320 Politikwissenschaft
Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (314) (remove)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (146)
- Part of a Book (94)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (26)
- Other (22)
- Doctoral Thesis (10)
- Review (9)
- Working Paper (3)
- Report (2)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Contribution to a Periodical (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (314) (remove)
Keywords
- Integration (7)
- Germany (6)
- Migration (5)
- Security Council (5)
- decision-making (5)
- World Bank (4)
- discourse (4)
- governance (4)
- human rights (4)
- international organisations (4)
Institute
- Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft (314) (remove)
From the international perspective, the peace process in Liberia has generally been described as a successful model for international peacebuilding interventions. But how do Liberians perceive the peace process in their country? The aim of this paper is to complement an institutionalist approach looking at the security and justice mechanism in Liberia with some insights into local perceptions in order to answer the following question: how do Liberians perceive the peace process in their country and which institutions have been supportive for the establishment of sustaining peace? After briefly introducing the background of the Liberian conflict and the data collection, I present first results, analyzing the mechanism linking two peacebuilding institutions (peacekeeping and transitional justice) with the establishment of sustaining peace in Liberia.
What shapes peace, and how can peace be successfully built in those countries affected by armed conflict? This paper examines mpeacebuilding in the aftermath of civil wars in order to identify the conditions for post-conflict peace. The field of civil war research is
characterised by case studies, comparative analyses and quantitative research, which relate relatively little to each other. Furthermore, the complex dynamics of peacebuilding have hardly been investigated so far. Thus, the question remains of how best to enhance the prospects
of a stable peace in post-conflict societies. Therefore, it is necessary to capture the dynamics of post-conflict peace. This paper aims at helping to narrow these research gaps by 1) presenting the benefits of set theoretic methods for peace and conflict studies; 2) identifying remote conflict environment factors and proximate peacebuilding factors which have an influence on the peacebuilding process and 3) proposing a
set-theoretic multi-method research approach in order to identify the causal structures and mechanisms underlying the complex realm of post-conflict peacebuilding. By implementing this transparent and systematic comparative approach, it will become possible to discover
the dynamics of post-conflict peace.
This article investigates local perceptions of international peacebuilding in Sierra Leone and Liberia and explains the need for an inclusive framework addressing peace and justice at the same time. These neighbouring countries in West Africa not only share the burden of an intertwined conflict history but have also been described as prototypes for successful peacebuilding. However, both cases show striking differences with regard to the relative importance given to security and justice during the peace process and within the selected peacebuilding approaches. In Liberia, the peacebuilding framework was clearly sequenced, favouring security over justice. In Sierra Leone, it included a comprehensive TJ component, which was implemented alongside security-centred initiatives. In order to compare these two cases and to elaborate on the challenges of establishing both peace and justice in post-conflict settings with a more people-centred focus, we conducted expert interviews with (inter)national peacebuilding actors and opinion surveys, asking how the civilian populations themselves perceive the peace process and the effectiveness of international peacebuilding. The findings provide insights into local experiences with the inclusive peacebuilding framework implemented in Sierra Leone and the drawbacks of delaying justice and accountability in Liberia.
This chapter operationalizes the three fundamental concepts of this study. It outlines what counts as authoritarian rule, it explains how to recognize dissent in non-democratic contexts, and it debates how to quantify repression in the shadow of the politicized discourse on human rights. First, the chapter opts to classify every political regime as authoritarian that fails to elect its executive or legislature in free and competitive elections. Second, the chapter proposes to see dissent through the lens of campaigns, i.e., series of connected contentious events that involve large-scale collective action and formulate far-reaching political demands. Finally, after some elaboration on the problems involved in measuring political repression reliably and validly, the chapter turns to rescaled versions of the Human Rights Protection Scores 2.04 and the V-Dem 6.2 political civil liberties index as indicators for violence and restrictions. This choice of indicators of repression is, finally, defended against three central objections: the separability of violence from restrictions, the so-called information paradox, and, finally, differences in the timing of violence and restrictions.
In der vorliegenden Arbeit liegt der Fokus auf jungen russischsprachigen Jüdinnen und Juden, deren Eltern in den 90er Jahren des 20 Jahrhunderts nach Deutschland eingewandert sind. Im Rahmen dieser Studie wird der Bildungsweg dieser MigrantInnengruppe und deren Erfahrungen in Deutschland aus der biographischen Perspektive nachvollzogen. Der Fokus wird insbesondere auf die biographischen Lebenserfahrungen gelegt, d.h. die allgemeinen Lebensumstände, Hürden und Schwierigkeiten, die die jungen russischsprachigen Jüdinnen und Juden in Deutschland überwinden mussten, um auf ihrem Bildungsweg an ihr Ziel zu kommen. Des Weiteren werden die Rolle des sozialen Umfelds auf die Auswahl ihres Bildungsweges sowie ihre Zugehörigkeit und ihr Beitrag zur deutschen Gesellschaft beleuchtet. Ein weiteres Hauptaugenmerk dieser Arbeit liegt auf den gesellschaftlichen, politischen und familiären Rahmenbedingungen, die den BiographInnen den Zugang zum Bildungsweg ermöglichten.
