320 Politikwissenschaft
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Report (683)
- Article (254)
- Book (175)
- Working Paper (73)
- Part of a Book (70)
- Part of Periodical (70)
- Review (49)
- Doctoral Thesis (37)
- Contribution to a Periodical (30)
- Conference Proceeding (17)
Language
- German (1035)
- English (428)
- French (33)
- Portuguese (7)
- Multiple languages (2)
- mis (1)
- Polish (1)
Keywords
- Deutschland (57)
- Islamischer Staat (43)
- USA (43)
- Terrorismus (36)
- Syrien (35)
- China (29)
- IS (29)
- Russland (29)
- Ukraine (28)
- Demokratie (22)
Institute
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (930)
- Exzellenzcluster Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen (508)
- Geschichtswissenschaften (53)
- Präsidium (41)
- Hessische Stiftung für Friedens- und Konfliktforschung (HSFK) (29)
- Zentrum für Nordamerika-Forschung (ZENAF) (25)
- Extern (24)
- Rechtswissenschaft (12)
- Medizin (10)
- Philosophie (9)
Spread across a number of countries around the world, and concentrated in four Middle Eastern countries, Kurds have yearned for their own country for almost a century, but were forgotten when the region was carved up by the Sykes-Picot Agreement early in the twentieth century. Since then, the creation of a Kurdish state was high on the agenda of all Kurds. This was especially true when we consider the lot of Kurds in Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. This book examines the political situation of Kurds in these four countries, looks at how this has changed-particularly in the past decade-and considers what the future might hold for the Kurdish people and for the notion of a state of Kurdistan. It asks the question of whether a Kurdish state is achievable, or, even, desirable. The book is written for policy makers and academics interested in the Middle East region and in Kurdish politics in particular. It is written in an accessible way that makes it easy reading for anyone curious about the region and its people.
Correspondence study field experiments with political elites are a recent addition to legislative studies research, in which unsolicited emails are sent to elites to gauge their responsiveness. In this article, we discuss their ethical implications. We advance from the viewpoint that correspondence study field experiments involve trade-offs between costs and benefits that need to be carefully weighted. We elaborate this argument with two contributions in mind. First, we synthesize ethical considerations in published work to explore what the specific trade-offs are and how they can be mitigated by experimental design. We conclude that correspondence study field experiments with political elites are worth pursuing given their potential to further good governance. But they also involve distinct trade-offs that are particularly challenging. Second, we draw from our own considerations while designing a comparative correspondence study field experiment and stress challenges resulting from cross-national designs. In sum, we aim to facilitate further reasoned discussion on an important methodological issue.
In the latest contribution to the Democracy Papers, Thomas Zittel explores when and how polarization becomes a cause for democratic anxiety. He argues that polarization over traditional policy issues is not in itself harmful, and can even be beneficial for democracies. However, he warns that polarization in which parties become divided over the acceptable rules of the game is a problem for democracies. Unfortunately, this latter type of division is increasingly common on both sides of the Atlantic today.
Die fragmentierte Verrechtlichung des internationalen Raums, die Proliferation von Regelungsarrangements jenseits des Staates und die Diffusion globaler Normen sowie die daraus resultierenden Geltungs-, Kompetenz- und Autoritätskonflikte sind seit geraumer Zeit ein in der sozialwissenschaftlichen Literatur viel diskutiertes Phänomen. Überlappungen von nationalen Regierungssystemen und von im Völkerrecht verankerten klassischen internationalen Regimen existieren seit der Schaffung des Westfälischen Staatensystems.In jüngerer Zeit verstärkte sich der Pluralismus normativer Ordnungen jedoch global durch neuartige Typen von Regelungsarrangements jenseits des Staates. Auch unter den zwischenstaatlich geschaffenen internationalen Institutionen finden sich solche, die autonome Handlungs- und Entscheidungskompetenzen zugesprochen bekommen haben und diese als Akteure mit eigener Subjektivität ausüben. Hinzu kommt eine immer stärkere Aufnahme von „behind the border issues“ in den Aufgabenkatalog dieser Regime und Organisationen (Zürn 2004). Diese Entwicklungen führen zu einem neuen Grad an Kontestation und Umstrittenheit globaler normativer Ordnungen. Weder die Herstellung einer einheitlichen globalen normativen Ordnung noch eine Re-Nationalisierung des Rechts erscheinen heute als realistische Zukunftsprognosen. Umso wichtiger ist es daher, sich mit den Auswirkungen dieses Pluralismus’ normativer Ordnungen zu beschäftigen.