|
|
1-20-10: Mass Psychology and Political Theory
Jasper Zuure, Research Fellow, Scientific Council for Government Policy, The Hague, The Netherlands, and Visiting Scholar, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University Bloomington
1-25-10: The Ethnicity Distraction? Political Credibility and Partisan Preferences in Africa
Dr. Philip Keefer, Lead Research Economist, Development Research Group, World Bank, Washington, DC
1-27-10: Solving Samaritan's Dilemmas in Irrigation Investment
Dr. Bryan Bruns, Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington
2-1-10: Deregulatory Policies and Technological Acceleration: At the Brink of a New Phase Transition in Policymaking Systems
Professor Barbara Cherry, Department of Telecommunications, Indiana University Bloomington
2-5-10: Will Barack Obama be Black in 2016? An Inquiry into the Strategic Persistence of Stereotypes
Professor Arthur Lupia, Hal R. Varian Collegiate Professor, Department of Political Science; and Research Professor, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
2-8-10: Toward a General "Rational" Solution for Multi-Player Sequential Games
Dr. Richard Shiffrin, Luther Dana Waterman Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University Bloomington
2-17-10: An Unrighteous Piece of Business: The Memphis Riot of 1866 and Conditions for Transition
Dr. Art Carden, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics and Business, Rhodes College, Memphis, TN
2-22-10: Polycentricity and Political Islam: The Minarchist Approach
Dr. Anas Malik, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science and Sociology, Xavier University, Cincinnati, Ohio
3-1-10: Transitional Justice and Poverty Reduction in Liberia: Issues and Challenges
Professor Amos Sawyer, Research Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington; and Woodrow Wilson Center Public Policy Scholar, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC
3-3-10: Why Oil Is Not a Curse
Dr. Pauline Jones Luong, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Brown University, Providence, RI
Dr. Morgan Grove and Dr. Lynne Westphal, USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Evanston, IL
3-22-10: Land Rights Cases in Belize: "Common" Versus "Private" Land
Professor Richard Wilk, Professor of Anthropology and Gender Studies, Department of Anthropology, Indiana University Bloomington
3-24-10: IAD and SES Dynamic Flows: Introducing the Program in Institutional Analysis of Social-Ecological Systems (PIASES) Framework
Professor Michael McGinnis, Co-Director, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, and Professor and Director of Graduate Studies, Department of Political Science; and Professor Elinor Ostrom, Senior Research Director, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, and Arthur F. Bentley Professor of Political Science, Indiana University Bloomington
3-29-10: The Changing Role of the State in Coordinated Capitalism: The Case of Germany
Dr. Marius Busemeyer, Research Associate, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Köln, Germany, and Visiting Scholar, Center for European Studies, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
3-31-10: Institutional Analysis of the Role of Bureaucrats in Social-Ecological Systems
Gwen Arnold, Research Assistant, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis and Joint PhD Program in Public Policy at SPEA; and Forrest Fleischman, Research Assistant, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis and Joint PhD Program in Public Policy at SPEA
4-5-10: Combating Transnational Crime: The Role of Learning and Norm Diffusion in the Current Rule of Law Wave
Dr. Paulette Lloyd, Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, Indiana University Bloomington
4-12-10:Sharing the State's Monopoly on Violence: Self-Help, Vigilantism, and the Roeder Case
Professor Eric Rasmusen, Dan R. and Catherine M. Dalton Professor, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy, Kelley School of Business, Indiana University Bloomington
4-14-10: Network Structures in Social-Ecological Systems (SES)
Dr. Armando Razo, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, and Affiliated Faculty, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington
4-15-10: Owning Russia: The Post-Soviet Struggle for Property and What We Can Learn from It
Dr. Andrew Barnes, Department of Political Science, Kent State University, Ohio
4-19-10: Can an Extreme Social Structure Shape Preferences Detrimental to Development? Theory and Evidence from Simple Games in Rural India
Dr. Karla Hoff, The World Bank, Washington, DC
4-21-10: Decisions about Land Use and Natural Resources Use of Family Agriculture from Brazilian Amazonia: Influence of Cultural and Economic Aspects in Deforestation and Annual Family Income
Dr. Luciano Mattos, Researcher, Brazilian Corporation of Agriculture Research (Embrapa); Professor, Getulio Vargas Foundation (FGV); and Visiting Scholar, Anthropological Center for Training and Research on Global Environmental Change, Indiana University Bloomington
4-23-10: Creating Revolutionary Awareness: "Philosophy" as a Main Cause of the French Revolution (1770-90)
Professor Jonathan Israel, School of Historical Studies, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey
4-26-10: Sub-Caste Identity and Offspring Sex-Selection in India
Dr. Rubiana Chamarbagwala, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Indiana University Bloomington
5-05-10: The Transactions-Interdependence-Institutions-Governance Nexus in Social-Ecological Systems
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Konrad Hagedorn, Department of Agricultural Economics, Division of Resource Economics, Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany; and Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington
MASS PSYCHOLOGY AND POLITICAL THEORY
Presented by Jasper Zuure, Research Fellow, Scientific Council for Government Policy, The Hague, The Netherlands, and Visiting Scholar, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: The presentation will be on how the knowledge from Mass Psychology has developed over more than a century and how this has influenced societal ideas about the masses and Political Theory. First, the resurgence of mass psychology will be discussed. Second, there will be made a distinction between the “classical” and “contemporary” perspective of mass psychology. Third, Mass Psychology will be defined and the taxonomy of the discipline will be given. The presentation will end with some examples.
BIO: Jasper Zuure studied Social and Organizational Psychology at Leiden University. His Master’s degree focused on Collective Behaviour and Mass Psychology. In 2007, he organized the symposium by the VeerStichting (a non-profit organization run by students) on the theme "Power of the Herd." Subsequently, he completed an internship at the DDB Amsterdam advertising agency and worked as a student assistant at Leiden University. During the summer of 2008, he attended a summer course in Political Psychology at Stanford University. After having completed an internship at the Scientific Council for Government Policy in the Netherlands, he currently is employed there as a Research Fellow. He works on projects related to collective behaviour, first on a project about nudging, at the moment on a project on new forms of democracy. In November 2009, he also started working as a PhD student on Mass Psychology and Political Theory at Leiden University. At the moment, Jasper is a Visiting Scholar at the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences at Indiana University Bloomington.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
Background Material
Goldstone, Robert L. and Todd M. Gureckis: "Collective Behavior," Cognitive Science 1 (2009) 412-438.
