Professor Jerome Busemeyer, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences and Cognitive Science Program, and Affiliated Faculty, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Dr. Xavier Basurto, Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Dr. Abdulkader Sinno, Assistant Professor of Political Science and Middle Eastern Studies, IUB, and Dr. M. Najeeb Shafiq, Assistant Professor of Education Policy Studies, IUB
Dr. Ridish Pokharel, Reader/Associate Professor, Institute of Forestry, Tribhuvan University, Pokhara, Nepal, and Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Dr. María Claudia López Pérez, Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Dr. Newton Paulo Bueno, Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Federal University of Viçosa, Brazil, and Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Professor Charles Trzcinka, Kelley School of Business, Chairperson, Department of Finance, James and Virginia Cozad Chair IUB
Professor James Wunsch, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Director, African Studies Program, Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska
Dr. Maria Alejandra Velez, Postdoctoral Researcher, Center for Research on Environmental Decision (CRED), Columbia University, New York City
Yang, Associate Professor, School of Public Administration, and
Jianguo Chen, PhD Student in Public Administration, Renmin
University of China, Beijing, and Visiting Scholars, Workshop in
Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Professor Amos Sawyer, Research Associate, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
3-31-08: (Canceled - see below for Ostrom's presentation)
Dr. Darla Munroe, Assistant Professor, Department of Geography; Adjunct Assistant Professor, Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics, The Ohio State University, Columbus
Professor Elinor Ostrom, Co-Director, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University, and Founding Director, Center for the Study of Institutional Diversity, Arizona State University
Professor Anne M. Hallum, Department of Political Science, Stetson University, DeLand, Florida
Dr. Achim Schlüter, Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Sciences, Albert-Ludwigs-University, Freiburg, Germany
Dr. E. G. Nadeau, Cooperative Development Services, Madison, Wisconsin
Pamela Jagger, Joint PhD Candidate, School of Public and Environmental Affairs and Department of Political Science, IUB
Professor Theo Toonen, Chair, Comparative Government and Public Administration, Leiden University, The Netherlands
Monday, January 14, 2008
WHAT IS QUANTUM PROBABILITY THEORY, AND HOW CAN IT BE USED TO ANALYZE MEASUREMENTS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES?
Presented by Professor Jerome Busemeyer, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, and Affiliated Faculty, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Abstract: Social and behavioral scientists face some of the same measurement problems that forced physicists to abandon classical probability theory. Their measurements are often incompatible, and the first measurement may disturb a second measurement. Thus only partial information about a complex system can be obtained at any point in time. Combining partial information about a system into a coherent understanding of the entire system is the hallmark of quantum theory.
Quantum theory provides a fundamentally different approach to logic, reasoning, and probabilistic inference. For example, quantum logic does not always follow the distributive axiom of Boolean logic; quantum probabilities do not always obey the Kolmogorov law of total probability; quantum reasoning does not always obey the principle of monotonic reasoning. For this talk, I will present a tutorial of the basic assumptions of classic versus quantum probability theories.
These basic assumptions will be examined, side by side, in a parallel and elementary manner. Classic theory will emerge as a possibly overly restrictive case of the more general quantum theory. The fundamental implications of these contrasting assumptions for measurement in the social and behavioral sciences will be examined.
BIO: BIO: Professor Jerome Busemeyer received a PhD in Psychology in 1979 from the University of South Carolina, and subsequently he received a NIMH Post Doctoral Fellowship in the Quantitative Training Program at the University of Illinois. He was a faculty member of the Psychology Department at Purdue University for 14 years, but then he moved to Indiana University, where he has been a Full Professor in Psychology for the past 7 years. Dr. Busemeyer has served on national grant review panels including NIMH Perception and Cognition and NSF Methodology, Measurement, and Statistics, and he has been steadily funded by NSF, NIMH, and NIDA for the past 25 years. He has published over 60 articles in various Psychological and Mathematical Social Science journals, and he has served on the editorial boards for several prestigious journals including Psychological Review and currently he is the chief editor of Journal of Mathematical Psychology. During the last two years (2005-2007), Dr. Busemeyer served as the manager of the Cognition and Decision Program at the Air Force Office of Scientific Research. His main areas of research include mathematical models of decision making and learning, and perhaps his most important work so far is a dynamic model of human decision making called decision field theory.
