Search results

Nonprofit organizations that primarily provide social or health services can play an important role in policy advocacy, as indicated by recent research. Less is known about how and why they participate in policy advocacy, and concerns remain that their advocacy is overly self-interested. This case study of an urban immigrant health policy advocacy coalition made up primarily of service-providing nonprofits in New York City suggests that (a) service-providing nonprofits' insights as daily case-level advocates for their clients generate unique contributions to policy change agendas, particularly at the policy implementation level rather than at the legislative level; (b) these organizations do not necessarily see a conflict between their organizational survival imperatives and social change objectives, nor between case-level and higher level advocacy; and (c) a coalition structure, leadership by an experienced advocacy organization, and dedicated foundation funding can elevate case advocacy concerns into a higher level and more sustained advocacy agenda.

What explains the explosion of coup activity in Africa over the last few years? To answer this question, this article presents narrative summaries—a current history—of all eleven coups attempts in Africa between August 2020 and November 2022. We then discuss the most relevant causal explanations for the observed increase in coup frequency in Africa in this period. Though we find relatively little evidence of direct coup diffusion or democratic backsliding as coup triggers, our findings suggest that coup-struck African countries over the last few years are disproportionately poor, have a recent history of coups, and face ongoing dilemmas of democratic consolidation. Ongoing Islamist insurgencies may have helped precipitate recent coups in West Africa but not elsewhere.

Historical Dictionary of Modern Coups d'état contains a chronology, an introduction, and an extensive bibliography. The dictionary section has more than 1,400 cross-referenced dictionary entries. This book is an excellent resource for students, and researchers.

Interest in authoritarian politics and democratic breakdown has fueled a revival in scholarship on coups d'état. However, this research is held back by the fact that no global coup dataset captures theoretically salient information on the identity of coup-makers, their goals, and the relationship between the coup leaders and the ruling regime. We introduce the Colpus dataset, new global data on coup types and characteristics in the post–World War II era. These data introduce a typology of coups, measurement strategy, and coding procedures to differentiate between whether coups seek to preserve existing ruling coalitions (leader reshuffling coups) or significantly alter ruling coalitions (regime change coups). We show trends in coup types across time and space. Finally, we demonstrate that poverty—an established determinant of coups—only predicts regime change coups. Colpus data will be of use to scholars of political instability and conflict, regime change, leadership accountability, the political economy of democracy and dictatorship, and related topics.

Using data from a study of Chinese immigrant religious institutions in New York City (primarily Christian and Buddhist), this paper explores why some religious institutions are more inclined than others to be involved in HIV-related work. Although numerous factors are likely to play a role, we focus on organisations' differing views on social engagement as an explanatory factor. We hypothesise that religious institutions that value social engagement ('civic') will be more inclined towards HIV/AIDS involvement than those that are more inward focused ('sanctuary'). Given that many religious institutions are fundamentally defined by their stance on the appropriateness of social engagement, better understanding of this key characteristic may help to inform community and government organisations aiming to increase religious institutions' involvement in HIV/AIDS-related work. Our analysis suggests that some organisations may be less interested in taking on the challenges of working in HIV/AIDS because of their general view that churches or temples should not be socially engaged. On the other hand, religious institutions that have concerns about social acceptability, fear of infection or lack of capacity – but generally embrace social engagement – may be more open to partnering on HIV/AIDS-related work because of their overriding community service orientation.