Search results

Op 22 en 23 april 2010 werd in Utrecht in het gebouw van de Universiteit voor Humanistiek het eerste internationale congres gehouden dat ooit door KWALON is georganiseerd. Initiator en hoofdorganisator Jeanine Evers had hiervoor een samenwerkingsverband ontwikkeld met onze Vlaamse zusterorganisatie KwalitatiefSterk, het Duitse Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Qualitative Social Research (Freie Universität Berlin) en het Britse CAQDAS networking project (University of Surrey). De conferentie werd bovendien ondersteund door de Universiteit van Humanistiek en DANS (KNAW).

The present study revisits the position accorded to Latin American states in the conventional account of the expansion of international society. Drawing on English School theory and legal history, it develops a critique of the 'standard of civilisation', contending that the boundaries of international society were much more malleable and diffuse than the conventional narrative suggests. The argument is illustrated with reference to the historical experience of Latin American states: despite the profound impact that European colonisation had on the region, the marginalisation of Latin American states within international society was commonly framed in civilisational terms. Rather than taking their 'western' identity and thus membership for granted, the paper demonstrates the role that civilisational rhetoric played in the making of Latin America's place in the heterarchical international order of the 'long 19th century'. The article concludes by discussing some implications for theorising the evolution of international society.

It has been shown in the work of Ted Gurr and others that ethnic discrimination can lead to ethno-political rebellion, and that rebellion often leads to interstate conflict. The authors seek to discover whether rebellion is the only meaningful link between ethnic discrimination and international violence. Many scholars have argued that a domestic environment of inequality and violence results in a greater likelihood of state use of violence internationally. This argument is most fully developed within feminist literature; however, research in the area of ethno-political conflict has also highlighted the negative impact of domestic discrimination on state behavior at the international level. The analysis builds upon the literature linking domestic gender inequality and state aggression to other inequalities created and/or sustained by the state. Using the Minorities at Risk (MAR) and Militarized Interstate Disputes (MID) datasets, the authors test whether states characterized by higher levels of discrimination against ethnic minorities are more likely to exhibit higher levels of hostility or to use force first when involved in international disputes. Group-level data in MAR are used to create a set of state-level variables measuring the extent of formal and informal discrimination against minority groups. The authors then test whether states with higher levels of discrimination against minority groups are more likely to rely on force when involved in an international dispute, controlling for other possible causes of state use of force. Ultimately, the authors confirm their hypotheses that states characterized by domestic inequality with regard to ethnic minorities are more likely to exhibit higher levels of hostility and to use force first when involved in an interstate conflict.

This article argues that a World Environment Organization (WEO) does not promise to enhance international environmental governance. First, we claim that the establishment of an international organization alone in a policy field currently populated by regimes cannot be expected to significantly improve environmental governance because there is no qualitative difference between these two forms of governance institutions. Second, we submit that significant improvement of international environmental governance through institutional re-arrangement must rely on a modification of decision-making procedures &/or a change of institutional boundaries. Third, we develop three principal models of a possible WEO. A WEO formally providing an umbrella for existing regimes without modifying issue-areas & decision-making procedures would be largely irrelevant. A WEO integrating decision-making processes of existing regimes so as to form comprehensive "world environment round" of intergovernmental bargaining would be largely dysfunctional & prone to a host of negative side-effects. A 'supranational' WEO including large-scale use of majority decision-making & far-reaching enforcement mechanisms across a range of environmental issues might considerably enhance international environmental governance, but it appears to be grossly utopian. In conclusion, a WEO cannot be at the same time realistic, significant & beneficial for international environmental governance. Available political resources should be invested in advancing existing & emerging sectoral environmental regimes rather than in establishing a WEO. 67 References. Adapted from the source document.

602International organizations — Immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Scope and extent — Principles on which immunity of organizations based — Comparison with State immunity — Whether immunity of organizations extends to acts iure gestionis — Contract of employment — Interpreter — Whether employment of interpreter sufficiently closely connected with decision-making process within organization to be covered by immunity — International Centre for Advanced Mediterranean Agronomic Studies — Paris Agreement establishing the Centre, 1962 — Reservation by Italy — European Convention on State Immunity, 1972 — Statement of rules of customary international lawTreaties — Reservations — Validity and effect of reservation — Reservation included in annex to agreement — Whether accepted by other parties — The law of Italy

Preliminary Material /M. R. Alborzi -- Chapter 1. Introduction /M. R. Alborzi -- Chapter 2. Description of the Situation /M. R. Alborzi -- Chapter 3. Law and Humanitarian Actors /M. R. Alborzi -- Chapter 4. Applicability of International Law /M. R. Alborzi -- Chapter 5. Evaluation and Recommendations /M. R. Alborzi -- Selected Bibliography /M. R. Alborzi -- Index /M. R. Alborzi.

Much recent international relations scholarship has argued that states are unable to control e-commerce, so that private actors are coming to play a dominant role. However, this body of literature fails to account for emerging "hybrid institutions," in which states create general frameworks of rules, which are then implemented by private actors. This article examines a prominent example of such an institution, the EU-U.S. Safe Harbor arrangement in the field of privacy, and sets out an alternative explanation of state–private actor relations in the sphere of e-commerce. It shows how Safe Harbor had its origins in efforts by the European Union (EU) and United States to mitigate problems of interdependence that threatened to undermine the principles of order on which their regulatory systems were based. Safe Harbor reflects neither the EU nor U.S. approach, but rather a novel blend of state and private regulation. The article demonstrates the vital role of argument and persuasion in identifying Safe Harbor as a solution, and in negotiating its particulars. It finds that conventional game-theoretic accounts of bargaining are unable to explain the negotiation of Safe Harbor, and argues that constructivist approaches should pay more attention to how argument can disclose new possibilities of action.

Examines schools of thought on foreign relations, their images of Russia as an international actor and the external environment, and grand strategies.

The movement to end the suffering caused by cluster munitions succeeded not only in establishing a legal ban in the form of the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM), but also in decisively reshaping the global perception of these weapons. Over the past decade, the awareness-raising and political mobilization surrounding cluster munitions have led to an understanding among states that any use would be associated with unnecessary human suffering and would most certainly provoke considerable international criticism. In other words, the political movement and legal ban have created a powerful stigma associated with the use of cluster munitions, a stigma that is now strong enough to dissuade most stockpilers from using or transferring the weapon, even those that are not part of the Convention. This paper lays out the reactions, both by the international community and the user itself, to the relatively few incidents of known or suspected use in the past several years.