Security governance and networks: New theoretical perspectives in transatlantic security

The end of the Cold War has not only witnessed the rise of new transnational threats such as terrorism, crime, proliferation and civil war; it has also seen the growing role of non-state actors in the provision of security in Europe and North America. Two concepts in particular have been used to describe these transformations: security governance and networks. However, the differences and potential theoretical utility of these two concepts for the study of contemporary security have so far been under-examined. This article seeks to address this gap. It proposes that security governance can help to explain the transformation of Cold War security structures, whereas network analysis is particularly useful for understanding the relations and interactions between public and private actors in the making and implementation of national and international security policies

Shape of the 8B Alpha and Neutrino Spectra

The beta-delayed alpha spectrum from the decay of 8B has been measured with a setup that minimized systematic uncertainties that affected previous measurements. Consequently the deduced neutrino spectrum presents much smaller uncertainties than the previous recommendation. The 8B neutrino spectrum is found to be harder than previously recommended with about (10-20)% more neutrinos at energies between 12-14 MeV. The efficiencies of the 37Cl, 71Ga, 40Ar, and SuperKamiokande detectors are respectively, 3.6%, 1.4%, 5.7% and 1.8% larger than previously thought.Comment: 4 pages, 5 figure

Liberal intervention in the foreign policy thinking of Tony Blair and David Cameron

David Cameron was a critic of Tony Blair’s doctrine of the international community, which was used to justify war in Kosovo and more controversially in Iraq, suggesting caution in projecting military force abroad while in opposition. However, and in spite of making severe cuts to the defence budget, the Cameron-led Coalition government signed Britain up to a military intervention in Libya within a year of coming into office. What does this say about the place liberal interventionism occupies in contemporary British foreign policy? To answer this question, this article studies the nature of what we describe as the ‘bounded liberal’ tradition that has informed British foreign policy thinking since 1945, suggesting that it puts a distinctly UK national twist on conventional conservative thought about international affairs. Its components are: scepticism of grand schemes to remake the world; instinctive Atlanticism; security through collective endeavour; and anti-appeasement. We then compare and contrast the conditions for intervention set out by Tony Blair and David Cameron. We explain the similarities but crucially also the vital differences between the two leaders’ thinking on intervention, with particular reference to Cameron’s perception that Downing Street needed to loosen its control over foreign policy-making after Iraq. Our argument is that policy substance, policy style and party political dilemmas prompted Blair and Cameron to reconnect British foreign policy with its ethical roots, ingraining a bounded liberal posture to British foreign policy after the moral bankruptcy of the John Major years. This return to a patient, pragmatic and ethically informed foreign policy meant that military operations in Kosovo and Libya were undertaken in quite different circumstances, yet came to be justified by similar arguments from the two leaders

Use of concept mapping to characterize relationships among implementation strategies and assess their feasibility and importance: Results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) study

BackgroundPoor terminological consistency for core concepts in implementation science has been widely noted as an obstacle to effective meta-analyses. This inconsistency is also a barrier for those seeking guidance from the research literature when developing and planning implementation initiatives. The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) study aims to address one area of terminological inconsistency: discrete implementation strategies involving one process or action used to support a practice change. The present report is on the second stage of the ERIC project that focuses on providing initial validation of the compilation of 73 implementation strategies that were identified in the first phase.FindingsPurposive sampling was used to recruit a panel of experts in implementation science and clinical practice (N = 35). These key stakeholders used concept mapping sorting and rating activities to place the 73 implementation strategies into similar groups and to rate each strategy’s relative importance and feasibility. Multidimensional scaling analysis provided a quantitative representation of the relationships among the strategies, all but one of which were found to be conceptually distinct from the others. Hierarchical cluster analysis supported organizing the 73 strategies into 9 categories. The ratings data reflect those strategies identified as the most important and feasible.ConclusionsThis study provides initial validation of the implementation strategies within the ERIC compilation as being conceptually distinct. The categorization and strategy ratings of importance and feasibility may facilitate the search for, and selection of, strategies that are best suited for implementation efforts in a particular setting.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0295-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

How is rape a weapon of war?: feminist international relations, modes of critical explanation and the study of wartime sexual violence