THE ETHNICITY DISTRACTION? POLITICAL CREDIBILITY AND PARTISAN PREFERENCES IN AFRICA
Presented by Dr. Philip Keefer, Lead Research Economist, Development Research Group, World Bank, Washington, DC
Abstract: A large literature concludes that competition among ethnic groups causes policy failure, slow growth, and civil war. An alternative view is that features of political competition such as the lack of credibility of political promises give rise to both ethnic competition and adverse development outcomes. If political parties credibly represent the collective interests of ethnic groups, the first view is more likely to be true. Data from Afrobarometer surveys in 16 sub-Saharan African countries suggest, though, that parties’ ethnic appeals are not credible. Ethnic clustering of political support is less widespread than believed; members of clustered ethnic groups are no more likely to express a partisan preference than others; even when they are more likely, they exhibit high rates of partisan disinterest that are inconsistent with credible ethnic appeals; and, finally, partisan preferences are at least as affected by factors such as gift-giving. These findings emphasize the importance of looking beyond ethnicity in analyses of African economic development.
BIO: Philip Keefer is a Lead Research Economist in the Development Research Group of the World Bank. The focus of his work, based on experience in countries ranging from Bangladesh, Benin, Brazil, and the Dominican Republic to Indonesia, México, Perú and Pakistan, is the determinants of political incentives to pursue economic development. His research, on issues such as the impact of insecure property rights on growth; the effects of political credibility on policy; and the sources of political credibility in democracies and autocracies, has appeared in journals ranging from the Quarterly Journal of Economics to the American Review of Political Science.
Co-Sponsor: Political Economy of Democratic Sustainability (PEDS)
SOLVING SAMARITAN'S DILEMMAS IN IRRIGATION INVESTMENT
Presented by Dr. Bryan Bruns, Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: Game theory models such as Samaritan’s dilemmas (Buchanan 1977, Wilson et al., 2005) clarify the need to carefully design aid programs so they will encourage rather than discourage local efforts. Better analysis and design of cost-sharing rules for irrigation system repair and improvement can align incentives and make commitments more credible. Shifting external investments from single-shot rehabilitation to progressive improvement aids adaptive problem-solving in irrigation co-management.
BIO: As a consulting sociologist, Bryan Bruns has specialized in improving participation in irrigation and water resources management, mostly in Southeast Asia. He co-edited Negotiating Water Rights and Water Rights Reform: Lessons for Institutional Design, and has written a variety of other publications, listed at www.BryanBruns.com. He earned a Ph.D. at Cornell University in Development Sociology, with minors in Agricultural Economics and Southeast Asian Studies. This presentation is part of his current work on "Customizing Governance in Commons: Improving Institutional Design and Finding Better Ways to Share Water."
DEREGULATORY POLICIES AND TECHNOLOGICAL ACCELERATION: AT THE BRINK OF A NEW PHASE TRANSITION IN POLICYMAKING SYSTEMS
Presented by Professor Barbara Cherry, Department of Telecommunications, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: This presentation discusses the challenges for institutional governance posed by deregulatory policies, particularly in the financial and telecommunications sectors, in a world of rapid technological change. It stresses that a complexity theory perspective is critical for understanding the evolution – both historical and in the future – of policymaking processes and specific policies. From this perspective, the recent wave of deregulatory policies is another phase in the further evolution of policymaking systems in response to technological changes, but its occurrence in a high-speed world is forcing us to the brink of a new phase transition in policymaking systems.
BIO: Barbara A. Cherry is Professor of Telecommunications at Indiana University (IU). Dr. Cherry’s research reflects an interdisciplinary academic background integrated with telecommunications industry and government experience. Prior to joining IU, Barbara worked at the FCC, initially as Deputy Chief of the Office of Plans and Policy and later as Senior Counsel in the Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis. Prior to the FCC, Barbara was Associate Professor and Associate Director of the James H. and Mary B. Quello Center for Telecommunication Management and Law at Michigan State University. Also, prior to entering academia, Barbara also worked on public policy issues while employed with Ameritech and AT&T. Dr. Cherry holds a Ph.D. from the Department of Communication Studies at Northwestern University, a J.D. from Harvard Law School, an M.A. in Economics and Law from Harvard University while recipient of a National Science Foundation Fellowship in Economics, and a B.S. in Economics summa cum laude from the University of Michigan.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
Background Material
The article in CommLaw Conspectus elaborates on the challenges of institutional governance as a general matter that arise from the need for greater regulatory resilience. In particular, it discusses how regulatory resilience must be constrained by the rule of rule, the sustainability of which is threatened under both deregulatory policies and the social acceleration of time (defined by W. Scheuerman in his book, Liberal Democracy and the Social Acceleration of Time). Analysis of the response of the U.S. Federal government to the recent financial crisis is provided as an example.
Cherry, Barbara A.: "Institutional Governance for Essential Industries under Complexity: Providing Resilience
within the Rule of Law," CommLaw Conspectus 17 (2008-2009)
The article published in the Federal Communications Law Journal (FCLJ) discusses the challenges of designing sustainable telecommunications policies from the perspective of the economy and policymaking systems as co-evolving complex adaptive systems. From this perspective, sustainable policies require greater regulatory resilience by policymaking bodies. The article then focuses on specific implications for federalism and its effects on telecommunications policies of federal preemption.
Cherry, Barbara A.: "The Telecommunications Economy and Regulation as Coevolving Complex Adaptive Systems: Implications for Federalism," Federal Communications Law Journal 59(2) (March 2007) 369-402
WILL BARACK OBAMA BE BLACK IN 2016? AN INQUIRY INTO THE STRATEGIC PERSISTENCE OF STEREOTYPES
Presented by Professor Arthur Lupia, Hal R. Varian Collegiate Professor, Department of Political Science; and Research Professor, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Abstract: Looking forward, for whom will Barack Obama continue to be black? In other words, will voters who saw him as black during his 2008 presidential campaign continue to see him as such? At one extreme, race could have no effect on how they see the president. At the other extreme, race can be all that they see. So, if people change the racial lenses through which they view Obama, who will change and why?
In the paper, I focus on how common variations in the kind of information to which people are exposed will affect how people evaluate President Obama into the future. The variations pertain to whether or not the information is true and whether or not people can recognize the costs associated with basing political judgments on mistaken views about race. A key point of the analysis is to clarify how a person's ability to recognize their mistakes depends on how critical attributes of their psychological makeup interact with the context in which they encounter information-providing entrepreneurs.
