'Why is there no NATO in Asia?':Revisited: Prospect theory, balance of threat, and US alliance strategies

Why did the US prefer multilateral alliances in Europe, but bilateral alliances in Asia after World War II? Rationalists and constructivists debate the impact of power, institutions, and identities in explaining this highly contested question. We introduce a new argument embedded in prospect theory from political psychology — a prospect–threat alliance model — to account for the variation in US alliance strategy toward Europe and Asia after World War II. Through setting the threat level as a reference point for leaders’ prospects of gains or losses, we suggest: (1) high threats frame decision-makers in a domain of losses, and multilateral alliances become a favorable alliance choice because states are more likely to take the risk of constraining their freedom of action in return for more help from multiple allies as well as for avoiding further strategic losses; (2) low threats position leaders in a domain of gains, and bilateral alliances win out because states are risk-averse in terms of maintaining their freedom of action in seeking security through alliances with fewer allies. US alliance policy toward Asia after World War II is a within-case analysis that tests the validity of the prospect-threat alliance model.No Full Tex

Big data for monitoring educational systems

This report considers “how advances in big data are likely to transform the context and methodology of monitoring educational systems within a long-term perspective (10-30 years) and impact the evidence based policy development in the sector”, big data are “large amounts of different types of data produced with high velocity from a high number of various types of sources.” Five independent experts were commissioned by Ecorys, responding to themes of: students' privacy, educational equity and efficiency, student tracking, assessment and skills. The experts were asked to consider the “macro perspective on governance on educational systems at all levels from primary, secondary education and tertiary – the latter covering all aspects of tertiary from further, to higher, and to VET”, prioritising primary and secondary levels of education

Uncertainty, Threat, and International Security

The rise of China is changing the strategic landscape globally and regionally. How states respond to potential threats posed by this new power arrangement will be crucial to international relations for the coming decades. This book builds on existing realist and rationalist concepts of balancing, bandwagoning, commitment problems, and asymmetric information to craft explanations about how states respond when faced with potential threats. Specifically, the book explores the role different types of uncertainty play in potential balancing situations. Particular focus is given to the nature of the rising state’s actions, the balance of forces, and the value of delay. These concepts are analysed and illustrated through a series of case studies on Europe in the 1930s as well as the present-day Southeast Asia, looking at great powers such as Britain and France, but also a wide range of smaller powers including Poland, Yugoslavia, Vietnam, and the Philippines

Rules, Standards, and the Internal Point of View

Large scale structure and cosmolog

Balancing versus bandwagoning : the strategic dilemma of Australia’s China policy

Recent research on power shift, or the change in relative power of states in an international structure, has focused on how states adapt to strategic difficulties. As a key change in international politics, scholars have long discussed how states react strategically to power shift. One school in international studies, neorealism, emphasizes the prime importance of security affairs over other strategic concerns in an anarchic international structure. It explores states’ dilemma in choosing between balancing a more powerful state or bandwagoning with it. While this approach sheds important insights on the study of international politics, the parsimony of neorealism suffers from a lot of criticisms and challenges. Among these, argument on the multi-faced nature of a state’s strategic interests has gained the strongest traction. Power shift profoundly impacts the Asia-Pacific region. The rise of China, for example, draws concerns for changing distribution of power in the region and around the globe. Others regional states, especially secondary powers, have to redefine their strategies to adapt to the changing geopolitical landscape. However, strategic choices of these states are barely studied. Australia’s reaction to the power shift, for instance, challenges the neorealists’ “balancing versus bandwagoning” model. Australia’s search for her own regional position is filtered through its threat perception. Seeing ideological differences with a rising China, Australian politicians have continuously tried to engage China to gain profit while remaining skeptical about a more assertive China. This thesis challenges the balancing literature and investigates why hedging has been the strategic response used by Australia to deal with the power shift. This research analyzes and interprets Australia’s strategic dilemma with evidence collected from the Australian government, academics, and media. This thesis affirms the neorealists’ position on the predominance of self-help principle in international politics. However, it also tries to move further to argue that security is the principle that cannot be over-emphasized. Australia simultaneously maximizes her strategic interests, which include security interests and economic interests. Principally, Australia aims at maintaining her status quo position while concurrently balancing against a rising China and bandwagoning with China economically for profit-maximization. By managing the strategic risk posed by China and not turning the China problem into China threat, Australia cautiously decides on her strategic response to prevent a riskier situation

Protecting and restoring habitat to help Australia’s threatened species adapt to climate change

