Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis address examines the relationship of political science and democratic governance by considering changes in both the political world and the discipline in Canada since the 1960s. It argues that the developing dynamics in political life, as significant as they have been, have not fundamentally altered the essential features of democratic governance in Canada. It suggests that a number of factors account for the diminished capacity of the discipline, as a collective scholarly and teaching enterprise, to contribute to democratic political life. On the one hand is the relative paucity of institutional mechanisms in Canada to link political science to democratic governance; on the other is the discipline's own fragmentation that lessens its focus on questions central to democratic governance.

POWER APPROACH IN POLITICAL SCIENCE IS ANALYZED BY FIRST CONTRASTING TRADITIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL DEFINITIONS OF POWER. SECONDLY, FIVE BEHAVIORAL DEFINITIONS OF POWER BY SUCH SCHOLARS AS CARTWRIGHT, DAHL, LASSWELL AND KAPLAN, MARCH, AND SIMON ARE EXAMINED TO ILLUSTRATE THE DIVERSITY OF DEFINITIONS OF POWER IN THE DISCIPLINE OF POLITICAL SCIENCE.

[Δε διατίθεται περίληψη / no abstract available] ; [Δε διατίθεται περίληψη / no abstract available]

This contribution aims to give an overview on the state of the art of research on terrorism and gender in the field of Political Science and International Relations (IR). Contemporary analyses of terrorism have begun integrating gender aspects into their frameworks. This article supports the call for a much more coherent use of gender as an analytical category as this is beneficial for the analysis of ter-rorism in a threefold manner. First, gender as an analytical category in the study of terrorism exposes the gender blindness of the term terrorism; second, gender challenges the political myth of protection central to international politics, i.e. that states can legitimately fight wars to protect the vulnerable – vulgo women and children. Third, gender also challenges the myth of an intrinsic peacefulness/vulnerability of women. The paper closes with the plea to integrate a coherent historical dimension into a gendered analysis of terrorism in order to potentially achieve a more empirically attuned theoretical understanding of terrorism and political violence in current times.

Scientific debates in modern societies often blur the lines between the science that is being debated and the political, moral, and legal implications that come with its societal applications. This manuscript traces the origins of this phenomenon to professional norms within the scientific discipline and to the nature and complexities of modern science and offers an expanded model of science communication that takes into account the political contexts in which science communication takes place. In a second step, it explores what we know from empirical work in political communication, public opinion research, and communication research about the dynamics that determine how issues are debated and attitudes are formed in political environments. Finally, it discusses how and why it will be increasingly important for science communicators to draw from these different literatures to ensure that the voice of the scientific community is heard in the broader societal debates surrounding science.

Contributed articles

Discusses the lasting influence on later US presidential scholars of Richard E. Neustadt's "Presidential power", first published in 1960, in which he analyzed presidential leadership and policy-making, and the need for an executive partnership with Congress, with Franklin Delano Roosevelt as his ideal, and subsequent challenges to Neustadt's theses.

Through accounts from innovative research projects by world-leading political scientists, this volume offers a unique perspective on research methodology. It discusses the practical and intellectual dilemmas researchers face throughout the research process in a wide range of fields from implicit attitude testing to media analysis and interviews. Jessica Bain, University of Leicester, UK Michael Bruter, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK Nathalia Chaban, University of Canterbury, Christchuch, New Zealand Robert Erikson, Columbia University, USA Mark Franklin, European University Institute Julie Gervais, University Paris I - Panthéon-Sorbonne, France Sarah Harrison, LSE, USA Will Jennings, University of Southampton, UK Martin Lodge, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK Milton Lodge, SUNY at Stony Brook, USA Maya Renko, European University Institute Aaron Strauss, Princeton University, USA Brad Verhulst, Virgina Commonwealth University, USA Ben Wellings, Australian National University ?