Historicizing the comparative survey of freedom: tracing the social trajectory of an influential indicator

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-144
Author(s):  
Emily Zerndt
Keyword(s):  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Political Scientist ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The Social ◽  
Retrospective Account ◽  
Comparative Survey ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Freedom House

ArgumentThe Comparative Survey of Freedom, first published by Freedom House in 1973, is now the most widely used indicator of democracy by both academics and the U.S. government alike. However, literature examining the Survey’s origins is virtually nonexistent. In this article, I use archival records to challenge Freedom House’s retrospective account of the indicator’s creation. Rather than the outcome of a scientific methodology by multiple social scientists, the Survey was produced by a single political scientist, Raymond Gastil, according to his own hunches and impressions. How, then, did this indicator rise to such prominence? I argue that the Survey’s notoriety can be attributed to its early promotion in both political science and American foreign policy decision-making, as well as the fact that it fit the dominant scientific and political paradigms of the time.

scholarly journals A New Stage of Afghan Crisis and U.S. Strategy Options

2017 ◽  
pp. 17-25
Author(s):  
N. I. Shapiro
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
South Asia ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
President Obama ◽  
New Developments ◽  
Continuity And Change ◽  
Regional Dynamics ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
The U.S

This article explores the evolution of the U.S. policy towards Afghanistan between 2009-2017 with particular emphasis on major adjustments to the original plans outlined by President Obama. The article analyses the main reasons underlying contraction of foreign policy decision-making cycles during Obama’s second term. It examines regional dynamics and the new developments in Afghanistan primarily the Taliban’s dramatic gains and the Islamic State’s growing presence since the official end of the coalition’s combat mission. It also analyzes the continuity and change aspects of Donald Trump’s new strategy in Afghanistan and South Asia.

scholarly journals Union struggle and the crisis of industrial relations in Italy

2003 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valeria Pulignano
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Trade Unions ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Union Power ◽  
Social Dialogue ◽  
The Social ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
The Government

This paper argues that the Berlusconi government is seeking to replace the ‘social concertation’ arrangement between government and trade unions with ‘social dialogue’ in an effort to undermine trade union ‘power’. This endeavour by the government to impose a policy of ‘social dialogue’ would severely limit trade unions' influence in economic and social policy decision-making and leave Berlusconi free to introduce reforms favouring his friends in employer organisations. One likely outcome would be the deregulation of the Italian labour market strongly damaging workers' rights.

Deliberative Policy Analysis

2018 ◽  
pp. 583-594
Author(s):  
Frank Fischer ◽  
Piyapong Boossabong
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Practical Method ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
The Social ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
Policy Problems

Deliberative policy analysis has its origins in the argumentative turn in policy analysis. It emerged as an alternative to the use of standard empirical-analytic methods of the social sciences to solve public policy problems. Not only has the conventional neopositivist approach failed to produce the promised results, it has generally operated with a technocratic, and largely an anti-democratic, bias. Basic to deliberative policy analysis is a method for bringing together a wider spectrum of citizens, politician and experts in the pursuit of policy decisions that are both effective and democratically legitimate. This chapter begins with an outline of the theoretical perspectives underlying deliberative policy analysis. Then, the process and practice is illustrated by the case study, which shows how the approach has moved from a theory to a practical method for policy decision-making.

Which Lessons Matter?: American Foreign Policy Decision Making in the Middle East, 1979–1987. By Christopher R. Hemmer. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2000. 217p. $17.95 cloth, $55.50 paper.

