Search results

Scholarship in international law aims at addressing global forest governance comprehensively. This article reviews the recent contribution Global Forest Governance - Legal Concepts and Policy Trends by Rowena Maguire and puts it into the perspective of recent political and policy science research on global forests. While finding Maguire's volume being a very timely and valuable contribution to the interdisciplinary discussions on international forest governance, we identify some weaknesses which are mostly rooted in methodological critique and a lack of a systematic framework for analysis.

Comparative politics is the only one of the political science subdisciplines that is defined in methodological rather than substantive terms. Since, however, scientific enterprises are always and unavoidably comparative, any emphasis on comparison and comparative method is certainly less than helpful in attempts to grasp the meaning of the term "comparatie politics". According to general usage in political science, comparativists are engrossed in political similarities and differences between countries; this lexical definition, however, corresponds poorly with stipulative definitions embedded in the practice of research. For one thing, by performing important hypothesis-generating and similar tasks, studies of one case form a central and integrated feature of comparative politics. Furthermore, much comparative research moves on the levels of individuals and groups, and makes use of countries as contexts rather than units. As political science has matured to be a nomotetic discipline, aiming at the building of empirically falsifiable explanatory theory, the crossing of borders in space and time has become a necessity, and comparative politics is today much more than an isolated political science compartment only. References.

The first decade of the 21st century has brought with it two important breakthroughs in the study of comparative politics. The first one concerns the availability of data. Nowadays, access to a wide range of information sources for a large number of countries in the world can be gained without too much effort. The second one concerns the methodological achievements made in recent years. Today, sophisticated multi-level analyses can be conducted fairly easily. Among qualitatively oriented researchers, Charles Ragin has made a significant contribution by introducing the fs/QCA-technique into the field of political science. However, the growing amount of data & the new methods not only open up new possibilities for the researcher. The present article explicitly deals with the problems related to the use of multi-level analyses & fs/QCA in comparative political research. In addition, attention is drawn to the drawbacks of using survey data from heterogeneous settings. Adapted from the source document.

Framsida; Innehållsförteckning; Förord; I. Reformism och utopism?; II. Wigforss pragmatistiska position; III. Ett annat samhälle är möjligt att tänka sig; IV. Ett annat samhälle är möjligt att utforma; V. Ett annat samhälle är möjligt att skapa engagemang för; VI. Wigforss och socialdemokratins framtid; VII. Pragmaticism, reformism och utopism; Referenser; Baksida

The study outlined in the article has the goal of describe & explain the trend of increasing presidential character within the parliamentary system. The project consists of three parts: 1) a comparative quantitative analysis of European governments, 2) field studies of European governments, & 3) a normative evaluation of the empirical results. References. Adapted from the source document.

What is good politics? It is both a knowledge of philosophical, organizational and normative questions. It is about how and where the political science branch of the social science tree grows, of what political scientists really should do and how political science education should be conducted. By extension, it is also about which frames political order, power and social organization can best be analyzed within. There are big questions. Are there any good answers or just bad? Or could it even be that the question of what distinguishes good from bad politics leads to awkward enough paradigmatic, epistemological, and other difficult or insoluble problems that maybe we should refrain from imposing or even trying to answer it? Well, it would actually be pretty bad. Adapted from the source document.

Argues that because of its international status, the English speaking world has an overly dominant position in formulating theories, models and research problems, which the Swedish political science merely copies. Repeating studies and applying the same methods is hardly a sign of a mature and cumulative science. Swedish political science could offer much more by studying fields such as Nordic social democracy, Swedish criminal policy or Nordic far right parties with unique theories and methods. L. Pitkaniemi

Research on Europeanization clearly shows that membership in the European Union over time affects the national political systems of member states. Given Norway's extensive integration within the EU, it is relevant and important to assess whether and, if so, how the Norwegian political system, too, has changed as a result, and how these effects compare with the general patterns among EU member states. Exploring the Europeanization of Norway in a comparative perspective, the article maps the effects of European integration for four central power relationships in the Norwegian political system: national-supranational authority, executive-legislative-judicial authority, political-administrative authority and national-regional authority. It is demonstrated that integration within the EU to a large extent has had the same effects in Norway as in the member states of the EU, despite Norway's alternative form of affiliation: extensive delegation of power to the supranational level, strengthening of the government in relation to the parliament, an increasingly important role for national courts, expanded power and autonomy of the executive administration in relation to the political leadership, and some strengthening of the regions vis-a-vis the central government. Adapted from the source document.