Monday, January 28, 2008
STRENGTHENING LOCALLY-BASED BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION GOVERNANCE IN COSTA RICA: A CROSS-SCALE ANALYSIS AND THE ROLE OF NGOs
Presented by Dr. Xavier Basurto, Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Abstract: Institutional scholars have identified a number of factors that play an important role on human groups' ability to engage in successful institutional change. However it is still not clear which are the causal relationships in specific contexts. This study looks at the relationship between two of the aforementioned factors: local leadership and local autonomy in the context of the cross-scale institutional linkages formed during the decentralization of the governance of protected areas for biodiversity conservation in Costa Rica. Looking at these issues in the context of the decentralization of biodiversity governance in Costa Rica is relevant because it is the most biodiverse country per unit of area in the world, and during the last twenty years has experimented with decentralization policies to create locally-based institutions for biodiversity conservation. To conduct the analysis I used "Fuzzy-Sets Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA)," because it is an analytical approach that allows for systematic and rigorous comparisons of small-to-moderate-sized Ns and is apt at handling multiple-causality outcomes. My findings suggest that local institutions that created cross-scale linkages mostly through non-governmental organizations (NGOs)—in their attempt to gain local autonomy from the central government for local biodiversity governance—were not as successful as those that built more diverse cross-scale institutional linkages.
BIO: Xavier Basurto strives to understand how humans can avoid tragedies of the commons and devise self-governing institutions for sustainable management of common-pool resources and biodiversity conservation. Towards this end he has lived, worked, and conducted social and biological fieldwork in Canada, the U.S., Mexico, and Costa Rica. The goal of his dissertation was to understand Costa Rica's twenty-year old experiment on the decentralization of biodiversity conservation. Xavier's dissertation research addressed issues currently of interest to Workshopers such as: (1) establishing causal chains among factors that can promote self-governance, (2) addressing institutional linkages across scales, (3) applying analytical approaches that allow for multiple-causality in the outcomes, and (4) that result from looking at causal conditions in a configural rather than an additive manner. At the Workshop Xavier is working towards publishing his previous research in peer-reviewed journals and developing his research agenda further. Xavier holds a M.S. from the School of Natural Resources, an M.P.A. and a Ph.D from the School of Public Administration and Policy at the University of Arizona.
Paper in PDF
Monday, February 4, 2008
EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FOR SUICIDE ATTACKS: EVIDENCE FROM SIX MUSLIM COUNTRIES
Presented by Dr. Abdulkader Sinno, Assistant Professor of Political Science and Middle Eastern Languages and Cultures, IUB, and Dr. M. Najeeb Shafiq, Assistant Professor of Education Policy Studies, IUB
Abstract: This paper examines the correlates of support for suicide bombing among Muslim publics in six mostly Muslim countries that have experienced such attacks. We find strong evidence that the conventional wisdom that increased education reduces the probability of support for suicide attacks applies in the case of attacks on civilians, but not in the case of attacks on foreign forces and supporting civilians occupying Muslim lands. Our findings disagree with the argument made by Princeton economist Alan Krueger (2007) and show the importance of distinguishing between targets of suicide attacks. Unlike suicide attacks on foreign occupiers in Iraq, attacks against civilians raise complex moral questions and therefore draw less support from educated Muslim individuals. We also find that members of Muslim publics with higher income and who perceive Islam to be under threat are more likely to support suicide attacks on both civilians and occupation forces.
Abdulkader Sinno is an Assistant Professor of Political Science and Middle Eastern Studies at Indiana University, Bloomington. He received his PhD from UCLA and was a CISAC Postdoctoral Fellow at Stanford University. His first book, Organizations at War in Afghanistan and Beyond (Cornell University Press, 2008) develops an organizational theory to explain the evolution and outcomes of civil wars, ethnic strife and other territorial conflicts. He organized an international conference at Indiana University on Muslims in Western Politics and is the editor of a volume on the same topic (Muslims in Western Politics, Indiana University Press, expected in fall 2008). He is preparing a new book manuscript on Muslim representation in Western liberal democracies. He is a fluent speaker of Arabic and French and has knowledge of Hebrew. He has researched and traveled extensively in the Middle East, Europe and North Africa. He teaches graduate and undergraduate courses on Middle Eastern politics, Muslims in the West, conflict processes and state building, research design, and comparative politics.