2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 686-687
Author(s):  
William B. Quandt
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
World Trade Center ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
World Trade Center Attack ◽  
The Past ◽  
The World ◽  
Trade Center ◽  
Policy Decision Making

At least since Ernest May's influential (1973) ‘Lessons’ of the Past, students of American foreign policy have been conscious of the powerful hold that some analogies seem to have on the minds of decision makers. All of us can think of “Munich” and “Vietnam” as shorthand for a whole series of judgments that we rely on to work through the maze of foreign policy calculus. In the aftermath of the World Trade Center attack in September 2001, we heard reference to “Pearl Harbor.” And we can now anticipate that “9-11” will take its place as a marker for a set of lessons concerning the struggle against terrorism.

scholarly journals Resistensi Hubungan Luar Negeri Amerika Serikat dan Iran: Studi Kasus Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-175
Author(s):  
Wildan Ilmanuarif Shafar ◽  
Dian Mutmainah
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Government ◽  
Comprehensive Plan ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

Since 2015 the United States has been a signatory of the historic nuclear agreement with Iran known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which was also agreed by other P5+1 countries. JCPOA is the achievement of the U.S. and other P5+1 countries' negotiations with Iran regarding the limitation of Iran's nuclear program. JCPOA is also known to be the vital instrument to reduce Iran's capabilities regarding its aggressive behavior and malign activities, creating destabilization in the Middle East. However, in 2018 the United States government decided to withdraw its participation from the JCPOA. As we know, this decision had an impact on Iran's behavior, which several times violated the contents of the JCPOA agreement even though they did not leave the agreement. We are also witnessing the impact of this decision increase the conflict between the US and Iran in recent years. This research aims to explain the rationale of the U.S. decision to withdraw from the JCPOA nuclear agreement with Iran in 2018. This research using the foreign policy decision-making framework model by Charles W. Kegley and Gregory A. Raymond. This concept focuses on explaining factors of foreign policy decision-making in three sources of analysis and the process of foreign policy-making based on rational choice.

THE ROLE OF INTELLIGENCE SERVICES IN AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY. CASE STUDY: THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN (1979-1989)

2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-144
Author(s):  
Daniel-Mihai DUȚU
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Intelligence Services ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
Soviet Invasion

This paper aims to present the role of intelligence services in the American foreign policy using as a case study the Afghan conflict from 1979-1989. Thus, this paper underlines the actions (or inactions) of the American intelligence services, highlighting their limitations from this period. It is important to describe the context that contributed to the start of the soviet invasion in Afghanistan and the two perspectives (American and Soviet) over the conflict. In this regard, we considered necessary an analysis on the Soviet point of view regarding the conflict and, most importantly, concerning the American involvement, having in mind the purpose of objectiveness while presenting the context and events. Using the relevant documents, testimonies and statements of former CIA officials from that period, the paper underlines the way foreign policy decisions were taken by the Administrations from Washington, during the Soviet-Afghan war, and how American intelligence services influenced the foreign policy decision-making process and the evolution of the conflict.

The role of social scientists in policy decision making about pornography: A reply to Page.

1990 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 368-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Linz ◽  
Edward Donnerstein
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Policy Decision Making

‘Bending the Rules’: The Space between HQ Policy and Local Action in UN Civilian Peacekeeping

2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 293-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Felix da Costa ◽  
John Karlsrud
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Interactions ◽  
Host Country ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Institutional Policy ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
The Social ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
The Relationship

Recent literature has argued that a ‘dominant peacebuilding culture’ has precluded the contextualisation of peacebuilding to local dynamics. The article explores the ‘peacekeeping-peacebuilding nexus’ in practice, where civilian peacekeepers are increasingly considered to be early peacebuilders. Drawing on examples from United Nations (UN) civilian peacekeeping involvement in local peacebuilding in South Sudan, this article argues for a less reductionist and more nuanced view of local peacebuilding and the social interactions and dynamics which take place. It recognises the discrepancies between official UN Headquarters (HQ) policy and action in the “field”, and thus explores the relationship between policy and practice and the location of agency and authority in civilian peacekeeping. The article argues that the critique levelled against peacekeeping and peacebuilding for being focused on actors in host country capitals does not sufficiently take into consideration the relationship between capitals and the “field”. Rather, local peacebuilding outcomes depend as much or more on negotiations, bargains and compromises between different actors at the “field” level, than on institutional policy decision-making deriving from headquarters.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document