Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACTGender representation is a pervasive problem in political science. We draw on evidence from the 2017 and 2018 American Political Science Association (APSA) Annual Meeting programs to discuss diversity and representation in large political science disciplinary conferences. APSA program divisions differ substantially in their gender representation: although some are representative of their organized-section membership, others are not, and some sections are particularly likely to feature "manels." We present representation data by organized section, with discussions of what representation looks like and identifying different types of representation goals. We conclude by offering guidelines for increasing gender representation, for both future submitters and program chairs.

1. Conceptualising the Citizenship-Integration Nexus (Roxana Barbulescu, Sara Wallace Goodman, and Luicy Pedroza) -- Part 1. Integration Through Citizenship -- 2. Ideas of integration in citizenship laws and citizenship acquisition procedures in Belgium and the UK (Djordje Sredanovic) -- 3. Becoming Dutch at what cost? Increasing application fees and naturalisation rates of EU immigrants in the Netherlands (Floris Peters, Swantje Falcke and Maarten Vink) -- 4. Citizenship and naturalisation for migrants in the UK after Brexit (Marina Fernandez Reino and Madeleine Sumption) -- Part 2. Integration from Below -- 5. Immigrant Economic Rights in the European Union (Hannah M. Alarian) -- 6. Migrants, New citizens, Co-citizens and citizens by adoption – Regionalist parties' framing of immigrants in the Basque Country, Corsica, South Tyrol, Scotland and Wales (Verena Wisthaler) -- 7. Intercultural Citizenship in the Making: Public Space and Belonging in Discriminatory Environments (Richard Zapata-Barrero and Zenia Hellgren) -- 8. "In London, I am a European citizen": Brexit, emotions, and the politics of belonging (Nando Sigona and Marie Godin) -- Part 3. Integration from Above -- 9. "It just feels weird" – Irish External Voting and the 'Brexit Irish' (Vikki Barry Brown) -- 10. Between Integration and Dissociation: Intra-European Immigrants' Life Experiences in Romania (Bogdan Voicu and Alin Croitoru) -- 11. EU Citizenship: A Tool for Integration? (Sara Wallace Goodman.

This open access book critically re-examines the theoretical and empirical interconnections between integration and citizenship, specifically, naturalisation. With new, empirical-grounded analyses of what we term 'citizenship-integration nexus' the central, shared contribution is showcasing how membership is informally achieved through everyday integration —usually around, but sometimes in spite of, formal citizenship requirements. By providing evidence of a nexus disjuncture, the book contributes to critical dialogues on immigrant integration and political incorporation, relevant for policymakers, civil society actors, and academics alike.

AbstractTravel bans were a globally prevalent policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the United States, travel bans against China and European countries proved a broadly popular mitigation tool among Americans. Why did Americans support COVID-19 travel bans? We fielded two novel survey experiments, surveying 3000 American citizens across five waves (between March 2020 and March 2021). In randomizing the country of origin of those potentially subject to travel ban measures, we find consistent evidence that racial attitudes drive support for travel bans. The strength of this relationship varies across political parties and across hypothetical target countries but is not explained by objective caseloads that change across countries and over the course of the pandemic.

A wealth of recent research in comparative politics examines how spatial variation in historical conditions shapes modern political outcomes. In an article in the American Political Science Review, Homola, Pereira, and Tavits argue that Germans who live nearer to former Nazi concentration camps are more likely to display out-group intolerance. Clarifying the conceptual foundations of posttreatment bias and reviewing the historical record on postwar state creation in Germany, we argue that state-level differences confound the relationship between distance to camps and out-group intolerance. Using publicly available European Values Survey data and electoral results from 2017, we find no consistent evidence that distance to camps is related to contemporary values. Our findings have implications for literatures on historical persistence, causal inference with spatial data, Holocaust studies, and outgroup tolerance.

"COVID-19 has killed more people than any war or public health crisis in American history, but the scale and grim human toll of the pandemic were not inevitable. Pandemic Politics examines how Donald Trump politicized COVID-19, shedding new light on how his administration tied the pandemic to the president's political fate in an election year and chose partisanship over public health, with disastrous consequences for all of us. Health is not an inherently polarizing issue, but the Trump administration's partisan response to COVID-19 led ordinary citizens to prioritize what was good for their "team" rather than what was good for their country. Democrats seized on the crisis as evidence of Trump's indifference to public well-being. At a time when solidarity and bipartisan unity was sorely needed, Americans came to see the pandemic in partisan terms, adopting behaviors and attitudes that continue to divide us today. This book draws on a wealth of new data on public opinion to show how pandemic politics has touched all aspects of our lives-from the economy to race and immigration-and puts America's COVID-19 response in global perspective. An in-depth account of a uniquely American tragedy, Pandemic Politics reveals how the politicization of the COVID-19 pandemic has profound and troubling implications for public health and the future of democracy itself"--

How the politicization of the pandemic endangers our lives—and our democracyCOVID-19 has killed more people than any war or public health crisis in American history, but the scale and grim human toll of the pandemic were not inevitable. Pandemic Politics examines how Donald Trump politicized COVID-19, shedding new light on how his administration tied the pandemic to the president's political fate in an election year and chose partisanship over public health, with disastrous consequences for all of us.Health is not an inherently polarizing issue, but the Trump administration's partisan response to COVID-19 led ordinary citizens to prioritize what was good for their "team" rather than what was good for their country. Democrats, in turn, viewed the crisis as evidence of Trump's indifference to public well-being. At a time when solidarity and bipartisan unity were sorely needed, Americans came to see the pandemic in partisan terms, adopting behaviors and attitudes that continue to divide us today. This book draws on a wealth of new data on public opinion to show how pandemic politics has touched all aspects of our lives—from the economy to race and immigration—and puts America's COVID-19 response in global perspective.An in-depth account of a uniquely American tragedy, Pandemic Politics reveals how the politicization of the COVID-19 pandemic has profound and troubling implications for public health and the future of democracy itself

Abstract
A wide range of empirical scholarship has documented a partisan gap in health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, but the political foundations and temporal dynamics of these partisan gaps remain poorly understood. Using an original six-wave individual panel study (n = 3,000) of Americans throughout the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, we show that at the individual level, partisan differences in health behavior grew rapidly in the early months of the pandemic and are explained almost entirely by individual support for or opposition to President Trump. Our results comprise powerful evidence that Trump support (or opposition), rather than ideology or simple partisan identity, explains partisan gaps in health behavior in the United States. In a time of populist resurgence around the world, public health efforts must consider the impact of charismatic authority in addition to entrenched partisanship.