M. Najeeb Shafiq is an Assistant Professor of Education Policy Studies at Indiana University. A Bangladeshi national, he received his PhD in Economics and Education from Columbia University, and MA and BA degrees in Economics from the University at Buffalo (SUNY) and the University of Western Ontario. Previously, he held appointments at Columbia University, Washington and Lee University, and the World Bank. Shafiq conducts research on the economics of education, demography, and labor in the developing world, particularly in South Asia and the Middle East.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
Monday, February 11, 2008
LOCAL DEVELOPMENT THROUGH NEPAL'S COMMUNITY FORESTRY FUNDS: WHO BENEFITS?
Presented by Dr. Ridish Pokharel, Reader/Associate Professor, Institute of Forestry, Tribhuvan University, Pokhara, Nepal, and Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Abstract: There is an increasing trend of involving local people in managing forest resources. Many countries in the world have initiated community-based forest management to manage their country’s forests. Nepal’s community-based forest management is over 25 years old in practice and well established. Good governance, livelihood promotion and sustainable forest management are second generation challenges facing the community forestry today. The communities generate income over US$10 million annually through community forestry. This paper seeks to understand to what extent community forestry contributes to local development, and attempts to answer the following questions: what are the major sources of community forest user group funds as well as their expenditures? To what extent are community forest user groups spending their income in local developments and pro-poor programs? Who actually benefits from the expenditures of pro-poor programs and CFUG funds? This paper answers these questions by using the primary data from 100 community forest user groups of three different mid-hill districts of the western development region in Nepal. A questionnaire was developed and administered to a small group of 100 community forest user groups. The study findings show that community forest user groups are generating income substantially and village infrastructures are the major source of expenditures of community forest user group funds. The second largest source of expending community forest user group funds is pro-poor programs. The study concludes that the non-poor benefit more from the CFUGs funds, as well as the pro-poor programs, so pro-poor programs are not really pro-poor. The study suggests that offering in-kind as a loan would benefit the poor more rather than cash.
BIO: Ridish K. Pokharel is a faculty member at the Institute of Forestry Tribhuvan University, Nepal. He teaches community forestry courses at graduate and undergraduate levels. He also served as Assistant Dean and Campus Chief at the Institute for five years. He received his PhD degree in 2003 from Michigan State University. His doctoral research was focused on developing a tool for measuring the success of Nepal’s community forestry program. Part of his dissertation works has been published in Human Ecology Review 14(1). This paper is based on his recent research works supported by the South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics (SANDEE).
The paper will be submitted for publication so it will not be placed on our website. Only a hard copy of this paper will be available.
Thursday, February 14, 2008 (Special Session)
COMBINING EXPERIMENTS AND PARTICIPATORY RURAL APPRAISAL TOOLS IN THE FIELD: EXPLORING NEW TECHNIQUES TO PRESERVE THE COMMONS IN COLOMBIA
Presented by Dr. María Claudia López Pérez, Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Abstract: In this presentation, I argue that by conducting economic experiments combined with qualitative methods in rural areas, it is possible not only to gather valuable information about institutional arrangements that might be effective in protecting the commons; but it is also an effective way to empower communities for the conservation of their natural resources. This presentation is the result of a series of field experiments, rural appraisal tools, surveys, and discussions conducted in rural Colombia with direct users of natural resources. In addition, interviews were held afterwards with users participating in those activities and policy makers working directly with these communities.
The first part of the presentation describes the methodologies used in the field. In detail I explain the advantages of using experimental economics in the field without losing the internal validity of the experiments conducted in the laboratory. Then, an overview of the other methodologies is provided, in particular, participatory rural appraisal tools. This qualitative analytical tool allows researchers to understand the dynamics of the community and the natural resources that they use to sustain their livelihood. The combination of methodologies allows the research team and the community members to create bridges between what happens in the economic experiment and what happens in their daily life as users of natural resources. In the second part of this presentation, I will introduce the results of a set of interviews we conducted after the experiments, not only with participants of the experiments but also with policy makers involved in designing regulations about the same natural resources involved in the experiments. During this presentation, I would like to receive feedback about the design of a survey I am planning to apply in the future with people that participated in these experiments.