BIO: Arthur Lupia is the Hal R. Varian Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan and Research Professor at its Institute for Social Research. He studies how information and institutions affect policy and politics with a focus on how people make decisions when they lack information. He draws from multiple scientific and philosophical disciplines and he integrates many research methods. His work provides insights on voting, civic competence, legislative-bureaucratic relations, parliamentary governance, and political communication.
His articles have appeared a wide range of academic journals. His books include The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know?; Stealing the Initiative: How State Government Reacts to Direct Democracy; Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality; Positive Changes in Political Science: The Legacy of Richard D. McKelvey’s Most Influential Writings; and The Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science (forthcoming).
He is active in developing new opportunities for social scientists. As a founder of TESS (Time-shared Experiments for the Social Sciences), he has helped hundreds of researchers run innovative experiments using nationally-distributed subject pools. As an original and regular contributor to NSF's EITM (Empirical Implications of Theoretical Models) program, he has helped to develop curricula that show young scholars how to better integrate advanced empirical and theoretical methods into effective research agendas. As a Principal Investigator of the ANES (American National Election Studies), he introduced many procedural, methodological, and content innovations to one of the world's best-known scientific studies of elections.
His awards include the 2007 Innovators Award from the American Association for Public Opinion Research and 1998 Award for Initiatives in Research from the National Academy of Sciences. He has been a Guggenheim Fellow and had a fellowship at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences. He is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
He has held numerous scholarly leadership positions at universities and a range of professional organizations. He has served on the editorial boards of many journals, including the American Political Science Review, the American Journal of Political Science, the Journal of Politics, and Public Opinion Quarterly. He is on the Board of Directors of Climate Central, an entity that strives to make climate science accessible to the public. He has held elective office in several professional associations including the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Political Science Association. He is currently APSA's Treasurer.
Hard copies of the paper will be available at the Workshop and upon request by email to ghiggins@indiana.edu.
Co-Sponsor: Political Economy of Democratic Sustainability (PEDS)
TOWARD A GENERAL "RATIONAL" SOLUTION FOR MULTI-PLAYER SEQUENTIAL GAMES
Presented by Dr. Richard Shiffrin, Luther Dana Waterman Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: Researchers have long felt that rational players could find better solutions than those dictated by such approaches as Nash Equilibria, particularly when cooperation among players allows better outcomes for everyone playing. We present results for rational players who do not bargain and discuss plays with each other, who are motivated by a selfish goal only (they cooperate only to improve the payoff they would have received otherwise), the goal being to maximize the ordinal payoff received. A complete solution is a available for two player sequential games, but only a partial set of solutions is available for three or more players.
BIO: Rich Shiffrin is at Indiana University. He is a professor in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, in the Cognitive Science Program (which he founded and directed for many years), and is an adjunct professor of Statistics. He is a Distinguished Professor and the Luther Dana Waterman Professor. He carries out research on cognition generally, on development of models to explain data, and on methodology to enable both to succeed. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society. He has won most of the major awards in his fields.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
AN UNRIGHTEOUS PIECE OF BUSINESS: THE MEMPHIS RIOT OF 1866 AND CONDITIONS FOR TRANSITION
Presented by Dr. Art Carden, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics and Business, Rhodes College, Memphis, TN
(coauthor: Christopher J. Coyne, Economics, West Virginia University)
Abstract: In the century between the Civil War and the Civil Rights Era, The American South was a limited-access economic and political order. Problems associated with the transition out of slavery and into freedom were fundamental sources of uncertainty during this period, and Southern history is intimately associated with racial tension and violence. Historians argue that the race riots occurring in Memphis and New Orleans in 1866 were the catalysts for radical Reconstruction. This essay explores the Memphis Riot of 1866 and places it in context of the literature on open-access and limited-access orders.
BIO: Art Carden is Assistant Professor of Economics and Business at Rhodes College in Memphis, TN where he studies the economic history of the South, development economics, and Big-Box Retail.
POLYCENTRICITY AND POLITICAL ISLAM: THE MINARCHIST APPROACH
Presented by Dr. Anas Malik, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science and Sociology, Xavier University, Cincinnati, Ohio
Abstract: Debates on political Islam often presume a “statist” orientation, meaning that the central state legislates and enforces “Islamic law”. In contrast “minarchist political Islam” circumscribes central authority in favor of multiple, diverse jurisdictions. The included background paper examines challenges in constituting minarchist political Islam with respect to symbols and institutions. Internal and external predators and the state itself are dangers to which the minarchist model is susceptible. Polycentric governance approaches provide a way to map different, sometimes overlapping jurisdictional groupings in an Islamicate context. A larger project considers constitutional and collective choice challenges in Pakistan from inception to present, given its diversity of acceding units, contested borders, and enduring rivalries.
BIO: Anas Malik is Assistant Professor of Political Science at Xavier University in Cincinnati. His research interests are in political Islam, development, and international political economy. He is the author of Political Survival in Pakistan, and is currently working on a project examining the minarchist approach to political Islam as it relates to Pakistan’s experience.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
Background Material
Malik, Anas: "Challenging Dominance: Symbols, Institutions, and Vulnerabilities in Minarchist Political Islam," The Muslim World 98 (October 2008): 502-519.
TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE AND POVERTY REDUCTION IN LIBERIA: ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
Presented by Professor Amos Sawyer, Research Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington; and Woodrow Wilson Center Public Policy Scholar, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC
Abstract: Since the ending of the civil war in 2003, Liberians, with the support of the international community, have embarked on a program of post conflict reconstruction within an environment affected by the consequences of war and historical divisions. The Poverty Reduction Strategy provides the current framework for reconstruction. The challenge for Liberians is to successfully establish the link between reconstruction and reconciliation such that dilemmas of reconstruction and growth are addressed in ways that reduce inequities. This presentation clarifies the link between reconstruction and reconciliation and identifies some the issues and challenges of mainstreaming principles of reconciliation and peacebuilding in policies that transcend autocracy and achieve growth with equity. The presentation benefits from Sawyer's role in governance reform in Liberia.
