Arguing about ASEAN: what do we disagree about?

This article argues that ASEAN has been, will remain, an essentially contested institution. No one has claimed, or could claim, that ASEAN is a flawless organization, but at the same time, the characterization of ASEAN as a dysfunctional entity or a talk shop is misplaced. The reality lies in taking the middle ground as the articles in this special issue show. Research and debate on ASEAN should be based on comparing its record with other regional associations in the developing world and using some agreed criteria about what success or failure means. And disagreements about ASEAN's role should be welcomed as part of a healthy debate.     

Beyond development,what?

The authors begin to outline the epic now unfolding at the grassroots, arguing that pioneering social movements are groping for their liberation from the 'Global Project' being imposed upon them. Going beyond the premises and promises of modernity, people at the grassroots are re-inventing or creating afresh new intellectual and institutional frameworks. As is clear from the recent rebellion in southern Mexico, ordinary men and women are learning from each other how to challenge the very nature and foundations of modern power, both its intellectual underpinnings and its apparatus. Explicitly liberating themselves from the dominant ideologies, fully immersed in their local struggles, these movements and initiatives reveal the diverse content and scope of grassroots endeavours.     

Veterinary services in the Horn of Africa: where are we now?

Pastoralists are marginalised in the Horn of Africa and receive inadequate veterinary services. Under economic structural adjustment programmes, public veterinary services became increasingly ineffective and, in response, community-based NGO programmes were established in some pastoral areas. While these programmes were often considered to be effective, with few exceptions they were small in scale, isolated from central government, and based on subsidised systems of drug distribution. Consequently, their sustainability was questionable. Governments now have incentives to improve veterinary services to pastoralists because of new possibilities for increasing livestock exports alongside new concerns about protecting consumers from livestock-related diseases. Current policy and institutional reform is encouraging a greater role for the private sector in service delivery but this is developing slowly, particularly in pastoral areas where future provision is likely to involve public–private partnerships.     

Who are those people we call farmers? Rural Kenyan aspirations and realities

Rural Kenyan households have different aspirations and income portfolio strategies, including agricultural intensification and income diversification. This article reports on a study that interviewed 624 households to explore rural aspirations and derive lessons for agricultural technology development and transfer. Though few households specialised in farming, many households self-identified as farmers and aspired to increase their agricultural income. Despite the prevalence of agricultural aspirations, few aspired for their children to have a future in farming. Combining aspirations with potential to invest, the article provides suggestions for targeting agricultural interventions. We need to start listening better to those people we call “farmers” to develop and offer innovations that meet their realities.     

What are levels of analysis and what do they contribute to international relations theory?

The objective of this article is to clarify the significance and usefulness of levels of analysis, a central IR concept, but one often used unproblematically. I argue that a level of analysis should be defined as a social structure that is examined for its effects on another social structure, or on the same social structure. Therefore, levels of analysis are also relational, meaning that one is defined, in part, in terms of its associated unit of analysis. Because this definition conceptualizes levels of analysis as methodological tools rather than ontological postulates, it is consistent with a wide range of positions on the agent-structure debate. More specifically, I show that the methodological issue of which levels of analysis a researcher employs is separate from the ontological issue of whether the theoretical lens is atomistic (reductionist) or holistic at any given level. One implication of this definition is that researchers need not view their ontological commitments as overly methodologically constraining. This article also addresses some questions raised by this conceptualization, among them the possibility of multiple social structures existing at a single level.     

German policy in a strategic triangle: Berlin,Paris, Washington … and what about London?

The article presents the German view on the current stand and future perspectives of the transatlantic relationship. It points to the caesuras that have defined the US–German relationship since the end of the Cold War. It also details the German role in both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars following the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and highlights the German discussion on its involvement in those wars. The historical strategic triangle of the US, Germany and France might develop into a Euro‐American ellipse to confront current global challenges, but, as of today, many hurdles remain, particularly the lack of a common vision and policy regarding the future political order of Europe. The article finally calls on the German government to continue its policy as a ‘civilian power’ and to repair its relations with the US after the Iraq war. International cooperation in multilateral institutions remains the main pillar of German foreign policy.     

Wiki and the Agora: ‘It's organising,Jim, but not as we know it’

This article argues that those keen to characterise and harness the empowering potential of Information and Communications Technology [ICT] for development projects must understand that the very existence of this technology opens up alternative models of co-operation and collaboration. These models themselves necessitate breaking away from ‘traditional’ command-and-control models of management. One alternative is to persuade participants, or potential participants, to co-ordinate their efforts along the lines exemplified by the open-source software movement and the contributors to Wikipedia: models of co-ordination that ought not to work but appear to do so. The article offers a summary of this argument, and then suggests ways in which NGOs in particular might try to incorporate these insights into their strategies. This is particularly critical for organisations that rely on increasingly pressurised funding opportunities, and which also seek to develop and engender participation and determination from within and among specific target groupings.     

