Ethnicity and the Politics of AIDS

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 873-877
Author(s):  
Macartan Humphreys

Evan Lieberman's Boundaries of Contagion: How Ethnic Politics Have Shaped Government Responses to Aids proceeds from a simple question of great importance to millions of people: “Why have some governments responded to AIDS more quickly and more broadly than others?” In answering this question, Lieberman employs a range of methods and engages a range of scholarly literatures dealing with health policy, comparative public policy, and ethnic politics. Because the book addresses “big” issues and bridges conventional divides in political science, we have invited a number of colleagues working broadly in comparative politics to comment on it.—Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 877-879
Author(s):  
Eduardo J. Gómez

Evan Lieberman's Boundaries of Contagion: How Ethnic Politics Have Shaped Government Responses to Aids proceeds from a simple question of great importance to millions of people: “Why have some governments responded to AIDS more quickly and more broadly than others?” In answering this question, Lieberman employs a range of methods and engages a range of scholarly literatures dealing with health policy, comparative public policy, and ethnic politics. Because the book addresses “big” issues and bridges conventional divides in political science, we have invited a number of colleagues working broadly in comparative politics to comment on it.—Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor


2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 879-881
Author(s):  
Daniel N. Posner

Evan Lieberman's Boundaries of Contagion: How Ethnic Politics Have Shaped Government Responses to Aids proceeds from a simple question of great importance to millions of people: “Why have some governments responded to AIDS more quickly and more broadly than others?” In answering this question, Lieberman employs a range of methods and engages a range of scholarly literatures dealing with health policy, comparative public policy, and ethnic politics. Because the book addresses “big” issues and bridges conventional divides in political science, we have invited a number of colleagues working broadly in comparative politics to comment on it.—Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor


1984 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Keith J. Mueller

The recent growth in policy studies curricula in political science departments affords increased opportunities for experimentation with alternative instruction modes. This article describes one innovation found to be appropriate for courses for which the instructor has access to experts in the policy being studied. In this example, community experts in health policy issues were used as resource persons to assist in discussion of specific health policy concerns. Other policy courses should be amenable to this format, including energy, environment, and economic development courses. Even without using community experts, the general format of weekly colloquiums could be replicated for other policy courses.The courses described herein is an upper division/graduate level course in American Health Policy. It is taught for one semester every other year as one of several topical courses in the public policy track within political science.


1995 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
JONAS PONTUSSON

The historical institutionalist tradition in comparative politics commonly assigns analytical primacy to political institutions. Whereas this polity-centeredness may be quite justifiable for purposes of comparative public policy, students of comparative political economy should pay systematic attention not only to economic institutions but also to a range of economic-structural variables that lie beyond the conventional confines of institutional analysis. Providing the basis for an analysis of collective actors and their interests, such an approach is needed to account for institutional change and policy realignments within stable institutions.


2013 ◽  
Vol 46 (02) ◽  
pp. 461-476

APSA is pleased to include here the names of individuals who have completed their doctoral dissertations at political science departments in the United States in 2012. The list is based on data collected in the APSA member database and includes information reported by both individuals and departments. Dissertations are listed by fields of interest as labeled by APSA, American politics, comparative politics, international relations, methodology, public administration, political philosophy and theory, public lawand courts, and public policy. (See also, table 1.)


1998 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 411-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES A. CAPORASO ◽  
ALEC STONE SWEET

In this article, the authors attempt to provide background for this special issue in honor of Harry Eckstein and his work. A brief sketch of Eckstein's personal life is offered, focusing on his formative experiences in Hitler's Germany. The article then turns to an in-depth analysis of three of Eckstein's writings: his splendid essay titled “Political Science and Public Policy”; his unrivaled overview of the field of comparative politics in “A Perspective on Comparative Politics, Past and Present”; and his attempt to redirect the discipline of political science in “Authority Patterns: A Structural Basis for Political Inquiry.” Eckstein's work holds up well, less in the sense that it has triumphed in the discipline as a whole (both Eckstein and his critics agree that it has not) and more in the sense that it serves as a constant reference point for an ongoing dialogue about questions that will never be settled.


1993 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 351-380 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon J. Bulmer

ABSTRACTThe analysis of European integration has tended to use a toolkit drawn from international relations. But since the revival of integration in the mid-1980s, the governance of the European Community and European Union has increasingly come to resemble that of a multi-tiered state. Accordingly, this article analyzes the governance of the European Union from a comparative public policy perspective. Using new or historical institutionalism, three levels are considered. In the first part, attention is focused on the EU's institutions and the available instruments of governance. The second part examines the analysis of governance at the policy-specific or sub-system level, and puts forward an approach based on governance regimes. The final part considers the institutional roots of the persistent, regulatory character of governance in the European Union.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document