Die in der Arbeit formulierten Forschungsfragen wurden mithilfe der interpretativen Sozialforschung, genauer, der fallrekonstruktiven Auswertung nach Gabriele Rosenthal beantwortet.
Über den biographischen Verlauf der Lebensgeschichte der jungen russischsprachigen Jüdinnen und Juden wurde deutlich, dass die BiographInnen in die säkulare Gesellschaft gehen müssen, um ihren Bildungsweg erfolgreich zu gestalten. Dort erfahren sie einen sehr starken Antisemitismus und sind diesem schutzlos ausgeliefert. Bei allen drei Interviewten wurde diese Erfahrung in der Schule gemacht, an einem Ort, an dem sie Schutz erfahren sollten. Diesen Anfeindungen begegneten sie auf unterschiedliche Weise und sie entwickelten verschiedene Handlungsstrategien. Einige BiographInnen setzen sich auf der intellektuellen Ebene bewusst damit auseinander, andere wiederum versuchen, nicht hinzuschauen und es zu ignorieren.
Des Weiteren wurde als Resultat der Untersuchung in einigen Fällen ein übereinstimmendes, in anderen ein nicht übereinstimmendes Passungsverhältnis zwischen elterlichen Vorstellungen und den Bildungswegen der jungen russischsprachigen Jüdinnen und Juden gefunden.
Jointly with the Global North, the rise of the Global South has come at a high cost to the environment. Driven by its high energy intensity and the use of fossil fuels, the South has contributed a significant portion of global emissions during the last 30 years, and is now contributing some 63% of today's total GHG emissions (including land-use change and forestry). Similar to the Global North, the Global South's emissions are heavily concentrated: India and China alone account for some 60% and the top 10 countries for some 78% of the group's emissions, while some 120 countries account for only 22%. Without highlighting such differences, it makes little sense to use the term 'Global South'. Its members are affected differently, and contribute differently to global climate change. They neither share a common view, nor do they pursue joint interests when it comes to international climate negotiations. Instead, they are organised into more than a dozen subgroups of the global climate regime. There is no single climate strategy for the Global South, and climate action will differ enormously from country to country. Furthermore, just and equitable transitions may be particularly challenging for some countries.
To ensure political survival, autocrats must prevent popular rebellion, and political repression is a means to that end. However, autocrats face threats from both the inside and the outside of the center of power. They must avoid popular rebellion and at the same time share power with strategic actors who enjoy incentive to challenge established power-sharing arrangements whenever repression is ordered. Can autocrats turn repression in a way that allows trading one threat off against the other? This chapter first argues that prior research offers scant insight on that question because it relies on umbrella concepts and questionable measurements of repression. Next, the chapter disaggregates repression into restrictions and violence and reflects on their drawbacks. Citizens adapt to the restriction of political civil liberties, and violence backfires against its originators. Hence, restrictions require enforcement, and violence requires moderation. When interpreted as complements, it becomes clear that restrictions and violence have the potential to compensate for their respective weaknesses. The complementarity between violence and restrictions turns political repression into a valuable addition to the authoritarian toolkit. The chapter concludes with an application of these ideas to the twin problems of authoritarian control and power-sharing.
Does complementarity between restrictions and violence stabilize authoritarian power-sharing in the face of popular rebellion? Scholars widely concur that the central political conflict in authoritarian regimes plays out between people on the inside of the regime. This chapter adds to the debate and studies coup attempts in light of two interconnected hypotheses. First, violence against campaigns destabilizes power-sharing because it exposes a weak leadership. Second, this adverse effect of violence declines as the routine level of restrictions increases, because restrictions act as a sorting mechanism for uncompromising political opposition. Both hypotheses are tested using Bayesian multilevel statistical analysis on a data set of 253 coup attempts in 198 authoritarian regimes between 1949 and 2007. This study design allows separation of repression’s time-dependent effects from its context effects, and it demonstrates the value of Bayesian methods for studying rare political phenomena such as coups d’état. The chapter’s conclusion, however, is straightforward: Once citizens form campaigns, repression can only deteriorate the situation because it opens a frontline right at the center of authoritarian rule.