Conflict Resolution through Democracy Promotion? The Role of the OSCE in Georgia

This article qualitatively and empirically analyses the OSCE's efforts to promote democracy after intra-state war in Georgia. This regional organization is rooted in a comprehensive approach to security that directly links security to democratic values. Therefore, the OSCE is a particularly appropriate subject for studying the issue of democracy promotion in the context of conflict-resolution processes. Georgia provides a difficult environment for such a goal. Given that its two secession conflicts are ‘frozen’, democracy can, especially in this context, be considered a well-suited means to indirectly contribute to conflict resolution. By contrasting the democratic development in Georgia with OSCE activities since 1992, this article will assess OSCE democracy promotion efforts. When these efforts are measured with regard to progress in peace and democratic quality, the effectiveness of external democracy promotion by the OSCE has to be called into question. However, the article argues that democratization is a long-term process in which internal factors play a decisive role. The OSCE, like other international organizations, can only reach its normative goals to the degree of the reform orientation and political will of the target state's government. The potential for impact is limited, but can be increased by commitment and context sensitivity.     

Varieties of Clientelism: Machine Politics during Elections

Although many studies of clientelism focus exclusively on vote buying, political machines often employ diverse portfolios of strategies. We provide a theoretical framework and formal model to explain how and why machines mix four clientelist strategies during elections: vote buying, turnout buying, abstention buying, and double persuasion. Machines tailor their portfolios to the political preferences and voting costs of the electorate. They also adapt their mix to at least five contextual factors: compulsory voting, ballot secrecy, political salience, machine support, and political polarization. Our analysis yields numerous insights, such as why the introduction of compulsory voting may increase vote buying, and why enhanced ballot secrecy may increase turnout buying and abstention buying. Evidence from various countries is consistent with our predictions and suggests the need for empirical studies to pay closer attention to the ways in which machines combine clientelist strategies.     

Exploring the perceived extent of and citizens' support for consumer racial profiling: Results from a national poll

Using data from a national Gallup poll, this article examines several hypotheses related to citizens' perceptions regarding the prevalence of consumer racial profiling (CRP) in the retail setting in America, as well as their support for the practice. The oversampling of Black and Hispanic respondents allowed for analyses that tested for racial differences in perceptions concerning the extent of CRP, and also for racial differences in the support for the use of CRP. The multivariate analysis found that Blacks were more likely than Hispanics and Whites to believe that CRP was widespread; there were no differences in the views of residents from urban and suburban areas; there were no differences between racial and ethnic groups regarding whether profiling was justified; and the more liberal the respondents were, the more likely they felt CRP was widespread and not justified. The authors also discuss the implications of these findings and present some future directions for CRP research.     

Déjà vu All Over Again: Investigating Temporal Continuity of Adolescent Victimization

An important theoretical issue in the study of criminal victimization focuses on state dependence or the extent to which prior victimization causally affects subsequent victimization. Framing this issue are two conceptual arguments that posit divergent predictions regarding the impact of past victimization. While “victim labeling” suggests that the experience of prior victimization increases victimization in the future, “victim rationality” suggests that past victimization decreases subsequent victimization. To date there has been little longitudinal research that explicitly evaluates these competing viewpoints. In response, the current study uses panel data from a sample of adolescents to assess the merit of these opposing theoretical frameworks. Against this theoretical backdrop, it is shown that prevailing strategies for the analysis of panel data—random-effects and fixed-effects—produce erroneous results that add confusion to the debate regarding the nature of state dependence processes in criminal victimization. Drawing from advances in econometrics, two estimators that can overcome the problems that plague more traditional panel data models are used to provide a test of the competing victimization perspectives. Results from those analyses suggest support for the thesis that past victimization increases subsequent victimization, but the magnitude of this positive relationship is more modest than is indicated by analytic models that have been utilized in prior longitudinal victimization research.