BIO: Professor Amos Sawyer is a Research Scholar at the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University, Bloomington; and Woodrow Wilson Center Public Policy Scholar, Washington, DC. He holds a Ph.D. in political science from Northwestern University and taught for many years at the University of Liberia, becoming dean of the College of Social Sciences and Humanities in 1981. He was chairman of the Liberian constitution commission in 1981 and president of the Interim Government 1990-1994, during Liberia’s civil war. He is now Chairman of the Governance Reform Commission in Liberia (Feb 2006-). He is actively involved in peacebuilding and conflict resolution initiatives in Africa and frequently serves in advisory capacities to African regional organizations and the UN on questions of African governance and conflict resolution. He has published extensively on such issues. His recent works include his book on Liberia titled Beyond Plunder: Toward Democratic Governance in Liberia (Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2005).
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
WHY OIL IS NOT A CURSE
Presented by Dr. Pauline Jones Luong, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Brown University, Providence, RI
Abstract: That mineral rich countries in the developing world are “cursed” by virtue of their wealth is a widely accepted “fact” among highly-respected academics, international NGOs, international financial institutions, and even representatives of the popular media. This is particularly true when it comes to oil wealth: countries rich in petroleum are considered to be doomed to suffer from poor economic performance, unbalanced growth, impoverished populations, weak states, and authoritarian regimes. At the root of this consensus, however, is a series of faulty assumptions and generalizations. Based on her new book, Why Oil is Not a Curse: Ownership Structure and Institutions in the Petroleum Rich Soviet Successor States (forthcoming, Cambridge University Press), Pauline Jones Luong will argue that the underlying cause of the so-called “curse” is not oil wealth per se, but rather, who owns and controls this wealth.
BIO: Pauline Jones Luong, an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at Brown University since 2004, was an Assistant Professor at Yale University from 1998-2004. She received her Ph.D. in 1998 from Harvard University, where she was an Academy Scholar from 1998-1999 and 2001-2002. Her primary research interests include: institutional origin and change; identity and conflict; and the political economy of development. Her empirical work focuses on the former Soviet Union. She has published articles in several leading academic and policy journals, including the American Political Science Review, Annual Review of Political Science, Comparative Political Studies, Current History, Foreign Affairs, Perspectives on Politics, Politics and Society, Central Asian Monitor, Europe-Asia Studies, and Resources Policy. Her books include: Institutional Change and Political Continuity in Post-Soviet Central Asia: Power, Perceptions, and Pacts (Cambridge 2002); and The Transformation of Central Asia: States and Societies from Soviet Rule to Independence (Cornell 2003). Her most recent book, entitled Why Oil is Not a Curse: Ownership Structure and Institutions in the Petroleum Rich Soviet Successor States (forthcoming, Cambridge University Press), focuses on the short- and long-term impact of natural resource endowments on institutional design in developing countries and incorporates the experiences of the former Soviet republics that make-up the Caspian basin with energy-rich states in several other continents. Her future research will focus on the positive externalities of extremism.
Hard copies of the paper will be available at the Workshop and upon request by email to ghiggins@indiana.edu.
Co-Sponsor: Political Economy of Democratic Sustainability (PEDS)
URBAN LONG TERM RESEARCH AREAS: A NEW NSF RESEARCH PROGRAM
Presented by Dr. Morgan Grove and Dr. Lynne Westphal, USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Evanston, IL
Abstract: The National Science Foundation and the USDA Forest Service are partners in a new research program called ULTRA, for the Urban Long Terms Research Areas. The program is in its beginning stages, with a number of ULTRA-Exploratory grants awarded.
Both Chicago and the DC-Baltimore corridor have ULTRA-Ex projects getting underway, projects that build on existing regional research partnerships. The Chicago Region ULTRA-Ex project builds on Chicago Wilderness’ Green Infrastructure Vision (GIV). The GIV was developed as an action plan for Chicago Wilderness’ Biodiversity Recovery Plan, as a tangible, concrete green infrastructure vision that maps regional-scale opportunities for biodiversity protection. The ULTRA-Ex team will critically investigate connections between the biodiversity-recovery goals of the GIV and carbon sequestration/storage, water quality, and stewardship scenarios, thereby integrating analysis of provisioning of several different ecosystem services and their climate mitigation and adaptation potential. This project is being integrated with a NSF-funded Couple Natural Human Systems project that investigates potential differences in biodiversity outcomes from different restoration planning and implementation processes (e.g., volunteer lead, manager lead, etc.). In DC-Baltimore, the ULTRA-Ex project builds upon many of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study activities with comparative analyses of D.C. (a pull city) and Baltimore City (a push city). The research team works to answer the question: What are the effects of adaptive processes aimed at sustainability and climate change in the Baltimore socio-ecological system? This interdisciplinary approach examines how adaptive processes associated with sustainability and climate change affect the interplay between human behavior and action, ecosystem structure, ecosystem functioning, ecosystem services and human outcomes such as human health and property values.
BIOS
Dr. Lynne Westphal is project leader and research social scientist with the USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Chicago, IL. She is a Co-Principal Investigator on the recently funded NSF ULTRA-Ex: “Connecting the social and ecological sciences with planners, managers, and the public: Building a broad foundation for the Chicago-Region ULTRA.”
Dr. J. Morgan Grove is a research social ecologist with the USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Burlington, VT. He is a Co-Principal Investigator on the Baltimore Ecosystem Study (BES). The Baltimore Ecosystem Study (BES) conducts research on metropolitan Baltimore as an ecological system. The program integrates biological, physical, and social sciences. As a part of the National Science Foundation's Long-Term Ecological Research Network, BES seeks to understand how Baltimore's SOCIO-ecosystems change over time. The ecological knowledge created by BES supports educational and community-based activities, and interactions with the Baltimore community. For further information about the Baltimore Ecosystem Study, please see http://www.beslter.org.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
Co-Sponsor: Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change (CIPEC)
LAND RIGHTS CASES IN BELIZE: "COMMON" VERSUS "PRIVATE" LAND
Presented by Professor Richard Wilk, Professor of Anthropology and Gender Studies, Department of Anthropology, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: For almost 30 years I have been involved in the efforts by Q’eqchi’ and Mopan Maya villagers in southern Belize to secure legal rights to the land where they live and farm, in the face of competing claims from loggers, conservationists, oil companies and the national government. The complex legal history of these cases is often depicted as a contest between “communal” and “private” land rights, between traditional villages which hold land as common property, and modern entrepreneurs who want to develop productive cash crops like cacao. Instead, as the work of many anthropologists and historians has shown, the indigenous land use system is a complex and flexible mixture of different kinds of usufruct and ownership rights, intimately connected with local agricultural ecology and market conditions. The court cases are further complicated by the question of whether or not these farmers are truly “indigenous” to the area. I will discuss the existing land use system and its ecological and historical context, and survey the legal positions of the various parties. My main question is about why so many parties have chosen to polarize the debate around the issue of common property.
