Suchergebnisse

Cover -- CONTENTS -- PREFACE -- ONE: RATIONALITY IN POLITICS AND ECONOMICS -- TWO: THE NATURE OF RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY -- THREE: METHODOLOGICAL PATHOLOGIES -- FOUR: THE PARADOX OF VOTER TURNOUT -- FIVE: SOCIAL DILEMMAS AND FREE-RIDING -- SIX: LEGISLATIVE BEHAVIOR AND THE PARADOX OF VOTING -- SEVEN: SPATIAL THEORIES OF ELECTORAL COMPETITION -- EIGHT: RESPONSES TO LIKELY COUNTERARGUMENTS -- REFERENCES -- INDEX -- A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W.

Abstract. Over the past decade European political leaders have increasingly come to refer to 'sustainable development' as a legitimate focus of government activity. Starting from the premises that sustainable development is a complex and contested ideal, and that experiences with state planning in the twentieth century have been deeply ambiguous, this article reflects on the insights which political science can shed on the new social project of 'planning for sustainable development'. The discussion centres on three relevant political science literatures — meta critiques of planning, 'new governance' debates, and enquiries into policy related learning. Consideration of these perspectives suggest that to the extent that it is possible for 'planning for sustainable development' to attain its declared objectives this will depend upon the integration of sustainable development norms into existing planning structures and modalities, the extensive development of co–operative management initiatives, and vigorous debates about alternative futures. Coordination among the inevitably disjointed and partially contradictory efforts of multiple agencies will rely upon the integrative potential of the sustainable development norm, central government initiatives, and collision, negotiation and mutual adjustment.

Climate change: a reference handbook offers readers a way to separate science from politics on this crucial and often contentious issue. It provides a comprehensive introduction to the science and public policy of climate change, including discussion of historical developments, today's key concepts, and the future of climate science and policy. Climate Change begins by explaining the science behind global climate change, including the growing consensus that human activity is a major contributing factor. It then takes an objective look at the key conflicts in climate science and policy, describes those that have been resolved, and offers a balanced review of proposals for those that have not. A separate chapter focuses on the scientific, economic, and political aspects of climate change as they are playing out specifically in the United States

In Still Seeing Red, John Kenneth White explores how the Cold War molded the internal politics of the United States. In a powerful narrative backed by a rich treasure trove of polling data, White takes the reader through the Cold War years, describing its effect in redrawing the electoral map as we came to know it after World War II. The primary beneficiaries of the altered landscape were reinvigorated Republicans who emerged after five successive defeats to tar the Democrats with the ?soft on communism? epithet. A new nationalist Republican party?whose Cold War prescription for winning the White House was copyrighted to Dwight Eisenhower, Richard M. Nixon, Barry Goldwater, and Ronald Reagan?attained primacy in presidential politics because of two contradictory impulses embedded in the American character: a fanatical preoccupation with communism and a robust liberalism. From 1952 to 1988 Republicans won the presidency seven times in ten tries. The rare Democratic victors?John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Jimmy Carter?attempted to rearm the Democratic party to fight the Cold War. Their collective failure says much about the politics of the period. Even so, the Republican dream of becoming a majority party became perverted as the Grand Old Party was recast into a top-down party routinely winning the presidency even as its electoral base remained relatively stagnant.In the post?Cold War era, Americans are coming to appreciate how the fifty-year struggle with the Soviet Union organized thinking in such diverse areas as civil rights, social welfare, education, and defense policy. At the same time, Americans are also more aware of how the Cold War shaped their lives?from the ?duck and cover? drills in the classrooms to the bomb shelters dug in the backyard when most Baby Boomers were growing up. Like millions of Baby Boomers, Bill Clinton can truthfully say, ?I am a child of the Cold War.?With the last gasp of the Soviet Union, Baby Boomers and others are learning that the politics of the Cold War are hard to shed. As the electoral maps are being redrawn once more in the Clinton years, landmarks left behind by the Cold War provide an important reference point. In the height of the Cold War, voters divided the world into ?us? noncommunists versus ?them? communists and reduced contests for the presidency into battles of which party would be tougher in dealing with the Evil Empire. But in a convoluted post?Cold War era, politics defies such simple characteristics and presidents find it harder to lead. Recalling how John F. Kennedy could so easily rally public opinion, an exasperated Bill Clinton once lamented, ?Gosh, I miss the Cold War.?

Over the past decade, historical institutionalism has emerged as one of the major research pillars of contemporary political science. However, most historical institutionalists seem to be unaware of the paradigmatic implications of this approach for political studies. The theoretical underpinnings of historical institutionalism, namely, the ideas of path dependence and the economics of increasing returns, are based on a new science called complexity science. The worldview of complexity science is largely inconsistent with the scientific foundation of current mainstream political science, namely, Newtonianism. The emergence of historical institutionalist analyses in political studies thus means serious paradigmatic challenges for the discipline.

This review evaluates the success of output studies in explaining intranational variation in the policies of local governments. Output studies address the central question of political science: why do different governments adopt different policies? It is therefore important to examine the contribution of output studies to our understanding of the reasons for policy variation and the role of politics within the relevant causal processes.