Crisis Bureaucracy: Homeland Security and the Political Design of Legal Mandates

Policymakers fight over bureaucratic structure because it helps shape the legal interpretations and regulatory decisions of agencies through which modern governments operate. In this article, we update positive political theories of bureaucratic structure to encompass two new issues with important implications for lawyers and political scientists: the significance of legislative responses to a crisis, and the uncertainty surrounding major bureaucratic reorganizations. The resulting perspective affords a better understanding of how agencies interpret their legal mandates and deploy their administrative discretion. We apply the theory to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Two principal questions surrounding this creation are: (1) why the President changed from opposing the creation of a new department to supporting it and (2) why his plan for such a department was far beyond the scope of any other existing proposal. We argue that the President changed his mind in part because he did not want to be on the losing side of a major legislative battle. But more significantly, the President supported the massive new department in part to further domestic policy priorities unrelated to homeland security. By moving a large set of agencies within the department and instilling them with new homeland security responsibilities without additional budgets, the president forced these agencies to move resources out of their legacy mandates. Perversely, these goals appear to have been accomplished at the expense of homeland security. Finally, we briefly discuss more general implications of our perspective: first, previous reorganizations (such as FDR's creation of a Federal Security Agency and Carter's creation of an Energy Department) also seem to reflect presidential efforts to enhance their control of administrative functions, including some not directly related to the stated purpose of the reorganization; and, second, our analysis raises questions about some of the most often-asserted justifications for judicial deference to agency legal interpretations.

Violencia sexual derivada del conflicto

Este artículo examina el notorio crecimiento de la literatura empírica en las ciencias políticas sobre la violencia sexual contra civiles en tiempos de guerra, incluyendo la violación, la esclavitud sexual y el matrimonio forzado, entre otros. Los trabajos anteriores, motivados por conflictos en curso en la antigua Yugoslavia y Ruanda, tendían a presentar estas formas de violencia como inevitables, omnipresentes y oportunistas o estratégicas. Sin embargo, la literatura reciente y las nuevas fuentes de datos han documentado variaciones sustanciales en la violencia sexual entre países, conflictos, perpetradores y víctimas y sobrevivientes. Con base en estas variaciones observadas, los académicos han desarrollado y propuesto numerosas teorías acerca de cuándo, dónde, por qué y bajo qué condiciones ocurre la violencia sexual, así como sus consecuencias. En este documento resaltamos los hallazgos principales desde la literatura, explicamos los debates más importantes entre expertos y exploramos varias posibilidades para investigaciones futuras. Para finalizar, describimos el aporte que ofrece el estudio de la violencia sexual en tiempos de guerra —tanto los hallazgos como el proceso de investigación— a un grupo más amplio de investigadores de las ciencias políticas

Talking to the Shameless?: Sexual Violence and Mediation in Intrastate Conflicts

To what extent, does sexual violence influence the likelihood of conflict management in intrastate conflicts? Despite a growing body of research that explores conflict-related sexual violence, the literature presents little insight on its effects on conflict resolution. Extending feminist international relations (IR) theory to intrastate conflicts and applying a gender lens to the power to hurt argument, I argue that when rebel sexual violence is public knowledge, the likelihood of conflict management increases because the state perceives it as a threat to its masculinity. I systematically test this argument on all intrastate conflict years from 1990 to 2009 using the Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict and the Civil War Mediation data set. The results provide robust support for the argument. This presents an important refinement of traditional rationalist conflict bargaining theories and opens new avenues for the research and practice of conflict management

The ethics of student research on political violence : A call to action for faculty and academic programs

Undergraduate and master’s students are increasingly conducting their own original human subjects research on topics related to political violence and human rights—often, but not always, in the field. This work typically involves the direct collection of data from vulnerable populations, in unstable contexts and about sensitive topics. However, despite the rich literature about research ethics, the ethics of advising, enabling and encouraging this type of student research on political violence has been largely overlooked. This article aims to (1) raise awareness about the proliferation of undergraduate and master’s students engaging in human subjects research on topics related to political violence and human rights; (2) discuss the risks inherent in this enterprise that are distinct from those that most faculty and doctoral students face, including little or no training in necessary methods or research ethics, few (if any) formal mechanisms of ethical oversight, short time horizons, clustering in over-researched areas, and the unlikely prospect of publication or dissemination of research results; (3) provide concrete suggestions about how to mitigate some of those risks, including a shift away from fieldwork-based research projects. We ultimately argue that it is educators’ and academic institutions’ responsibility to require that students engage in ethical practices, including discouraging some types of research

The ethics of student research on political violence : A call to action for faculty and academic programs

Undergraduate and master’s students are increasingly conducting their own original human subjects research on topics related to political violence and human rights—often, but not always, in the field. This work typically involves the direct collection of data from vulnerable populations, in unstable contexts and about sensitive topics. However, despite the rich literature about research ethics, the ethics of advising, enabling and encouraging this type of student research on political violence has been largely overlooked. This article aims to (1) raise awareness about the proliferation of undergraduate and master’s students engaging in human subjects research on topics related to political violence and human rights; (2) discuss the risks inherent in this enterprise that are distinct from those that most faculty and doctoral students face, including little or no training in necessary methods or research ethics, few (if any) formal mechanisms of ethical oversight, short time horizons, clustering in over-researched areas, and the unlikely prospect of publication or dissemination of research results; (3) provide concrete suggestions about how to mitigate some of those risks, including a shift away from fieldwork-based research projects. We ultimately argue that it is educators’ and academic institutions’ responsibility to require that students engage in ethical practices, including discouraging some types of research

Time for a change : the ethics of student-led human subjects research on political violence

Undergraduate and master's students frequently conduct independent human subjects research on topics related to political violence and human rights - often, but not always, in the field. This work may involve the direct collection of data from vulnerable populations, in unstable contexts and about sensitive topics. However, despite the rich literature about research ethics, the ethics of advising, enabling and encouraging this type of student research on political violence has been largely overlooked. This article aims to (1) raise awareness about the proliferation of students engaging in human subject research on topics related to political violence and human rights; (2) discuss the risks inherent in this enterprise that are distinct from those that many faculty and doctoral students face; (3) provide suggestions about how to mitigate some of those risks, including a shift away from fieldwork-based research projects. We argue that it is a collective responsibility to require that students engage in ethical practices, including more thoughtful and creative selection of research questions, sites and populations

Fatalities and Lethal Violence in Port-au-Prince (2002-2017)

Starting in 2002, Komisyon Episkopal Nasyonal Jistis ak Lapè, or The National Episcopal Commission for Justice and Peace (JILAP) collected information about lethal violence. Each JILAP report provides information about incidents of lethal violence in the Port-au-Prince metropolitan area. The violence is measured by the number of fatal casualties recorded per month. The reported deaths include homicides, as well as other causes of death (e.g., suicides, deaths due to traffic accidents, and vigilante violence). To gather this information, JILAP consults with designated observers in neighborhoods around Port-au-Prince, who meet with witnesses and/or independently investigate reported deaths. They also use newspapers to gather more information on reported deaths. The data contain information from 63 distinct quarterly reports, from 2002 through 2017, documenting 10,086 incidents