BIO: Richard Wilk is professor of anthropology and gender studies at Indiana University where he directs the Food Studies Program. With a PhD in Anthropology from the University of Arizona, he has taught at the University of California Berkeley, University of California Santa Cruz, New Mexico State University, and University College London, and has held fellowships at Gothenburg University and the University of London. His research in Belize, Europe, the USA and West Africa has been supported by three Fulbright fellowships, grants from the National Science Foundation, and from many other organizations. He has also worked as an applied anthropologist with UNICEF, USAID, USDA, Cultural Survival and a variety of other development organizations. His initial research on the cultural ecology of indigenous Mayan farming and family organization was followed by work on consumer culture and sustainable consumption, energy consumption, globalization, television, beauty pageants and food. Much of his recent work has turned towards the history of food, the linkages between tourism and sustainable development, and the origin of modern masculinity. His publications include more than 125 papers and book chapters, a textbook in Economic Anthropology, and several edited volumes, The most recent books are “Home Cooking in the Global Village” (Berg Publishers), Off the Edge: Experiments in Cultural Analysis (with Orvar Lofgren, Museum Tusculanum Press) and “Fast Food/Slow Food” (Altamira Press), and Time, Consumption, and Everyday Life (with Elizabeth Shove and Frank Trentmann, Berg Publishers).
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
Background Material
Wilk, Richard R.: "Whose Forest? Whose Land? Whose Ruins? Ethics and Conservation," Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (1999): 367-374.
Campbell, Maia S. and S. James Anaya: "The Case of the Maya Villages of Belize: Reversing the Trend of Government Neglect to Secure Indigenous Land Rights," Human Rights Law Review 8(2) (2008): 377-399
Supreme Court of Belize, Affidavit 2008
Supreme Court of Belize, Judgment 2007
IAD AND SES DYNAMIC FLOWS: INTRODUCING THE PROGRAM IN INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS (PIASES) FRAMEWORK
Presented by Professor Michael McGinnis, Co-Director, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, and Professor and Director of Graduate Studies, Department of Political Science; and Professor Elinor Ostrom, Senior Research Director, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, and Arthur F. Bentley Professor of Political Science, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: This paper introduces a framework of analysis for the Program in Institutional Analysis of Social-Ecological Systems (PIASES) that is in the process of being established at the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis at Indiana University. This PIASES framework builds on and extends previous efforts to revise the long-standing IAD (Institutional Analysis and Development) framework to facilitate its application to complex coupled social-ecological systems (SES), specifically by modifying a SES framework originally introduced in an influential PNAS article by Ostrom (2007). The key innovation is that PIASES is explicitly built upon a dynamic understanding of the flows of information and resources within both the social and ecological sides of a SES. This framework is intended to provide the foundation for a common language for potential application to diverse forms of resource governance.
BIOS
Elinor Ostrom is Distinguished Professor, Arthur F. Bentley Professor of Political Science, and Senior Research Director of the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University, Bloomington; and Founding Director, Center for the Study of Institutional Diversity, Arizona State University. She is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the National Academy of Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society, and a recipient of the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2009, Reimar Lüst Award for International Scholarly and Cultural Exchange, the Elazar Distinguished Federalism Scholar Award, the Frank E. Seidman Distinguished Award in Political Economy, the Johan Skytte Prize in Political Science, the Atlas Economic Research Foundation’s Lifetime Achievement Award, and the John J. Carty Award for the Advancement of Science. Her books include Governing the Commons (1990); Rules, Games, and Common-Pool Resources (1994, with Roy Gardner and James Walker); Local Commons and Global Interdependence: Heterogeneity and Cooperation in Two Domains (1995, with Robert Keohane); Trust and Reciprocity: Interdisciplinary Lessons from Experimental Research (2003, with James Walker); The Commons in the New Millennium: Challenges and Adaptations (2003, with Nives Dolšak); The Samaritan’s Dilemma: The Political Economy of Development Aid (2005, with Clark Gibson, Krister Andersson, and Sujai Shivakumar); Understanding Institutional Diversity (2005); Understanding Knowledge as a Commons: From Theory to Practice (2007, with Charlotte Hess); and Working Together: Collective Action, the Commons, and Multiple Methods in Practice (2010, with Amy Poteete and Marco Janssen).
Michael D. McGinnis is Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in the Department of Political Science at Indiana University, Bloomington. In July 2009 he resumed his former position as Co-Director for the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, an inter-disciplinary research group focused on the study of institutions, development, and governance. McGinnis received a B.S. in mathematics from the Ohio State University in 1980 and a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Minnesota in 1985, and he has worked at IU ever since. He has published several articles in political science and international relations journals, as well as chapters in edited volumes. He is co-author, with John T. Williams, of Compound Dilemmas: Democracy, Collective Action, and Superpower Rivalry (University of Michigan Press, 2001) and editor of three volumes of readings on governance issues written by scholars associated with the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis. He was co-editor of International Studies Quarterly (1994-98).
THE CHANGING ROLE OF THE STATE IN COORDINATED CAPITALISM: THE CASE OF GERMANY
Presented by Dr. Marius Busemeyer, Research Associate, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Köln, Germany; and Visiting Scholar, Center for European Studies, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
Abstract: Recent advances in the comparative study of the political economy of advanced industrial democracies point to the importance of the state and public policy as supporting factors of coordinated capitalism. Looking back on the political history of vocational training and the welfare state in Germany since the 1970s, this paper studies in greater detail the role of the state and how it is changing over time. We find that in the 1970s the state acted as expected by the pertinent Varieties of Capitalism literature, delegating public obligations such as the training of young people to firms and refraining from hierarchical intervention. However, this neocorporatist arrangement laid the foundation for a long-term political dependency of the state on private actors to supply collective goods, i.e., vocational training opportunities. This in-built vulnerability of neocorporatist arrangements triggered a redefinition of the role of the state when private actors were no longer able to supply the collective goods in question because of changing environmental conditions. The state abandoned its former role of being a neutral moderator and became actively involved in transforming the institutional framework in order to bring it closer in line with the interests of business.