Comments regarding the Political Science Association are presented. Adapted from the source document.

Introduces the nomination process for the Swedish Political Science Association's Essay Prize and the winning essay for 2008 by Mikael Persson titled 'Did the egalitarian reforms of the Swedish educational system equalize levels of democratic citizenship?' The essay studied the effects of the educational reform done in the mid 1990's and was proclaimed to be well written and methodologically advanced by the awarding committee. L. Pitkaniemi

Introduces two articles on the role of Swedish political science internationally and on equality in Swedish political science. While both topics have been previously discussed, they are still considered important and sensitive. L. Pitkaniemi

In this research anthology, inequality in Swedish working life in a Sweden marked by increased inequality, is studied. Racialised inequality, racism and discrimination in individual workplaces are focused, but inequalities based on class and gender are also studied. The concept of inequality regime is used by several of the authors to analyse work organizations. The workplaces studied are found in different sectors, not least in healthcare. The book also includes contributions that provide comparative international perspectives and studies of the development of inequality over time. The anthology contains 12 chapters based on empirical studies of working life, one chapter that analyses working life inequality from a political theory perspective, an introduction and a closing chapter that frames and draws conclusions from the different studies, as well as an afterword. The authors are 22 researchers from different social science disciplines.

In 1870, political science was established as an academic discipline, attached to history, at the Lund University. In 1877, a chair in history and political science was created. Twenty-five years later, it was transformed into a chair in political science and statistics. In 1926, that symbiosis was put to an end and political science was awarded a chair of its own. Pontus Fahlbeck, professor from 1889 to 1917, was a historian who developed into a social scientist with broad interests: political science, statistics, economics, and sociology. Several of his books were also published in foreign languages and he had many contacts with colleagues abroad, particularly in France and Germany. However, the critical period in the modernization of political science in Lund happened just after the middle of the 20th century, with Nils Stjernquist, holding the chair from 1951 to 1983, at helm. The dependence of history and legal science waned; the influence of social science, especially in its American version, increased. The result was a modern political science department with broad interests and worldwide contacts. References.

This dissertation examines key characteristics and factors shaping the leadership style of Swedish Prime Ministers (PMs). Based on the research of the American presidency, an interactionist framework is developed which draws upon institutional theory and political psychological theory. The analysis is advanced by exploring multiple sources and is based on four cases of leadership styles: two single party Social Democratic PMs, Ingvar Carlsson and Göran Persson, as well as two center/right coalition PMs, Thorbjörn Fälldin and Carl Bildt. Leadership style is studied through a focused comparison of the PMs' performance of four functions. Thus, the four PMs are studied as staffers and organizers of the cabinet and the Government Offices, decision makers, communicators and crisis managers. The results indicate that the office of the PM is elastic, accommodating a wide-ranging variation of leadership styles. The Social Democratic PMs display the most uniform leadership styles, but, rather surprisingly, they also have the most dissimilar leadership styles among the four cases. The center/right PMs' approaches differ to a great extent from one another, displaying mixed forms of leadership styles. The analysis explains how the PMs' leadership styles are shaped based on the interaction between their distinct personal characteristics and surrounding institutions. Thus, the dissertation concludes that leadership theories developed in a presidential setting are largely applicable in a parliamentary setting and that political behavior is not dictated by institutions such as formal structures or norms. The results encourage a reassessment of how personality, as an explanatory factor, is applied in mainstream political science. Furthermore, the analysis highlights the need for reconsidering the presidentialisation thesis and the notion of dominant leadership as there are alternative pathways to prime ministerial influence which are disregarded in the debate.

As part of the discontinuation of the Political Science Association's own magazine Politologi, the Journal of Political Science offers a section for the Association. This section will provide new dynamical means of communication between political scientists & the journal, & therefore stimulate qualified debate & scientific publications. Besides scientific articles, reports from conferences & information on the Association's work are also welcomed. C Brunski