Suchergebnisse

The effect of regime type on inflows of foreign direct investment (FDI) remains a matter of controversy. While some studies report a positive influence of democracy on FDI, others show a negative influence. This study reexamines this discrepancy rising pooled panel data during the past 20 years & contributes to the existing literature in three ways. First, it refines the causal mechanisms underlying the democracy-related arguments of veto players, audience costs, & democratic hindrance with respect to foreign investment. Second, it introduces three accurate measures to capture each of those three causal arguments. Third, it briefly demonstrates how different measurements of the dependent variable can produce statistically spurious results. The empirical results reveal that democratic institutions are, at best, weakly associated with increases in FDI inflows (measured by FDI/GDP ratios). While multiple veto players (&, counterintuitively, democratic hindrance) may be positively associated with increases in FDI, audience costs are not linked to FDI activities. These findings have important policy implications given that developing democratic countries are trying to attract more FDI in order to achieve their economic growth & development targets. Tables, Figures, Appendixes, References. Adapted from the source document.

While the field of foreign policy has generated an impressive amount of research, there is still much to be explored and explained of the way in which regime types (totalitarian and democratic) influence the dynamics of state behavior at the international level. The present study examines in a comparative way the characteristics that influence the process of foreign policy making in totalitarian and democratic states. This can help achieve a better understanding of their foreign policy decisions and also help reveal valuable patterns in their decision making process. For the purpose of the present study, the United States of America and the People`s Republic of China were chosen as representative cases of the above mentioned highly contrasting regimes. The foreign policy and diplomatic relationship of the two countries is analyzed on the period between the 1940s and the 1970s using comparative foreign policy analysis, their differences providing a fertile ground for comparison.

Do voters' assessments of the government's foreign policy performance influence their vote intentions? Does the 'clarity of responsibility' in government moderate this relationship? Existing research on the United States demonstrates that the electorate's foreign policy evaluations influence voting behaviour. Whether a similar relationship exists across the advanced democracies in Europe remains understudied, as does the role of domestic political institutions that might generate responsibility diffusion and dampen the effect of foreign policy evaluations on vote choice. Using the attitudinal measures of performance from the 2011 Transatlantic Trends survey collected across 13 European countries, these questions are answered in this study through testing on incumbent vote the diffusion‐inducing effects of five key domestic factors frequently used in the foreign policy analysis literature. Multilevel regression analyses conclude that the electorate's ability to assign punishment decreases at higher levels of responsibility diffusion, allowing policy makers to circumvent the electoral costs of unpopular foreign policy. Specifically, coalition governments, semi‐presidential systems, ideological dispersion among the governing parties and the diverse allocation of the prime ministerial and foreign policy portfolios generate diffusion, dampening the negative effects of foreign policy disapproval on vote choice. This article contributes not only to the debate on the role of foreign policy in electoral politics, but also illustrates the consequential effects of domestic institutions on this relationship.

Despite the increase in the number of studies in International Relations using concepts from a role theory perspective, scholarship continues to assume that a state's own expectations of what role it should play on the world stage is shared among domestic political actors. Cristian Cantir and Juliet Kaarbo have gathered a leading team of internationally distinguished International Relations scholars to draw on decades of research in Foreign Policy Analysis to explore points of internal contestation of national role conceptions (NRCs) and the effects and outcomes of contestation between domestic political actors. Nine detailed comparative case studies have been selected for the purpose of theoretical exploration, with an eye to illustrating the relevance of role contestation in a diversity of settings, including variation in period, geographic area, unit of analysis, and aspects of the domestic political process. This edited book includes a number of pioneering insights into how the domestic political process can have a crucial effect on how a country behaves at the global level.

AGAINST THE BACKGROUND OF THE CURRENT TENDENCY OF FOREIGN POZICY ANALYSTS TO EMPHASIZE THE SO CALLED DOMESTIC SOURCES OF FOREIGN POLICY, THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES THE ROLE PLAYED BY EXTERNAL FACTORS. THREE DIFFERENT WAYS IN WHICH THE STUDENT OF DOMESTIC SOURCES OF FOREIGN POLICY MAY CONCEIVE OF THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN FOREIGN FACTORS AND DOMESTIC FACTORS ARE SUGGESTED.

This collection of essays by renowned scholar Amitai Etzioni aims to provoke reconsiderations of basic assumptions of foreign policy by students, academics and practitioners. With chapters focusing on the Middle East, China and the EU, as well as articles with a more global focus, the book offers thought-provoking and insightful perspectives on international foreign policy which challenge existing academic debate in the field. It will be of great interest to students, scholars and practitioners of foreign policy and international relations.

Abstract. The European Commission and the EU Council Secretariat support the Member States in the conduct of European foreign policy, yet they have not always been able to get along. This article gives an overview of their inter-institutional relations across history, foreign policy instruments (declarations, crisis management joint actions and representation) and regions. The main argument is that the relationship between both institutions is generally cooperative, but that tensions do arise in a limited number of cases where the roles of the Commission and the Council Secretariat are unclear, perceived to overlap or in competition. In these instances, they have generally found a modus vivendi and their inter-institutional relations have subsequently improved. Such informal arrangements do not address, however, the underlying structural problems – that the Council Secretariat challenges the Commission's political and informational role in the context of foreign policy. Differences between both institutions are therefore still regularly displayed. This continues to undermine EU consistency and its effectiveness in international relations.

'On Analysis of China's National Interests (Guanyu Zhongguo de Guojia Liyi Fenxi)' by Yan Xuetong is reviewed.