BIO: Marius Busemeyer is a researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies. His research focuses on comparative political economy and welfare state research, specializing in the fields of education, social and fiscal policy. He has recently finished a research project on the politics of institutional change in the German vocational training system. He is also a visiting scholar at the Center for European Studies at Harvard University. While there, he is planning to continue working on the subject of the comparative political economy of education and training by looking at other country cases in comparison to Germany. Busemeyer received his doctorate in political science from the University of Heidelberg in 2006. He has published, among others, in the European Journal of Political Research, the Journal of European Public Policy, and the Socio-Economic Review.
INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF BUREAUCRATS IN SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
Presented by Gwen Arnold, Research Assistant, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis and Joint PhD Program in Public Policy at SPEA; and Forrest Fleischman, Research Assistant, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis and Joint PhD Program in Public Policy at SPEA, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: Scholars at the Workshop have made important contributions to the study of public agencies through research on police, education, and infrastructure. Workshop research on social-ecological systems (SESs), however, has emphasized communities & local institutions. Government bureaucracies play an important role in the management of many SESs throughout the world, including those nominally managed by community institutions. In this presentation we elaborate on Ostrom's SES framework by expanding the governance system variables to incorporate literature on bureaucratic behavior & motivation. We consider how the nuts & bolts of bureaucracies influence the interactions between public agencies, other actors, and natural resources. This leads us to consideration of characteristic strengths & weaknesses of bureaucratic involvement in SESs.
BIOS
Gwen Arnold is a PhD student in the Joint Program in Public Policy at the School of Public and Environmental Affairs and Department of Political Science at Indiana University. Her research focuses on the adoption and implementation of wetland assessment methodologies by American states. Prior to coming to IU, Gwen received a BA in political science from University of Michigan and worked on wetland policy at the Environmental Law Institute. She is a 2008, 2009, and 2010 summer National Network of Environmental Management Scholars fellow at EPA Region 3.
Forrest Fleischman is a PhD student in the Joint Program in Public Policy at the School of Public & Environmental Affairs & Department of Political Science at Indiana University. His research focuses on the role of the Forest Department in forest sector decentralization reforms in India. Prior to coming to IU, Forrest received a BS & MS in Earth Systems at Stanford University, and worked as a policy advocate for Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, a watchdog on the US Forest Service.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
COMBATING TRANSNATIONAL CRIME: THE ROLE OF LEARNING AND NORM DIFFUSION IN THE CURRENT RULE OF LAW WAVE
Presented by Dr. Paulette Lloyd, Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: The move toward the globalization of economic and political liberalization that took off in the 1970s and peaked at century's end has had interesting consequences for the rule of law around the world. On the one hand, strengthening the rule of law would seem to be one of those liberalizing institutional moves that would seems quite consistent with these broader processes. But on the other, globalization has been accompanied by a dark side: the globalization of black markets and criminal activity. Transnational crime is an aspect of the rule of law that has presented serious challenges to local rule of law regimes. By its very nature it seems to cry out for a cooperative or at least a coordinated approach among national criminal law institutions. Our paper analyses the development and spread of a normative legal framework for addressing transnational crimes internationally. We focus on the case of human trafficking, and ask, what forces have contributed to the globalization of law in this area? We examine two modes of the globalization of the rule of law: the negotiation and ratification of anti-human trafficking treaties, and the criminalization of human trafficking in domestic law. We argue that the globalization of law in this area has been facilitated by two forces: First, the role of negative externalities. The evidence suggests that the countries experiencing the local effects of trafficked human beings are most likely to adopt anti-trafficking laws. Furthermore, when neighboring countries implement anti-crime legislation, there is a heightened risk the activities will be diverted to other jurisdictions; some evidence exists for defensive criminalization. Second, rules and norms against human trafficking have been buttressed by strong hegemonic leadership from the United States and Europe. The globalization of the rule of law – against trafficking in humans and transnational crime more broadly – has received its strongest support in countries that experience the externalities as well as those that are subject to pressure and influence from the United States, Europe and the “Global West.”
BIO: Paulette Lloyd is an Assistant Professor in IU's sociology department. She received her PhD in Sociology from the University of California at Los Angeles, followed by a postdoctoral research position at the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies. Her research interests are globalization processes, particularly Globalization of Law, Social Network Methodology, Human Rights, Political Sociology, Comparative Historical Sociology, and Social Movements.
SHARING THE STATE'S MONOPOLY ON VIOLENCE: SELF-HELP, VIGILANTISM, AND THE ROEDER CASE
Presented by Professor Eric Rasmusen, Dan R. and Catherine M. Dalton Professor, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy, Kelley School of Business, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: I am at the early stages of a project on how private citizens are used to enforce the law and whether it is efficient or not. Examples include bounty hunters, trial witnesses, the hue and cry, private prosecutions, punitive damages, treble damages, qui tam suits, vigilantes, self-defense, and repo men. A provocative example: Scott Roeder’s killing of George Tiller, defended by Roeder as necessary to enforce Kansas law against aborting viable babies when police refused to act.
BIO: Eric Rasmusen is the Dalton Professor of Business Economics and Public Policy at the Kelley School of Business. He works in the areas of law-and-economics, industrial organization, and political economy, and is best known as the author of Games and Information: An Introduction to Game Theory. His website is http://rasmusen.org, and his working papers can be accessed from there.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
NETWORK STRUCTURES IN SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS (SES)
Presented by Dr. Armando Razo, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, and Affiliated Faculty, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: This talk will review opportunities for data collection and analysis of relevant SES network structures based on discussions from previous PIASES meetings.
BIO: Professor Razo is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science who has been affiliated with the Workshop since he arrived at IU from Stanford University in fall 2004. Professor Razo's research interests lie in the field of comparative politics, with a concentration on the political economy of development. His research and teaching center around two major themes: (1) how political institutions in developing countries affect economic performance; and (2) the study of institutions and organizations in nondemocratic settings. He teaches a variety of courses in comparative politics, research methods, and institutional analysis. His books include Social Foundations of Limited Dictatorship (2008) on networks and economic policy in dictatorships, and The Politics of Property Rights (2003) on political instability and economic performance, co-authored with Stephen Haber and Noel Maurer. In addition, he has published articles in World Politics, the Journal of Economic History, and the Journal of Latin American Studies.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
Thursday, April 15, 2010 (Political Economy of Democratic Sustainability Lecture)
OWNING RUSSIA: THE POST-SOVIET STRUGGLE FOR PROPERTY AND WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM IT
Owning Russia: The Struggle over Factories, Farms, and Power
(Cornell University Press, 2006)
For a description of the book, see: http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/cup_detail.taf?ti_id=4462.
