Search results

In this article I discuss the factors contributing to the drafting and approval of the forestry incentives law (PINPEP) in Guatemala. This is a remarkable law because (a) it is among the few in the country recognizing property rights to land other than private property; (b) it has a stronger focus on subsidies and social benefits than on market mechanisms and; (c) the law is the result of the effort of forestry community organizations. My findings indicate that community organizations can, through their alliances with science-policy networks, participate in law-making and by that, in democratizing environmental governance. My study nuances the role of experts in environmental governance showing that their power and status should be understood as relational and historically contingent. Furthermore, some key and charismatic individuals can act as door openers to link community forestry organizations and science-policy networks. Although the identity of the grassroots organizations that participated in the process of making the law is tied to forestry, these organizations have a long history in the country. This history has been shaped by their experiences in exile and in refugee camps during the civil war as well as by their contact with development assistance organizations. ; Social forestry movements and science-policy Networks: the politics of forestry incenitves program in Guatemala

One of the areas of policy research where randomized field trials have been utilized most intensively is welfare reform. Starting in the late 1960s with experimental tests of a negative income tax and continuingthrough current experimental tests of recent welfare reforms, randomized evaluations have played a strong and increasing role in informing policy. This article reviews the record of these experiments and assesses the implications of that record for the use of randomization. The review demonstrates that the usefulness of randomized field trials in the area of welfare reform has been limited by a number of weaknesses, some of which are inherent in the method and some of which result from constraints imposed by the politicalprocess. The conclusionis that randomizedfield trials have an importantbut limited role to play in future welfare reform evaluations and that it is essential that they be supplemented by nonexperimental research.

One of the areas of policy research where randomized field trials have been utilized most intensively is welfare reform. Starting in the late 1960s with experimental tests of a negative income tax and continuing through current experimental tests of recent welfare reforms, randomized evaluations have played a strong and increasing role in informing policy. This paper reviews the record of these experiments and assesses the implications of that record for the use of randomization. The review demonstrates that, while randomized field trials in the area of welfare reform have been professionally conducted and well-run, and have yielded much valuable and credible information, their usefulness has been limited by a number of weaknesses, some of which are inherent in the method and some of which result from constraints imposed by the political process. The conclusion is that randomized field trials have an important but limited role to play in future welfare reform evaluations, and that it is essential that they be supplemented by nonexperimental research.

This article retraces the forgotten legacy of a percussion triggered shrapnel scattering improvised explosive device (IED), known as the Orsini Bomb. Initially used in an attempt to assassinate Emperor Napoleon III in 1858, in the decades after, the Orsini Bomb was replicated, modified and deployed by regicides, insurgents and terrorists, and mythologised by the press as an omnipresent aspect of such forms of radical warfare. This article presents a 'biography' of this unique IED, concluding, firstly, that Orsini's design was an important point of reference in weapons manufacture for violent radicals even after the advent of dynamite in the 1860s and,secondly, that its reputation as a semiotic reference point for terrorist activity was enhanced by press reportage of its proliferation and use throughout the fin de siècle. In the final analysis, the Orsini Bomb became a transnationally recognised 'brand' of weapon, synonymous with both assassination and insurgency. As such, the bomb's reputation – often dwarfed in the historiography of political violence by dynamite – needs to be reconsidered.

Résumé Pourquoi, pour quoi et pour qui mener des recherches en, dans, sur le travail social ? Quel est l'intérêt de construire des connaissances si les acteurs concernés par les actions que nous analysons, ne peuvent se saisir des connaissances produites ? Et est-il acceptable de construire dans les recherches, un rapport social dominé par les chercheurs qui instrumentalisent les acteurs par rapport à leur finalité ? Au regard des pratiques habituelles des chercheurs qui sont situées sur une aire qui est imposée par la discipline et où ils « naviguent » entre les « possibles », l'aire de « navigation », qui devient « bricolage », n'est plus délimitée seulement par la discipline mais également par les principes des acteurs (prescripteurs, praticiens et usagers). Pour la conduire, il ne faut pas avoir d' a priori sur ce qui est en train de se passer : on construit chemin faisant, on englobe ce qui est possible. Cela suppose pluridisciplinarité et co-construction de savoirs. On parlera ici de recherche située où on ne peut avancer que si on est dans le souci de savoir comment les acteurs s'en saisissent. La bonne surprise, c'est que cette position éthique et cette recherche d'utilité sociale de la recherche produisent de l'utilité scientifique. Les collaborations construisent pour les chercheurs un espace d'explicitation qui oblige à préciser devant des « non-pairs », permettent un retour critique et heuristiquement profitable de la part de praticiens sur les notions et les catégories que le chercheur produit et les invitent à investiguer des dimensions de la réalité qu'ils ne repéreraient pas autrement.