Summary for policy makers Australia’s biodiversity is threatened by climate change, but we currently know little about the scale of the threat or how to deploy on ground conservation actions to protect biodiversity against the changes expected. In this project we predict the impacts of climate change for threatened species and delineate the best options for climate adaptation for all these species collectively via protecting and restoring their habitat.For 504 of Australia’s currently threatened species we predict their distributional responses to climate change, under three climate change scenarios of increasing severity: early mitigation, delayed mitigation and business-as-usual. We then simulate the optimal placement of new protected areas and where necessary, restoration of critical habitat for those species most affected by a changing climate, taking into account variation in the costs and benefits of taking action in different places.We measured the benefits of protecting and restoring habitat by considering the long-term availability and quality of habitat for threatened species as climate changes. We undertook a state-of-the-art multi-action optimisation that accounts for spatial and temporal habitat connectivity under climate change. The scale of the prioritisation analysis implemented here is unprecedented in the conservation literature, and is only possible because of recent advances in software sophistication and parallel computer processing power.We discovered that:• Fifty-nine of the 355 threatened plant species and 11 of the 149 threatened animals considered could completely lose their climatically suitable range by 2085 under the most pessimistic (business as usual) climate change scenario, while four plant species face almost certain extinction due to complete loss of suitable range even under the most optimistic mitigation scenario tested.• Climate is predicted to become unsuitable across more than half of their geographic distribution for 310 (61%) of the modelled species under the business-as-usual scenario and for 80 (16%) species under the early mitigation scenario.• For an available budget of $3 billion, protecting an additional 877,415 km2 of intact habitat, and restoring 1,190 km2 of degraded habitat immediately was identified by our analysis as the optimal set of actions to help the 504 threatened species adapt to climate change assuming early mitigation. Under a more pessimistic business-as-usual climate change scenario, 837,914 km2 of protection is required, along with 77 km2 of restoration. In all cases, appropriate threat management within the protected areas is required.• Within the$3 billion budget, optimal allocation of protection focuses on forests and woodland areas of eastern Australia, Northern Territory, the Great Western Woodlands of Western Australia, and southern South Australia. Restoration effort is required mostly in south-eastern Australia.• We tested a range of conservation budgets from $500 million to$8 billion, and found that the spatial pattern of priority does not change dramatically, and that conservation gains do not level off within that range, i.e. that each dollar invested up to at least 8 billion generates additional benefits for threatened species under climate change.Our analysis deals only with threatened species, i.e. those currently most vulnerable to threats including climate change, and while this doesn’t represent all Australian native animals and plants and how they may all be best provided for, these species have great immediate significance for national biodiversity policy.In summary, the 504 threatened species considered in this study require an increase of between 838,077 km2 and 878,590 km2 in areas protected against loss or degradation either through legislation to protect habitat, designation of protected areas, or negotiations of long-lasting voluntary conservation covenants.Please cite this report as: Maggini, R, Kujala, H, Taylor, MFJ, Lee, JR, Possingham, HP, Wintle, BA, Fuller, RA 2013 Protecting and restoring habitat to help Australia’s threatened species adapt to climate change, National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility,  Gold Coast, pp. 59.Australia’s biodiversity is threatened by climate change, but we currently know little about the scale of the threat or how to deploy on ground conservation actions to protect biodiversity against the changes expected. In this project we predict the impacts of climate change for threatened species and delineate the best options for climate adaptation for all these species collectively via protecting and restoring their habitat.For 504 of Australia’s currently threatened species we predict their distributional responses to climate change, under three climate change scenarios of increasing severity: early mitigation, delayed mitigation and business-as-usual. We then simulate the optimal placement of new protected areas and where necessary, restoration of critical habitat for those species most affected by a changing climate, taking into account variation in the costs and benefits of taking action in different places.We measured the benefits of protecting and restoring habitat by considering the long-term availability and quality of habitat for threatened species as climate changes. We undertook a state-of-the-art multi-action optimisation that accounts for spatial and temporal habitat connectivity under climate change. The scale of the prioritisation analysis implemented here is unprecedented in the conservation literature, and is only possible because of recent advances in software sophistication and parallel computer processing power.We discovered that: Fifty-nine of the 355 threatened plant species and 11 of the 149 threatened animals considered could completely lose their climatically suitable range by 2085 under the most pessimistic (business as usual) climate change scenario, while four plant species face almost certain extinction due to complete loss of suitable range even under the most optimistic mitigation scenario tested.Climate is predicted to become unsuitable across more than half of their geographic distribution for 310 (61%) of the modelled species under the business-as-usual scenario and for 80 (16%) species under the early mitigation scenario.For an available budget of 3 billion, protecting an additional 877,415 km2 of intact habitat, and restoring 1,190 km2 of degraded habitat immediately was identified by our analysis as the optimal set of actions to help the 504 threatened species adapt to climate change assuming early mitigation. Under a more pessimistic business-as-usual climate change scenario, 837,914 km2 of protection is required, along with 77 km2 of restoration. In all cases, appropriate threat management within the protected areas is required.Within the $3 billion budget, optimal allocation of protection focuses on forests and woodland areas of eastern Australia, Northern Territory, the Great Western Woodlands of Western Australia, and southern South Australia. Restoration effort is required mostly in south-eastern Australia.We tested a range of conservation budgets from$500 million to $8 billion, and found that the spatial pattern of priority does not change dramatically, and that conservation gains do not level off within that range, i.e. that each dollar invested up to at least$8 billion generates additional benefits for threatened species under climate change. Our analysis deals only with threatened species, i.e. those currently most vulnerable to threats including climate change, and while this doesn’t represent all Australian native animals and plants and how they may all be best provided for, these species have great immediate significance for national biodiversity policy.In summary, the 504 threatened species considered in this study require an increase of between 838,077 km2 and 878,590 km2 in areas protected against loss or degradation either through legislation to protect habitat, designation of protected areas, or negotiations of long-lasting voluntary conservation covenants.Please cite this report as: Maggini, R, Kujala, H, Taylor, MFJ, Lee, JR, Possingham, HP, Wintle, BA, Fuller, RA 2013 Protecting and restoring habitat to help Australia’s threatened species adapt to climate change, National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility,  Gold Coast, pp. 59.&nbsp

Investigating the Causes of War and the Conditions of Peace: Measuring Military Power and Testing Structural Realism in the South China Sea

This dissertation investigates if nations are generally driven towards war or peace; how countries’ individual predispositions towards violence can be identified; and when conflict is likeliest to occur, based on balances of power. These questions are addressed through a mixed qualitative- quantitative test of Defensive Realism, Offensive Realism, and Balance of Power and Power Transition Theory. The outcomes show States generally favour peace; assessing nations’ strategies reveals their predispositions; and that power imbalances enable conflict

Acquisition Management for System of Systems: Requirement Evolution and Acquisition Strategy Planning

Naval Postgraduate School Acquisition Research Progra