Presented by Dr. Andrew Barnes, Department of Political Science, Kent State University, Ohio
Abstract: When the Soviet Union fell, it left an endowment of factories and farms that would serve as the building blocks of a new Russian economy. This was not merely a construction project, however, or a simple bequeathal of wealth to descendants. Instead, during and after the breakdown of the USSR, a wide range of competitors fought to build new political and economic empires by wresting control over resources from the state and from each other.
In his book, Owning Russia, Andrew Barnes documents how a new generation of capitalists gained control over key pieces of the Russian economy by acquiring debt-ridden factories and farms once owned by the state. He shows that dividing the spoils of the Soviet economy involved far more than the experiment with voucher privatization or the scandalous behavior of a few Moscow-based “oligarchs.” In Russia, the control of property yielded benefits beyond mere profits, and these high stakes fueled an intense and enduring conflict over real assets. This competition empowered the Russian executive branch at the expense of the legislature, strengthened managers in relation to workers, created a broad array of business conglomerates, and re-shaped regional politics. It was a process that not only blurred the line between government and business but often erased it.
BIO: Andrew Barnes is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Kent State University. He received his Ph.D. from Princeton University and taught courses at Georgetown University and the University of Miami (FL) before moving to Kent. His research interests include post-communist politics and economics, the international political economy of oil, and links between markets and democracy. He has published articles in Comparative Politics, Comparative Political Studies, Post-Soviet Affairs, East European Politics and Societies, and Europe-Asia Studies, among other outlets. His book, Owning Russia, was published in 2006 by Cornell University Press.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
CAN AN EXTREME SOCIAL STRUCTURE SHAPE PREFERENCES DETRIMENTAL TO DEVELOPMENT? THEORY AND EVIDENCE FROM SIMPLE GAMES IN RURAL INDIA
Presented by Dr. Karla Hoff, The World Bank, Washington, DC
(coauthors: Priyanka Pandey, World Bank, and Benjamin Brooks, Princeton University)
Abstract: We show that individuals living in the same area of India but differing in social rank (caste status) also differ greatly in their ability to solve problems of coordination and cooperation. In a repeated stag hunt game, low caste individuals generally succeed at collective action whereas high caste individuals generally do not. We can explain this result by the difference in preferences between low and high caste individuals exhibited in a series of binary choice dictator games. High caste but not low caste men are averse to disadvantageous inequality. By decreasing the utility obtained if a player unilaterally cooperates ("the sucker's payoff"), such aversion lowers an individual’s incentive to cooperate. Because caste status is fixed by birth, our findings may represent the impact on preferences of a high caste culture that puts extreme emphasis on the social rank of the individual. Since the high castes hold disproportionate wealth and power in rural India, these findings provide a new explanation for the observed failures of cooperation in one of the poorest states of India.
BIO: Karla Hoff is a Senior Research Economist in the Development Research Group, World Bank. Her research focuses on institutions and institutional change and the economics of imperfect information. Through experiments in rural India using mazes, puzzles, and behavioral games, she has studied how an individual's position in a rigid social structure shapes numerous behaviors: susceptibility to stereotype threat, the willingness to compete, the willingness of third parties to punish norm violators, and the selection of equilibria in coordination games. The hope is that these findings could lead to a new dimension in development economics, potentially making aid more targeted and effective in some areas. She has coedited two books, Poverty Traps (Princeton, 2006) and The Economics of Rural Organization (Oxford, 1993). She received the Emerald Management Review prize in 2009 for "Exiting a Lawless State" (Economic Journal, 2008). She has a PhD in Economics from Princeton.
DECISIONS ABOUT LAND USE AND NATURAL RESOURCES USE OF FAMILY AGRICULTURE FROM BRAZILIAN AMAZONIA: INFLUENCE OF CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS IN DEFORESTATION AND ANNUAL FAMILY INCOME
Presented by Dr. Luciano Mattos, Researcher, Brazilian Corporation of Agriculture Research (Embrapa); Professor, Getulio Vargas Foundation (FGV); and Visiting Scholar, Anthropological Center for Training and Research on Global Environmental Change, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: The expansion of agricultural frontier in the Brazilian Amazon has been occurring since the 1960’s. This process results from the geopolitical strategy of Brazilian Military Dictatorship (1965-1985) to encourage human occupation through investments in infrastructure conditions (roads, hydro-electric power and mining) and establishment of large farmers. However, an intensive drought from Northeastern Region (the poorest Brazilian region), and a process of social exclusion of the family agriculture from Center-West, Southeastern and South Regions (all three regions with relevant agricultural tradition and intensive process of land concentration), resulted in spontaneous migratory fluxes to the North Region (Brazilian Amazon). Thus, the Brazilian Military Dictatorship included settlements of family agriculture is its strategy of human occupation in the Brazilian Amazon. More than 30 years after these phenomena, the main social movements of family agriculture and native population from Brazilian Amazonia promoted a historic partnership and proposed a development project to the Federal Government of President Lula. This proposed called Proambiente is a public policy that joins together four actions: social control, territorial planning, economic and ecological integrated planning of family lots and common areas, and communal accord of environmental services. The lecture examines variables affecting land use decisions of families were participating in the Proambiente program. The preliminaries results are showing the persistence of problems such as conflicting between environmental conservation of legal reserve and annual family income. Data of 2,400 families are analyzed using multiple regression approach. Family’s origin, time of lots’ occupation, level of formal education, generation index, size of lots, land tenure, access to rural credit, access to transportation and access to electricity are showing to be important variables affecting deforestation and/or annual family income.
