Suchergebnisse

This is a collection of essays written by scholars in the academic community with practical experience in corrections. Each essay contains the author's valuable and insightful reflections on their efforts to achieve important objectives while they were employed in the field

This is a collection of essays written by scholars in the academic community with practical experience in corrections. Each essay contains the author's valuable and insightful reflections on their efforts to achieve important objectives while they were employed in the field.

This article critically engages the normative implications of referring to small-scale, "pop-up" aid actors as Citizen Initiatives for Global Solidarity (CIGS) in the context of citizen-initiated disaster and humanitarian response. The force of the term "global solidarity" can be powerful, yet the precise meaning of the concept is often ambiguous. In light of this ambiguity, this article works toward conceptual clarity while questioning whether or not the label "CIGS" is an instance of parasitical solidarity—a rhetorical use of global solidarity that implies more, or different, moral content than is actually present in the practices being described as solidaristic. While answers to that question will differ on a case-to-case basis, the conversations across regions and disciplines that this special issue aims to contribute toward will benefit from a careful consideration of how to avoid parasitical uses of global solidarity. In addition, sensitivity on this front is an important component of decolonizing the discourse of aid by decentering the roles of volunteers. Operationalizing global solidarity with an eye toward "pop-up" humanitarian responses generates a conceptual starting point that is required for these interdisciplinary conversations, regardless of whether that operationalization is ultimately utilized, adjusted, or rejected by those engaging disaster response from different standpoints.

Party systems provide the essential structure of the coalition bargaining environment. Stability in party systems ensures that there are regularities that can be observed in government formation, but most empirical research focuses on established democracies. In new democracies party systems are less institutionalized and interactions between parties are less predictable. This has significant implications for coalition formation. This paper presents the first study of coalition formation in new democracies that employs an empirical design that is comparable to the leading research on Western Europe. It uses a new dataset of potential coalitions in Central and Eastern Europe to examine three explanations for government formation that arise when party systems are weakly institutionalized. The results show that: first, incumbency is a disadvantage for governments when formation occurs post-election. This is due to high levels of electoral volatility in new democracies caused by policy failure and clientalistic practices. Incumbents are advantaged when formation takes place mid-term as weak party system institutionalization leads to an inchoate pattern of interaction between opposition parties which therefore fail to provide a viable alternative. Second, the presence of former dominant parties influences government formation by stifling the development of programmatic competition. Instead, programmatic competition is subjugated to contestation based on historical enmities. Finally, established parties collude to exclude new parties from coalition formation which may be an indicator that party systems are becoming more institutionalized. Overall, this article provides new insights into the importance of routinized and stable political practices and institutions.

Studies of government participation in established democracies demonstrate that ideological factors significantly influence whether or not a party gets into government. Thus far, research on government participation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) indicates that ideological considerations have been insignificant. This is unexpected given what we know from the literature on parties and party systems in the region. Party systems have become more stable and parties themselves rapidly developed identifiable policy platforms. I argue that one of the reasons for this disparity between the government participation literature in new and established democracies is the failure to understand the ideological space across the CEE region. Although party competition can be conceptualized as a one-dimensional space in each country, the policies that underpin notions of 'left' and 'right' vary. Imposing a definition of the ideological space that was developed for West European countries ignores the ideological context of CEE. This article finds that when the left-right space is defined in a way that is meaningful to CEE countries, ideological factors are highly significant indicators of government membership across the region. Specifically, ideological proximity to the formateur and proximity to the median significantly increase a party's probability of participating in government. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]

Studies of government participation in established democracies demonstrate that ideological factors significantly influence whether or not a party gets into government. Thus far, research on government participation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) indicates that ideological considerations have been insignificant. This is unexpected given what we know from the literature on parties and party systems in the region. Party systems have become more stable and parties themselves rapidly developed identifiable policy platforms. I argue that one of the reasons for this disparity between the government participation literature in new and established democracies is the failure to understand the ideological space across the CEE region. Although party competition can be conceptualized as a one-dimensional space in each country, the policies that underpin notions of 'left' and 'right' vary. Imposing a definition of the ideological space that was developed for West European countries ignores the ideological context of CEE. This article finds that when the left–right space is defined in a way that is meaningful to CEE countries, ideological factors are highly significant indicators of government membership across the region. Specifically, ideological proximity to the formateur and proximity to the median significantly increase a party's probability of participating in government.