental relationships and lack of law and order along the common borders of the regional states. Third, the centralised policy and decision making process of the ruling party has hindered genuine democratic participation of citizens and self-determination of the ethnic groups. This undermines the capacity of the regional states and makes the federal structure vulnerable to the dynamics of political change. The conflicts in Benishangul-Gumuz emanate from these causes, but lack of territorial land use rights of the indigenous people and lack of proportional political representation of the non-indigenous people are the principal manifestations. The research concludes by identifying the issues that determine the sustainability of the federal structure. Some of them include: making constitutional amendments which consider citizenship rights and minority rights protection; enhancing the democratic participation of citizens by developing the capacities of the regional states and correcting the organisational weakness of the multi-national political parties; encouraging co-operative intergovernmental relationships, and maintaining the territorial land use rights of the Benishangul-Gumuz indigenous people.