Governance for human development: the role of external partners

There is a positive correlation between democratic governance and human development. Democratic governance is governance infused with the principles of, inter alia, equity, participation, rule of law, transparency and accountability. Human development is at its very core the expansion of people's choices and their increased participation in decisions that affect their lives. Therefore democratic governance reinforces human development, and human development reinforces democratic governance. External partners—those actors outside of the national development process—can positively contribute to a country's transition to and consolidation of democratic governance (and, thereby, its human development) in a number of ways. External partners act through democratic governance entry points to deliver strategic services and use indicators to measure their relative progress. Indicators can be valuable tools in informing external partners and recipients of assistance of what works, what does not work and why. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Demythologising the petite bourgeoisie: The Italian case

The political volatility and economic instability of the petite bourgeoisie are taken for granted in most political and sociological analysis. Viewed as a pivotal force in historic and contemporary movements of the extreme right, it is widely believed to exercise a constant ‘threat’ potential, thus guaranteeing its protection throughout the post‐war period — above all in the Italian context where small economic entrepreneurs persist in substantial numbers. Using a variety of evidence, including electoral and survey materials, this article counterposes to the ‘pathological’ interpretation of the petite bourgeoisie an alternative profile, one that stresses its confidence, its stability of allegiance and its commitment to centrism.     

MI1(b) and the origins of British diplomatic cryptanalysis

The War Office's First World War cryptanalytic bureau MI1(b) has been severely overshadowed by its more glamorous equivalent in the Admiralty, ‘Room 40’. In particular its diplomatic decryption work has gone completely unnoticed; yet this was its main activity, and it contributed more than did Room 40 to their common successor, the Government Code and Cypher School (GC&CS). This article, drawing on the past decade's releases of GC&CS archives, traces the development of MI1(b)'s diplomatic work, disentangles its achievements from those of its better-known naval colleague, describes how the two organizations were merged to become GC&CS, and suggests why MI1(b)'s achievements were so quickly forgotten.