Explaining national identity: from group attachments to collective action

This paper discusses the motivations, perceptions, and cognitions that are the foundation for group identity and stereotypes. Forming the basis for larger national identities, these attachments and categorizations are shown to be instrumental in mobilizing group members for collective action leading often to war. Drawing on literatures in social psychology, comparative politics, and international relations, an attempt is made to bridge the micro and macro levels of analysis. The research reviewed is organized into a framework that connects social-psychological processes of identity formation to inter-group conflict within and between nations. Group loyalties are connected to collective actions through the influence of public opinion, political representation, policy-making, and norms. This framework is broadened further by considering variability in a society’s political institutions, events that mark transitions in regimes or political cultures, and receptivity to appeals made by policy-making elites. The paper concludes with some implications for the resolution of conflicts between groups and nations and identifies a number of avenues for further research

Research digest

This is the fourth installment of Negotiation Journal's new section of research digests. Our purpose in publishing the digests is to disseminate some of the most recent research findings in our field. We have attempted to communicate technical research in a manner that would reach the diverse readership of Negotiation Journal. We hope that we have accomplished this goal and that you find the information useful — both in terms of keeping up with the latest findings and consulting articles of particular interest. We look forward to receiving feedback from our readers about the value of this section as well as ideas on how the digests can be improved. We also welcome suggestions for articles (from any peer-reviewed journal) on negotiation and related topics to be summarized in future issues. Feel free to drop us a line at the Journal from time to time

Turning points in multilateral trade negotiations on intellectual property

Detailed chronologies of events that transpired during the discussion of intellectual property issues (TRIPS) in the GATT Uruguay Round and prior to and during the WTO Doha Ministerial are used to trace the unfolding negotiation processes through time. Of particular interest are departures from earlier trends in the chronologies. A departure is defined as a clear and self evident change from earlier events or patterns in the form of an impactful decision taken by one or more parties. By coding the causes (precipitants) and effects (consequences) of the departures, we perform a turning points analysis. These three-part sequences reveal the triggers and impacts of departures during the extended TRIPS negotiation process. The analyses will allow a comparison of the patterns that unfolded during the two phases of TRIPS negotiations. This comparison will highlight the breakthroughs that occurred during the Uruguay Round and the crises that emerged later, prior to and during the Doha Ministerial. It will also have implications more generally for the way that comparative analyses of international negotiation are performed

Who's keeping the peace? Regionalization and contemporary peace operations

No Full Tex

Justice from an interdisciplinary perspective: the impact of the revolution in Human Sciences on Peace Research and International Relations

Peace and justice have been a preferred couple in theoretical writings - but what do we know about their empirical relationship? Insights from other disciplines suggest that humans are highly sensitive to violations of justice and that justice concerns permeate social relations. Neuroscientists have located the parts of the brain responsible for negative reactions to violation of claims for justice. Evolutionary biologists have identified rules of distribution and retribution not only in early human societies but among other socially living species as well. Psychologists have observed the emergence of a sense of justice in very early childhood, while behavioral economists have identified behavior of average persons in experiments that deviated significantly from the model of the "economic man" and could only be explained by a sense of justice. The chapter summarizes these findings and outlines their implications for peace research. It highlights the ambivalent nature of justice for social relations. Justice concerns can exacerbate conflicts between individuals and groups but justice can also provide standards for arriving at durable peaceful solutions to conflicts. Understanding these ambivalences and their repercussions for international and intrastate relations provides a promising path towards understanding conflict dynamics