BIO: Maria Claudia Lopez obtained her Ph.D. from the Department of Resources Economics at University of Massachusetts 2007. Currently she is part of the faculty at the School of Environmental and Rural Studies at the Universidad Pontificia Javeriana in Bogotá. She holds a masters degree in rural development, and a bachelor's degree in economics. Her dissertation is focused on the experimental analysis of internal and external institutions to promote cooperation among users of shared local natural resources in Colombia. For that purpose, she conducted economic experiments, surveys, and participatory workshops in rural areas with more than 450 fishermen and mollusk-harvesters, to analyze the effects of different institutions on the exploitation of common-pool resources. Maria Claudia combined experimental economics and participatory techniques to understand how the groups' interests can prevail over individual self-interest. Her main interest is to better understand the nature of human interactions as well as about factors that can increase the identity, solidarity, and cooperation among natural resource users as the first step towards community-building.
Monday, February 18, 2008
UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF ROBUSTNESS IN SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS: DEFINITIONS AND EVALUATION
Presented by Dr. Newton Paulo Bueno, Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Federal University of Viçosa, Brazil, and Visiting Scholar, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to propose a procedure to evaluate social-ecological systems’ robustness based on a robustness definition that answers to three basic questions: (1) what is the relevant system to be studied?, (2) what are the desired system characteristics to be preserved?, and (3) when does the collapse of one part of a social-ecological system imply that the entire system loses its robustness? The proposed (tentative) definition is the following: a social-ecological system is robust if it is capable of supporting the current trend of population growth at the current levels of per capita use of the natural resources without it is necessary to change its basic rules in use. The system’s robustness degree at a particular time is given by the theoretical distance from actual conditions to its instability tipping point. A tipping point is a threshold condition that, when crossed, shifts the dominance of feedback loops that control the process. Social-ecological systems tend to remain stable as long as the conditions remain below the tipping point. But when conditions cross that point its behavior can become temporally unstable and system's robustness be disrupted. The proposed heuristic procedure to evaluate the robustness of local level SES is to compute the human ecological footprint of the system and to compare it with basic indicators, such as the arable land availability. It will be suggested that, by using this procedure, it is possible to identify if the system is below of its overshoot tipping point. This is an important signal because it indicates the existence of windows of opportunity in which perhaps it is still possible to reverse paths toward collapse in social-ecological systems.
BIO: Newton P. Bueno is an Associate Professor at the Department of Economics, Federal University of Viçosa/Brazil, in the areas of Macroeconomics and Institutional Economics. He received his Doctorate from the State University of Campinas – UNICAMP/Brazil - in 1996 and has been working mainly in the field of Institutional Economics applying the system dynamics methodology. Presently, he is spending a sabbatical year as visiting scholar at Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis at Indiana University sponsored by The Coordination Agency for Improvement of Teaching Personnel (CAPES) of the Brazilian Government.
Paper in PDF
Monday, February 25, 2008
FINANCIAL GLOBALIZATION AND RISK SHARING: WELFARE EFFECTS AND THE OPTIMALITY OF OPEN MARKETS
Presented by Professor Charles Trzcinka, Kelley School of Business, Chairperson, Department of Finance, James and Virginia Cozad Chair, IUB (coauthor: Andrey Ukhov, Assistant Professor of Finance, Kelley School of Business, IUB)
Abstract: To study the welfare effects of investment barriers and the opening of markets to foreigners, we construct an equilibrium model of international asset pricing without agency costs that allows endogenous market participation among heterogeneous agents. Equilibrium prices and the set of participating and non-participating agents are jointly determined in equilibrium and the ability of agents to choose to participate in the market affects prices of domestic and foreign assets. We examine the welfare effects of non-participation and find that when a country moves from complete segmentation to open markets for foreigners, the cost of capital falls in the domestic market. This is consistent with empirical findings in the international asset pricing literature. Through the endogenous participation mechanism, our model is able to capture sources of economic growth. Contrary to previous models, however, we show that opening markets is not Pareto-optimal and we identify a class of domestic agents whose welfare is lower after the opening of markets. These finding have political economy interpretations and policy implications.