BIO: Luciano Mattos is Agronomist from the University of Sao Paulo (USP), and PhD candidate in Economics at Campinas State University (Campinas SP, Brazil). He has been a Researcher at the Brazilian Corporation of Agricultural Research (Embrapa) since 2002, and a Professor at the Getulio Vargas Foundation (FGV) since 2008. He is currently a Visiting Scholar in the Anthropological Center for Training and Research on Global Environmental Change (ACT) at Indiana University. During 2003-2005, Luciano Mattos coordinated the first federal public policy on environmental services in Brazil. This initiative was developed with focus on smallholders such as family agriculture, traditional fishermen, traditional population, and indigenous people from the Brazilian Amazonia Basin. The goal was to stimulate integrated ‘Economic and Ecological Planning of Individual Family Lots and Commons Areas’. Simultaneously, each local community established a ‘Communal Accord of Environmental Services’ and its participative indicators in six types of environmental services: avoided deforestation, carbon sequestration, conservation of water and soil, preservation of biodiversity and reduction in risks of landscape’s flammability. Mattos’ research occupies the interdisciplinary space between agronomy, economics and anthropology.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
Friday, April 23, 2010 (Horizons of Knowledge Lecture)
CREATING REVOLUTIONARY AWARENESS: "PHILOSOPHY" AS A MAIN CAUSE OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION (1770-90)
Presented by Professor Jonathan Israel, School of Historical Studies, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey
BIO: Jonathan Israel’s work is concerned with European and European colonial history from the Renaissance to the eighteenth century, with particular emphasis on the history of ideas, the Dutch Golden Age (1590–1713), including the Dutch global trade system, seventeenth-century Dutch Jewry and Spinoza, the "Glorious Revolution" of 1688–91 in Britain, and Spanish imperial strategy especially in Mexico, the Caribbean and the Low Countries. His books include European Jewry in the Age of Mercantilism, 1550–1750 (1985); The Dutch Republic. Its Rise, Greatness and Fall, 1477–1806 (1995); Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity, 1650–1750 (2001); and Enlightenment Contested: Philosophy, Modernity, and the Emancipation of Man 1670–1752 (2006). His recent work focuses on the impact of radical thought (especially Spinoza, Bayle, Diderot and the eighteenth century French materialists), and on the Enlightenment and emergence of modern ideas of democracy, equality, toleration, freedom of the press and individual freedom.
Ph.D., University of Oxford, 1972; University of Hull, Assistant Lecturer, 1972–73, Lecturer, 1973–74; University College London, Lecturer, 1974–81, Reader, 1981–85, Professor, 1985–2000; Institute for Advanced Study, Professor, 2001–; Fellow, British Academy, 1992; Corresponding Fellow, Royal Netherlands Academy of Sciences, 1994; University of Amsterdam, Honorary Professor, 2003; Dr. A.H. Heineken Prize in History, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2008.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
SUB-CASTE IDENTITY AND OFFSPRING SEX-SELECTION IN INDIA
Presented by Dr. Rubiana Chamarbagwala, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: This paper explores the relationship between belonging to a historically infanticidal sub-caste and current offspring sex ratios using data from historical censuses and texts and the Third National Family and Health Survey in India, conducted in 2005-2006. The status hierarchy and marriage practices of certain sub-castes historically encouraged offspring sex-selection in favor of sons via female infanticide and neglect of female children. Today, despite dramatic changes in gender-specific social roles, rapid economic development, and modernization, caste remains an important determinant of status in Indian society and offspring sex-selection in favor of sons not only persists but has increased. I find that (i) membership in a historically infanticidal sub-caste has no effect on the gender of first born children, (ii) lowers the likelihood of second and third births being a girl if they have older sisters, (iii) and for fourth and higher births, decreases the chances of a child being a girl regardless of the number of existing daughters in the family. Additionally, children who belong to a historically infanticidal sub-caste and have older sisters have the lowest likelihood of being a girl in land-owning and wealthier households.
BIO: Rubiana Chamarbagwala is an Assistant Professor at Indiana University Bloomington. Her research and teaching interests are in the fields of Economic Development, Demography, Applied Microeconomics, Labor, and International Trade. Her research has focused on human capital investments and child labor, the impact of economic reforms and liberalization on labor market outcomes and welfare, and on gender differences in survival in India. She received her BA in 1998 from Middlebury College, VT, and her Ph.D. in Economics in 2004 from the University of Maryland, College Park.
THE TRANSACTIONS-INTERDEPENDENCE-INSTITUTIONS-GOVERNANCE NEXUS IN SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
Presented by Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Konrad Hagedorn, Department of Agricultural Economics, Division of Resource Economics, Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany; and Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington
Abstract: Nature-related transactions have particular properties resulting from attributes that can be observed in ecosystems. This influences interdependence between actors affected by such transactions and therefore requires corresponding institutions and governance structures. Institutional analysis frameworks used for analyzing resource use and environmental issues should consider the particular properties of transactions involving natural systems. The prevailing understanding of interactions associated with transactions seems to be underdeveloped as regards its appropriateness for natural resources, because the properties of transactions it emphasizes prevail in areas like production and trade where transactions are usually separable because often a high degree of decomposability, modularity and independence exists. Thus, frictions in the system that separate activities are perceived as the reason why a transaction needs to be controlled by institutions and governance structures. In contrast, resource units or ecosystem services are to a large extent provided by, or through, self-organized ecosystems where human design plays a limited role. In this case, linkages between activities due to the coherence of the system and the interconnectedness of its parts represent the main reasons why transactions have to be regularized by institutions and organizations. For ordering nature-related transactions, we propose a heuristic framework based on two dimensions: 'modularity and decomposability of structures' and 'functional interdependence of processes.' It serves as a starting point for establishing a typology ranging from ‘atomistic-isolated transactions’ to 'complex-interconnected transactions.' The complex process of institutionalizing such transactions is decomposed into conceptual categories by means of a 'transaction-interdependence cycle.'
BIO: Konrad Hagedorn is the head of the Division of Resource Economics and director of the Berlin Institute of Co-operative Studies at Humboldt University Berlin. His areas of teaching and research are resource economics, institutional analysis, environmental and rural policies and economics of transition. Main research fields are concepts of institutional analysis that focus on resource use and management, environmental problems and protection, poverty and resource degradation in developing countries, institutional change in the EU and in transition countries, and the emergence and transformation of cooperatives. At the Workshop, Professor Hagedorn works on analytical frameworks and research heuristics that support a better understanding of "Institutions of Sustainability." The background of this research is the extended capacity of humans to use and overuse both geo- and bio-physical systems, which has increased rapidly during the twentieth century. As a consequence, adequate theoretical approaches and empirical methodologies are required to develop a proper explanation and understanding of the complexity and diversity of nature-related institutions and governance structures in socio-ecological systems. A central prerequisite to achieve this are analytical frameworks that have the capacity to serve as research heuristics for facilitating research initiatives and processes that aim at the analysis of Institutions of Sustainability.
Back to the Workshop Homepage
Copyright 2008, Workshop in Political
Theory and Policy Analysis
Last updated:
