Suchergebnisse

Among a wide range of challenges, EU member states have been facing a growing threat from terrorism in the recent years. The primary responsibility for combating terrorism lies with each individual member state, although the threat is becoming increasingly cross-border and diverse. Regardless of whether terrorism poses a real or perceived threat to the states' and citizens' security, public opinion is one important force behind the extensive counterterrorism efforts undertaken in Europe. In this article, we explore the influence of public opinion on EU policy within the security domain in the period 2005–19. We investigate the relationship between the number of attacks carried out on EU territory and citizens' increased concern for terrorist attacks, as well as the attention given to this topic by EU decision-makers. Based on data from Eurobarometer, the Global Terrorism Database, and evidence from official documents, we perform an analysis of the connection between public perception and anti-terrorism policy coordination in the EU. The results of this investigation point to increasing levels of collective securitization and an ever-stronger focus on security and counterterrorism in the European Union. Our findings are related to policy formation in the EU. ; publishedVersion

Abstract
This article examines the determinants of the positioning of secondary states in the US-China conflict over market access for China's Huawei. Our explanations draw on three branches of realism: balance-of-threat theory, patron-client theory, and Hirschman's theory on trade relationships and foreign-policy convergence. For the dependent variable, we assemble a new dataset of the attitudes of 70 states toward Huawei's investment aspirations. We present a series of ordered logit regression models from which three main patterns appear. First, less powerful states seem more acceptive of the Chinese company. Second, those states that rely on US security guarantees tend to be far more rejective of Huawei. Third, whereas trade with China appears to be a factor in the reasonings of other states, trade with the US is not. In sum, the patron-client theory offers the most cogent explanation of the divergence of responses to Huawei.

It is a common argument in Denmark that municipal involvement in professional team sports can be justified on the grounds of local impact. The use of public funds to directly or indirectly subsidise local professional team sports clubs (PTSCs) is often seen as warranted due to the PTSCs' positive effects on local economic growth or (inbound) municipal migration. However, can PTSCs be associated with tangible effects at all? This question has never been answered properly in a European context. Based on data covering the 2008–2013 period, and using spatial panel regression models, this article examines this issue in relation to three dominant professional sports in Denmark: football (soccer), handball and ice hockey. The study finds effects for only one of the sports examined, with Danish handball clubs exercising a marginal effect on average income. Ice hockey's effect is negative and football remains insignificant in all models deployed. Concerning migration, negative effects are found in relation to female handball clubs. These findings are consistent with previous research and have implications for local sport policies and managers. Municipal politicians, public authorities or sport managers should no longer rationalise the use of public funds for local PTSCs on the assumption of (tangible) economic effects or population growth, as it appears to be an inefficient use of public money. If policy makers want to increase municipal income or inbound migration, they should engage themselves in developing more appropriate strategies. ; acceptedVersion ; © 2016 Sport Management Association of Australia and New Zealand. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This is the authors' accepted and reviewed manuscript for the article, locked until 15 October 2018 due to copyright restrictions.

Empirical studies on the causes of civil war robustly show that poor countries are more likely to suffer civil war than rich ones. However, the interpretations of this finding differ. The literature proposes three different causal mechanisms: (1) poverty leads to grievances; (2) income proxies the opportunity-cost of rebelling; and (3) income proxies state capacity. Using factor analysis, logistic modeling and multiple imputation, we test which of the three possible explanations can best explain the link between poverty and conflict. We find per capita income to belong to a wealth/poverty dimension, and to have little in common with "pure" measures of grievance and state capacity. Thus our findings support the opportunity-cost argument. The wealth dimension is also shown to be the most important underlying cause of civil war.

ABSTRACTBy applying data from the 1930 Reichstag election we test whether the German National Socialist Worker's Party (NSDAP) was a workers, bourgeois, or a catch-all party. We argue that the degree to which the different groups in society voted NSDAP is dependent on the proportion of Protestants and Catholics in their respective Kreis. We build on two important works on the Nazi electorate, Jürgen Falter's Hitlers Wähler (1991) and King et al. (2008). We specifically make one important change to Falter and King et al.'s models whereby we include new social groups in our study of the interaction between religious affiliation and social groups as an explanation of the Nazi vote. Similar arguments have been made by other historians, yet this has not been tested on data for the whole of Germany until Falter's work in 1991. We find significant explanatory power in the interaction between religion and social groups on the propensity to vote for the Nazi party.