BIO: Charles Trzcinka, Ph.D, holds the James and Virginia Cozad Chair of Finance at Indiana University's Kelly School of Business. Dr. Trzcinka is regarded as an expert on financial markets and investments. In addition to publishing numerous scholarly articles, he is frequently quoted on matters pertaining to individual investors. His monographs and articles dealing with mutual funds and institutional money management have received widespread attention in the national press (New York Times, MONEY Magazine, USA Today, Business Week, Forbes) and in 1998 he testified in Congress onmutual fund competition. He is the author of the 2003 Forbes Stock Market Course, a well known guide for individual investors.
Dr. Trzcinka received a Ph.D. in financial economics from Purdue University in 1980. His academic and professional assignments, among other things, have included: professorships at SUNY Buffalo for nearly twenty years and New York University; Director of the U.S. Commerce Department's MBA program in the People's Republic of China; and, Senior Economist with the Office of Economic Analysis of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. He has been a consultant to a variety of investment organizations, including the Virginia Retirement System, Richards & Tierney, Zephr Associates and the New York State Attorney General's Office. He also has published extensively in well respected financial academic journals such as the Journal of Finance and Journal of Financial Economics. Dr. Trzcinka is a member of the American Economics Association, American Finance Association and the Institute for Chartered Financial Analysts.
Paper in PDF
Monday, March 3, 2008
IN THE SHADOW OF "LAME LEVIATHANS": COLLECTIVE ACTION AND LOCAL GOVERNANCE IN AFRICA
Presented by Professor James Wunsch, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Director, African Studies Program, Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska
Abstract: One way of understanding the consistent underperformance of Africa's formal local governments is by assessing their relative disadvantages in resolving recurring problems of collective choice, collective action, and principal-agency. In contrast to the general weakness of formal local governments, many informal governance initiatives have developed in Africa, and been quite active in performing what are usually the functions of formal local governments. These include delivering social services, providing policing, and engaging in economic development/income enhancing activities. Can their relatively superior performance be understood by analyzing their ability to resolve those same collective choice, collective action, and principal agency issues that seem to hamper formal local governments? To what extent does their relative ability to engage in constitutional choice come into play as well? If they have performed better on these criteria, how have they done so?
Dr Wunsch is working on a larger manuscript exploring these issues, drawing from case studies of informal local governance initiatives in Africa. The paper that will be available for the colloquium will be a draft portion of that manuscript.
BIO: Jim Wunsch is professor of political science and international relations at Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska, where he has been a member of the faculty since 1973. He is also director of the inter-disciplinary program in African Studies at Creighton. He received his PhD from Indiana in 1974. He was a Fulbright Fellow in Ghana in 1971-72, where he did his dissertation research on voluntary associations, and served two years as a project design and evaluation officer for USAID, where he worked on issues of decentralization and local governance. He has done field work in Africa since then in Nigeria, Uganda, Ghana, Zambia, South Africa, Botswana, and other countries, on these same issues. He has also done field research in Thailand, Bangladesh, and the Philippines. He spent 1985-86 in residence at the Workshop (where he and Dele Olowu wrote The Failure of the Centralized State), and in 2004 he and Dele Olowu published Local Governance in Africa: The Challenges of Democratic Decentralization. He has also published on issues of project design and implementation.
