The executive toolbox:building legislative support in a multiparty presidential regime

How do presidents win legislative support under conditions of extreme multipartism?Comparative presidential research has offered two parallel answers, one relying on distributivepolitics and the other claiming that legislative success is a function of coalition formation. Wemerge these insights in an integrated approach to executive-legislative relations, also addingcontextual factors related to dynamism and bargaining conditions. We find that the twopresidential “tools” – pork and coalition goods – are substitutable resources, with porkfunctioning as a fine-tuning instrument that interacts reciprocally with legislative support. Porkexpenditures also depend upon a president’s bargaining leverage and the distribution oflegislative seats.

Resilience in Food Systems: Concepts and Measurement Options in an Expanding Research Agenda

The idea of “resilience” increasingly appears in development dialogue and discussion of food systems. While the academic concept of resilience has roots in diverse disciplines, climate change and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have led to a rapid intensification of interest in the concept as it applies to food systems. Both the broad conceptual roots and the swift increase in attention pose dangers of conceptual dilution, contradiction, and confusion as agronomists and other analysts of food systems incorporate the resilience concept into their work. In this publicly funded research, the authors present the results of an extensive search of literature and subsequent analysis. The overview examines conceptualizations of resilience more broadly, followed by a similar review within the food systems domain. The authors consider connections among related concepts under the broader umbrella of food security, such as vulnerability and risk, and discuss challenges and opportunities in the investigation of food system resilience. The review of concepts serves as a precursor to an investigation of measurement options in a rapidly expanding body of empirical research, as measurement should flow clearly from conceptualization. The analysis here presents various resilience measures at different levels and breaks down their components as they apply to food systems, identifying commonalities and divergences. The authors identify a glut of resilience conceptualizations and measurements but indicate avenues for consolidation and precision. The range of options means that researchers can likely find suitable existing subconcepts and measurements for their own work across many different types of shocks. The authors also discuss policy and practical applications, including connections to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals and food system responses to climate change and pandemics

Resilience in Food Systems: Concepts and Measurement Options in an Expanding Research Agenda

The idea of “resilience” increasingly appears in development dialogue and discussion of food systems. While the academic concept of resilience has roots in diverse disciplines, climate change and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have led to a rapid intensification of interest in the concept as it applies to food systems. Both the broad conceptual roots and the swift increase in attention pose dangers of conceptual dilution, contradiction, and confusion as agronomists and other analysts of food systems incorporate the resilience concept into their work. In this publicly funded research, the authors present the results of an extensive search of literature and subsequent analysis. The overview examines conceptualizations of resilience more broadly, followed by a similar review within the food systems domain. The authors consider connections among related concepts under the broader umbrella of food security, such as vulnerability and risk, and discuss challenges and opportunities in the investigation of food system resilience. The review of concepts serves as a precursor to an investigation of measurement options in a rapidly expanding body of empirical research, as measurement should flow clearly from conceptualization. The analysis here presents various resilience measures at different levels and breaks down their components as they apply to food systems, identifying commonalities and divergences. The authors identify a glut of resilience conceptualizations and measurements but indicate avenues for consolidation and precision. The range of options means that researchers can likely find suitable existing subconcepts and measurements for their own work across many different types of shocks. The authors also discuss policy and practical applications, including connections to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals and food system responses to climate change and pandemics

Characters matter: How narratives shape affective responses to risk communication.

INTRODUCTION:Whereas scientists depend on the language of probability to relay information about hazards, risk communication may be more effective when embedding scientific information in narratives. The persuasive power of narratives is theorized to reside, in part, in narrative transportation. PURPOSE:This study seeks to advance the science of stories in risk communication by measuring real-time affective responses as a proxy indicator for narrative transportation during science messages that present scientific information in the context of narrative. METHODS:This study employed a within-subjects design in which participants (n = 90) were exposed to eight science messages regarding flood risk. Conventional science messages using probability and certainty language represented two conditions. The remaining six conditions were narrative science messages that embedded the two conventional science messages within three story forms that manipulated the narrative mechanism of character selection. Informed by the Narrative Policy Framework, the characters portrayed in the narrative science messages were hero, victim, and victim-to-hero. Natural language processing techniques were applied to identify and rank hero and victim vocabularies from 45 resident interviews conducted in the study area; the resulting classified vocabulary was used to build each of the three story types. Affective response data were collected over 12 group sessions across three flood-prone communities in Montana. Dial response technology was used to capture continuous, second-by-second recording of participants' affective responses while listening to each of the eight science messages. Message order was randomized across sessions. ANOVA and three linear mixed-effects models were estimated to test our predictions. RESULTS:First, both probabilistic and certainty science language evoked negative affective responses with no statistical differences between them. Second, narrative science messages were associated with greater variance in affective responses than conventional science messages. Third, when characters are in action, variation in the narrative mechanism of character selection leads to significantly different affective responses. Hero and victim-to-hero characters elicit positive affective responses, while victim characters produce a slightly negative response. CONCLUSIONS:In risk communication, characters matter in audience experience of narrative transportation as measured by affective responses

Tree biomass : a state-of-the-art compilation /

no.3