Rape is a weapon of war. Establishing this now common claim has been an achievement of feminist scholarship and activism and reveals wartime sexual violence as a social act marked by gendered power. But the consensus that rape is a weapon of war obscures important, and frequently unacknowledged, differences in ways of understanding and explaining it. This article opens these differences to analysis. Drawing on recent debates regarding the philosophy of social science in IR and social theory, it interprets feminist accounts of wartime sexual violence in terms of modes of critical explanation – expansive styles of reasoning that foreground particular actors, mechanisms, reasons and stories in the formulation of research. The idea of a mode of critical explanation is expanded upon through a discussion of the role of three elements (analytical wagers, narrative scripts and normative orientations) which accomplish the theoretical work of modes. Substantive feminist accounts of wartime sexual violence are then differentiated in terms of three modes – of instrumentality, unreason and mythology – which implicitly structure different understandings of how rape might be a weapon of war. These modes shape political and ethical projects and so impact not only on questions of scholarly content but also on the ways in which we attempt to mitigate and abolish war rape. Thinking in terms of feminist modes of critical explanation consequently encourages further work in an unfolding research agenda. It clarifes the ways in which an apparently commonality of position can conceal meaningful disagreements about human action. Exposing these disagreements opens up new possibilities for the analysis of war rape

Expert recommendations for implementing change (ERIC): Protocol for a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND: Identifying feasible and effective implementation strategies that are contextually appropriate is a challenge for researchers and implementers, exacerbated by the lack of conceptual clarity surrounding terms and definitions for implementation strategies, as well as a literature that provides imperfect guidance regarding how one might select strategies for a given healthcare quality improvement effort. In this study, we will engage an Expert Panel comprising implementation scientists and mental health clinical managers to: establish consensus on a common nomenclature for implementation strategy terms, definitions and categories; and develop recommendations to enhance the match between implementation strategies selected to facilitate the use of evidence-based programs and the context of certain service settings, in this case the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) mental health services. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will use purposive sampling to recruit an Expert Panel comprising implementation science experts and VA mental health clinical managers. A novel, four-stage sequential mixed methods design will be employed. During Stage 1, the Expert Panel will participate in a modified Delphi process in which a published taxonomy of implementation strategies will be used to establish consensus on terms and definitions for implementation strategies. In Stage 2, the panelists will complete a concept mapping task, which will yield conceptually distinct categories of implementation strategies as well as ratings of the feasibility and effectiveness of each strategy. Utilizing the common nomenclature developed in Stages 1 and 2, panelists will complete an innovative menu-based choice task in Stage 3 that involves matching implementation strategies to hypothetical implementation scenarios with varying contexts. This allows for quantitative characterizations of the relative necessity of each implementation strategy for a given scenario. In Stage 4, a live web-based facilitated expert recommendation process will be employed to establish expert recommendations about which implementations strategies are essential for each phase of implementation in each scenario. DISCUSSION: Using a novel method of selecting implementation strategies for use within specific contexts, this study contributes to our understanding of implementation science and practice by sharpening conceptual distinctions among a comprehensive collection of implementation strategies

The intersection of information skills and behaviors with the steps of evidence-based practice (EBP) in local professional health programs curricula

PDF version of PPT presentation given at virtual SCC/MLA 2021 conferenc

Egypt’s 2011–2012 parliamentary elections: Voting for religious vs. secular democracy?

This study investigates whether individuals’ attitudes towards democracy and secular politics have any influence on voting behavior in Egypt. Based on data from a survey conducted immediately after the Egyptian parliamentary elections in January 2012, this study finds that Egyptians’ attitudes towards democratic governance were quite negative around the parliamentary elections, yet Egyptians still endorsed democracy as the ideal political system for their country. However, empirical findings suggest that support for democracy has a limited impact on electoral results. On the other hand, the main division in Egyptian society around the first free and fair parliamentary elections was the religious-secular cleavage. As people support secular politics more, they become significantly less likely to vote for Islamist parties. These results illustrate that preferences in regard to the type of democracy – either a liberal and secular or a religious democracy – were the main determinant of the historic 2012 elections in Egypt