Background papers in PDF
Thursday, March 6, 2008 (Special Session)
COLLECTIVE TITLING AND THE PROCESS OF INSTITUTION BUILDING: COMMON PROPERTY REGIME IN THE COLOMBIAN PACIFIC
Presented by Dr. Maria Alejandra Velez, Postdoctoral Researcher, Center for Research on Environmental Decision (CRED), Columbia University, New York City
Abstract: Over the last decade, the Colombian Government has assigned collective land titles, more than 5 million hectares, to Afro–Colombian communities in the Pacific Coast. These legal rights do not guarantee the sustainable use of the resources unless appropriation and management rules effectively regulate internal users. This research is aimed, at an empirical examination of the institutional and managerial developments that have occurred in the land-titling communities in Colombia’s Pacific coast. We survey community leaders and government environmental authorities to understand whether these communities have succeeded in designing and implementing rules and procedures to manage the collective land after the change of the property right regime (Ley 70). This paper illustrates how collective titling has changed the region’s political landscape and the local environmental governance. The results show that while new, formal property rights created the incentive to guard against the encroachment by external intruders, the building of the institutions intended to manage the territory and its natural resources has been slower than expected. I discuss the factors that might have delayed this process and the different types of property rights (formal and informal) within the new common property regime.
BIO: Dr. Velez obtained her doctoral degree on Resource Economics from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Her dissertation applies in the field tools provided by experimental economics to analyze and characterize individual behavior. She developed and conducted common pool resource experiments to study shared local natural resources in rural villages of Colombia. Currently she is a Postdoctoral Researcher at Columbia University studying collective land titling in the Colombian Pacific Coast and decision making under uncertainty, with a focus on water management in Ceara, Brazil. The paper she is presenting is based on her recent field work to investigate the impact of collective titling on the management of natural resources in afro-descendent communities. This work was carried out with the aid of a grant from the Latin American and Caribbean Environmental Economic Program (LACEEP).
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
Monday, March 17, 2008
SEEKING GOOD GOVERNANCE IN A GRAND-SCALE STATE: INSTITUTIONAL EVOLUTION OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS IN CHINA
Presented by Dr. Hongshan Yang, Associate Professor, School of Public Administration, and Jianguo Chen, PhD Student in Public Administration, Renmin University of China, Beijing, and Visiting Scholars, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Abstract: A proper institutional arrangement of intergovernmental relations (IGR) is critical to good governance in a grand-scale state. Since the foundation of the New China in 1949, the overall centralization of IGR was established by the Communist Party of China (CPC). The system was of great benefit to the consolidation of new regime but was a disadvantage for good governance and performance. After 30 years of suffering from overall centralization, the ruling party and the central government began to reform IGR and brought decentralization into effect gradually since the 1980s. Along with the economic reform and opening-up to the outside world, local governments at all levels were granted more and more powers in economic development and public services delivery. The decentralized policy led to significant improvement in economic development. However, because of the lack of constitutional reform and effective democratic participation, the administrative decentralization led to serious problems in actual governance. This presentation focuses on the institutional evolution of IGR in China from a historical perspective.
The following questions are addressed: (1) Why is China the only grand-scale state that exercises a unitary system? (2) What led to decentralization since the 1980s? (3) What advances and problems accompany this decentralization? Answers to these questions suggest that China is in the process of institutional evolution from overall centralization to selective centralization, which appears to be an efficient approach towards good governance in a developing, grand scale country. Along with the institutional evolution of IGR, public governance in China is changing from monocentric arrangements to polycentric arrangements to some degree.
Hongshan Yang is an associate professor of Public Administration studies at Renmin University of China, Beijing. He received his Ph.D. in Political Science, and MA and BA degrees in Public Administration from Peking University. His dissertation was focused on economic globalization and political development in developing countries and parts of the works have been published in several Chinese Journals, including World Economy and Politics 12(3). Since 2002, he focuses mainly on administrative reform and urban governance in changing China. He is the author of Municipal management (2005), The Study of Intergovernmental Relations (2005), and Political Relationships in Contemporary China (2002).
Jianguo Chen is a PHD student at the School of Public Administration, Renmin University of China, Beijing. He received his MA degree in Public Administration from Renmin University of China in 2005 and BA degree in Information Management and Information System from Zhengzhou University in 2003. He is interested in the relationship between property rights transition and the development of grassroots democracy in urban China.
There will not be a formal paper for this session.