Can we identify a benevolent hegemon?

Analysts frequently assess the underlying character of the state with the largest concentration of material capabilities in the system—the hegemon. Scholars typically differentiate a hegemon that is benevolent from one that is predatory. In the current era, many have wondered about how to best characterise the United States. Scholars became particularly interested in this question during the George W Bush administration and reached strikingly different answers. This article aims to provide greater clarity regarding how we reach a judgment about the underlying character of a hegemon, in general, and the United States, in particular. The first section analyses the policies that the hegemon adopts towards the global economic system. The second section considers the hegemon's policies in the security realm, focusing on the key issue of how unilateralism should be conceptualised. The final section discusses the potential significance the ‘hegemonic reference point’—that is, the comparison that is made between the hegemon and the leading alternative leader of the global system.     

Development in motion: what to think about migration?

Recent interest in migrant remittances as a development resource calls attention to a deeper issue: the relationship between migration and development. Remittances may be a significant source of economic inflows to poor countries and regions, but their actual development impact (positive or negative) is tied to the migration processes that generate them. Attention to migration in turn creates an opportunity to think about the broader context of development policy and practice, and to re-think the boundaries that we put around our work.     

Rights-based approaches to development: what is the value-added?

Advocates and activists for human rights are currently facing a paradox: the coexistence of profound challenges in familiar territory (civil liberties) alongside expansion into new areas. Rights-based approaches (RBAs) are a part of this latter expansionary stream. This article argues that four kinds of potential value-added can be claimed. First, value-added can be sought through direct, indirect, and strategic uses of the law. Second, value can also be added by re-centring the state and (re)asking the question about its appropriate role in development (delivery, oversight), and strategising engagement with the state. Third, in relation to accountability, RBAs add value by calling the state to account; building capacities of rights holders and duty bearers; and encouraging a new kind of ownership of human rights among NGOs. Fourth, the article explores claims that RBAs re-politicise development, redefining it as rights-based rather than based on benevolence; reclaiming or re-politicising the key (process) terms of development; addressing the root, structural causes of poverty and conflict, rather than the symptoms; and speaking truth to power. Not all of these contributions are unique to RBAs, however, and on all counts it remains to be seen if RBAs will deliver on their promise.     

In error we trust: an apology of abductive inference

The recent surge of pragmatist scholarship in International Relations emphasizes the need for a shift towards a more practical social science. Abductive reasoning is supposed to serve as one of the tools of such reorientation. This article pays closer attention to this form of inference and shows that it represents our deep trust in the role of error within a scientific enquiry. Although abduction stands for a converse error of affirming the consequent, it also enables us to generate new explanations of many complex problems. Instead of attempting to apply abduction to International Relations as a discipline, we simply show that this inferential practice is already being implemented to a large extent thanks to the agent-based modelling that frequently follows pragmatist tenets. In fact this function of suggesting plausible explanations for further examination in the following stages of scientific enquiry may be easily seen as one of the crucial purposes of this kind of modelling. Three examples illustrate this claim.     

China’s rise: what about a transatlantic dialog?

Asia Europe Journal - This essay examines and evaluates China’s global rise and the state of the transatlantic discussions about this issue. Since 2010, the rise of China has been accompanied...     

Low Power,First Offers,and Reservation Prices: Weak Negotiators are Self-anchored by Their Own Alternatives

Although most scholars recommend making the first offer in negotiations, recent research and practitioners' experience have uncovered a second-mover advantage in certain situations. In the current article, we explore this first- versus second-mover dynamic by investigating the circumstances under which negotiators would make less favorable first offers than they would receive were they to move second, focusing on the effects of negotiation power in the form of alternatives. Additionally, we examine the effects of low power on reservation prices and whether these effects could be mitigated using an anchor-debiasing technique. In Study 1, we manipulated negotiators' power in the form of the best alternative to the negotiated agreement and examined its effect on first offers and reservation prices. Our results showed that low-power negotiators would receive more favorable first offers than they would have made themselves when facing either low- or medium-power counterparts. Also, our results suggest that low-power negotiators had less favorable reservation prices than their medium- and high- power counterparts. In Study 2, we investigated whether this effect would persist in the face of anchor-debiasing techniques. Our results showed that while anchor-debiasing techniques did improve their first offers, low-power negotiators would still benefit from making the counteroffer rather than moving first. Our findings uncover the disadvantageous effects of low power on first-offer magnitude while offering practical advice to negotiators.