|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
181059
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The development and introduction of new technologies are central to achieving sustainable transitions. Policymakers are important in enabling a successful transition. However, discourses about EU transport decarbonisation reveal multiple policy approaches to technology innovation, both in terms of decarbonising the car and building new alternative fuels infrastructure for transport. A discursive institutionalist analysis of these two separate but interdependent communicative discourses on road transport decarbonisation shows the complexities of facilitating transformative change. This shift requires coordination at all levels involving different actors and sector coupling to successfully decarbonise road transport.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
171634
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Despite decades of large-scale immigration, systemic and institutionalized racism and ethnonationalism remain very strong in South Korea. One reason is obvious: South Korea is the quintessential homogeneous nation-state. Many observers, in fact, believe that it is one of the few societies in the world that is naturally homogenous. For this and other reasons, the prospect that South Korea can or will transform from homogenous nation-state to multicultural society is generally given very short shrift. I argue, however, that small but extremely significant steps toward a multicultural society have already been made and that the key reason is due to the introduction of ‘multiculturalism’ as an idea and discourse in Korean society. While a focus on ideas/discourse is hardly new, this paper contends that it has been seriously underappreciated, particularly in analyses of South Korea, as a cause of institutional stability on the one hand, and of institutional change and transformation, on the other hand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
187374
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
What factors explain variation in decisions to use force in American foreign policy? Consider the Obama administration’s decision to intervene in Libya. Upon assuming office, Obama outlined a foreign policy marked by a self-professed doctrine, ‘don’t do stupid shit’. In short, Obama sought to avoid the unnecessary use of military force, but when the threat of mass atrocity emerged, despite strong protests from senior advisers, he became drawn into the 2011 Libya intervention. By contrast, following chemical weapon attacks in Syria in 2013, Obama reneged on upholding his so-called ‘red-line’, pursuing diplomatic measures even though support for a military response was strong. But what explains this variation? Rationalist perspectives across the board have tended to overrate interpretive efficiency. Yet, such assumptions obscure the capacity for interests to be interpreted in different ways. To redress this issue, I build on discursive institutionalist insights, developing a model to show how principled and cognitive ideas act as weapons in institutional debates, serving to repress or displace information. To show how agents come to rely on principled or cognitive ideas, I develop a three-part model offering two mechanisms – cognitive repression and normative displacement – by which agents displace and repress certain types of information, depending on the ‘form’ in which that information is presented. This enables a more comprehensive understanding of how different interpretations lead to policy variation at critical moments of decision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
175449
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In spite of theoretical and methodological diversity, the three generations of the strategic culture literature failed to overcome the main challenge of the approach – to account for change in behavior – due to two fallacies: Conceptualizing strategic culture as homogenous on the national level and continuous on the temporal level. However, the recent emergence of fourth generation in the literature offers prospects for overcoming them. The article presents a new, falsifiable theoretical model that pursues this aim. Thus, it begins with discussion of the promise and pitfalls of the fourth generation. Next, the alignment of strategic culture with new institutionalism is explored. This is followed by an introduction of discursive institutionalism and its potential for advancing the fourth-generation theory building. Then, a new falsifiable fourth-generation discursive-institutionalist strategic culture model is presented. The concluding section discusses the operationalization of the model via network analysis using social data science methods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|