Monday, March 24, 2008
GOVERNANCE REFORM IN LIBERIA: CHALLENGES OF DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
Presented by Professor Amos Sawyer, Research Associate, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, IUB
Abstract: Amos Sawyer will provide an update of ongoing governance reform activities in Liberia. His PowerPoint presentation will focus on some of the issues and challenges that are being addressed in public sector reform, decentralization, security sector reform, and in other areas of governance reform in Liberia. Although the presentation will focus on Liberia, many of the challenges that will be discussed are common to post-conflict reconstruction initiatives elsewhere. After 14 years of violent conflicts and governance breakdown, governance reform was begun in Liberia following the signing of a peace agreement in 2003. In 2006, Sawyer was appointed chair of the Governance Reform Commission (now Governance Commission) by the President of the newly elected government of Liberia. The Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis is supporting Sawyer's work with Liberia's Governance Commission.
BIO: Professor Amos Sawyer is a Research Scholar at the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University, Bloomington. Among his activities at the Workshop is his role as coordinator of the Consortium for Self-Governance in Africa (CSGA), an association of research and teaching centers and research-action organizations in Africa and the United States dedicated to the study of Africa’s governance challenges and promotion of self-governing institutions. 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.
Monday, March 31, 2008 [Darla Munroe's presentation has been CANCELED; Elinor Ostrom will give the presentation, see below for details]
[NEW] SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMON-POOL RESOURCES
Presented by Professor Elinor Ostrom, Co-Director, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University, and Founding Director, Center for the Study of Institutional Diversity, Arizona State University
The paper that Professor Ostrom is presenting is still being revised.
Paper in PDF
Monday, April 7, 2008 (Special Session, Series on Sustainability)
FINDING COMMON GROUND: DESIGNING INSTITUTIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION IN CENTRAL AMERICA
Presented by Professor Anne M. Hallum, Department of Political Science, Stetson University, DeLand, Florida
Abstract: For almost thirty years, political scientist Elinor Ostrom and her colleagues have been “finding common ground” among thousands of case studies from around the world of “common-pool resources” (CPRs). Ostrom’s invaluable work in building an explanatory theory is applied in this article to an NGO working in Guatemala and Nicaragua in sustainable agriculture. This application demonstrates that, by working with local communities respectfully and over the long-term, outside NGOs can enhance local CPR systems. Recent scholarly criticism of big international NGOs (BINGOs) is also reviewed to illustrate the dilemmas of forming effective partnerships with local communities.
BIO: Anne Motley Hallum is a Professor of Political Science at Stetson University in Florida, where she teaches American government courses, with an emphasis on Environmental Politics. She is also an activist, as the Chair of the Board of Directors for fifteen years of The Alliance for International Reforestation (AIR), an award-winning NGO which works in over 70 villages in Central America. Professor Hallum has the unusual vantage point of being a political scientist as well as the chief administrator of an environmental NGO, and she is readily able to test political science theories and arguments in the field. She is the author of a dozen articles and chapters on the environment, religion and politics in Latin America, and a book, Beyond Missionaries: Toward an Understanding of the Protestant Movement in Central America (Rowman & Littlefield). Professor Hallum is currently working on a book analyzing the dilemmas of evaluating effective and ineffective NGOs.
Paper in PDF
Thursday, April 10, 2008 (Special Session)
THE GRAMMAR OF INSTITUTIONS: THE CHALLENGE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN NORMS AND RULES
Presented by Dr. Achim Schlüter, Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Sciences, Albert-Ludwigs-University, Freiburg, Germany (coauthor: Insa Theesfeld, Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO), Halle, Germany)
Abstract: This paper discusses the grammar of institutions developed by Sue Crawford and Elinor Ostrom and tries to show avenues where the grammar could be extended. One of the ambiguities in the grammar is the clear distinction between norms and rules. The paper compares the distinction made by Crawford and Ostrom with other distinctions made between norms and rules. Apart from minor additional criteria the distinction between rules and norms in the grammar is the or else statement. We argue that on the one hand, apart from routine based behaviour we can always assume an or else characterising institutional statements and, on the other hand, we are often not aware of the possible consequences of disobeying a rule and act due to internal and external emotional factors. Therefore, the distinction between norms and rules becomes difficult. We propose to draw a line between rules and norms based on the continuous seriousness of sanctionability of the or else, we distinguish between automated, internal and external emotional and more tangible fine sanctions. It is argued that internal and external emotional factors, the delta parameters in the language of the grammar, are the ones on which we should focus if we want to understand the reasons people follow or disobey an institutional statement.
Achim Schlueter is Assistant Professor at the
Paper in PDF
Monday, April 14, 2008 (Special Session, Series on Sustainability)
THE NEXT TWO MILLION ACRES: A COMMUNITY-BASED STRATEGY FOR INCREASING FAMILY FOREST MANAGEMENT IN WISCONSIN
Presented by Dr. E. G. Nadeau, Cooperative Development Services, Madison, Wisconsin (coauthor: Paul Pingrey, DNR Forest Certification Coordinator)
Executive Summary: This report has two primary purposes: To review and evaluate activities carried out under the Wisconsin Healthy Forest Program (WHFP) from September 2005 through September 2007; and to make recommendations for increasing management of private forest land in Wisconsin. The recommendations are derived from the WHFP pilot program and from other recent developments related to private forest management in the state.
Wisconsin already has one of the highest rates of private forest management in the United States, thanks in large part to the effectiveness of the Wisconsin Managed Forest Law. But there is plenty of room to improve the environmental, social and economic benefits of sustainable forest management on family forest land. This report proposes several public and private initiatives that together could add two million acres of sustainably managed private forest land in Wisconsin by 2020.
BIO: E.G. Nadeau, Research and Development Consultant, Cooperative Development Services, Madison, WI. (608) 258-4393. Nadeau has over 30 years of experience in cooperative and community development as a researcher, planner, developer and educator. During the past ten years he has worked on various projects to promote sustainable forest management practices by private woodland owners. He is the lead author and editor of BALANCING ECOLOGY AND ECONOMICS: A Start-up Guide for Forest Owner Cooperation and of Taking Care of Family Forests in Minnesota, a report on family forest management based on 24 case studies. He served on the Woody Biomass Task Force of the Wisconsin Council on Forestry in 2005-2007. He is a member of the coordinating committee for the Wisconsin Healthy Forest Program. Nadeau has a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Draft Discussion Paper in PDF
PowerPoint in PDF
Monday, April 21, 2008
LIVELIHOOD AND SUSTAINABILITY OUTCOMES AFTER UGANDA’S FOREST SECTOR GOVERNANCE REFORM
Presented by Pamela Jagger, Joint PhD Candidate, School of Public and Environmental Affairs and Department of Political Science, IUB
There are few cases where both favorable livelihood and sustainable forest management outcomes have been achieved. On private forest land overseen by the decentralized District Forestry Service there has been no significant change in average annual household income from forests, the share of total income from forests has declined, and forest cover and quality have significantly declined. In Budongo Central Forest Reserve overseen by the parastatal National Forestry Authority, there have been significant gains in average annual household income from forests, as well as the share of total income from forests. However, increases in income are limited to households in the highest income quartile and are primarily attributed to the sale of illegally harvested timber. Forest cover in Budongo Central Forest Reserve has only slightly decreased, but reduced tree diversity, water quality and presence of large trees indicates diminishing forest quality. The findings from this study challenge the view that governance reforms will result in favorable livelihood and sustainable forest management outcomes. Policy makers should carefully consider the incentives facing both forestry officials and local resource users with particular attention to increasing awareness of the value of trees and forests, and facilitating opportunities for a rural smallholders’ across all income categories to sustainably engage in the forest product harvesting and value addition.
BIO: Pam Jagger is a doctoral candidate in Public Policy and an affiliate of the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis at Indiana University. She is presently engaged in several collaborative projects focused on understanding the livelihood and sustainability outcomes and trade-offs associated with various agriculture and natural resource management policy reforms. Prior to studying at IU she worked with the International Food Policy Research Institute, Resources for the Future, and the World Bank. She has conducted extensive field research and policy analysis related to sustainable forest and land management in Uganda, Ethiopia, Kenya and Zimbabwe.
Paper in PDF
Thursday, May 1, 2008
ADAPTING TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN A METROPOLIS BELOW SEA LEVEL: WATER GOVERNANCE IN THE NETHERLANDS
Presented by Professor Theo Toonen, Chair, Comparative Government and Public Administration, Leiden University, The Netherlands
Background Paper in PDF
Back to index
Back to the Workshop Homepage
Copyright 2008, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis