Justifying Human Rights: Does Consensus Matter?

This paper is a critical examination of a widely accepted method of human rights justification. The method defends the universality of human rights by appeal to diverse worldviews that converge on human rights norms. By showing that the norms can be justified from the perspective of diverse worldviews, human rights theorists suggest that there is reason to believe that human rights are universal norms that should govern the institutions of all societies. This paper argues that the evidence of plural foundations of human rights fails to increase our confidence in the universality of human rights. The paper defends the following claims: (1) the convergence on human rights is better explained as an accidental outcome than as an indicator of the universality of human rights, (2) the plurality of human rights justification is superfluous to the explanation of why human rights apply to all societies, (3) the aggregation of justifications decreases rather than increases the reliability of the universality belief, and (4) the reasonable disagreement among conflicting justifications generates an epistemic dilemma.     

The Role of Leaders in Intra-Alliance Bargaining

This article develops a theory about the role of leaders in long-term international bargaining, specifically in the context of negotiations within existing military alliances. The international relations literature suggests that domestic opposition (to cooperation on a particular issue) increases a state’s bargaining power vis-á-vis its negotiating partner. This study confirms that domestic opposition to cooperation generally increases a state’s bargaining power at the international level, but it suggests that domestic opposition to the state’s leader – which affects the leader’s vulnerability – does not have a uniform effect on the country’s bargaining power. It demonstrates the central role a state leader plays in international bargaining and explains the dynamics of alliance negotiations left unexplained in the literature. In order to examine the argument, this study uses “structured, focused comparison” of the U.S. alliances with Japan and Spain.     

Political change and turnovers: How do political principals consider organizational,individual, and performance information?

Public Choice - This study explores whether changes in political leadership affect the survival of chief executive officers (CEOs) of Korean state-owned enterprises (SOEs). On the basis of...     

When Should We Use Unit Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Longitudinal Data?

Many researchers use unit fixed effects regression models as their default methods for causal inference with longitudinal data. We show that the ability of these models to adjust for unobserved time‐invariant confounders comes at the expense of dynamic causal relationships, which are permitted under an alternative selection‐on‐observables approach. Using the nonparametric directed acyclic graph, we highlight two key causal identification assumptions of unit fixed effects models: Past treatments do not directly influence current outcome, and past outcomes do not affect current treatment. Furthermore, we introduce a new nonparametric matching framework that elucidates how various unit fixed effects models implicitly compare treated and control observations to draw causal inference. By establishing the equivalence between matching and weighted unit fixed effects estimators, this framework enables a diverse set of identification strategies to adjust for unobservables in the absence of dynamic causal relationships between treatment and outcome variables. We illustrate the proposed methodology through its application to the estimation of GATT membership effects on dyadic trade volume.     

Uneven institutional configurations and sectoral variation in China's socialist market economy: a comparative study of three pillar industries

By comparing three Chinese pillar industries, automobile, petroleum, and machinery, this paper analyzes how the development of uneven institutional configurations bred sectoral variation in transitional China. In 1994, at the dawn of the Chinese socialist market economy, the State Council issued guidelines for national industrial policy and proposed the enactment of similar growth-promoting policies for all pillar industries. The level of policy enactment and the resulting outcomes, however, vary significantly across the industries. Previous literature on China's rapid industrialization has sought to build a single model encompassing China as a whole, and has emphasized either the state's institutional capacity or China's unique governance mechanisms. This study investigates China's industrialization by taking account of the uneven development of institutional capacity amid macro institutional reforms. Every idea and institution evolved at a different pace in these reforms, and the incremental nature of the reforms further deepened the gaps between sectors. This paper argues that, due to this uneven development, the Chinese state was not strong enough to be considered a developmental state until at least the early 2000s.     

How Does Race Affect Perceptions of Police Trustworthiness?

While race is often discussed in relation to police, there is still little empirical evidence on the role of race in shaping citizens’ evaluations of government performance. Using an experimental design, this study examines how different levels of police performance affect perceptions of police trustworthiness and to which degree observed effects vary by individual race and across communities with different racial makeups. Specifically, we study the effect of different levels of performance on perceived trustworthiness in two communities—one predominantly African American and one predominantly White—and replicate across two samples: a sample consisting of primarily White participants and another consisting of only African American participants. Results indicate that the interaction between the racial composition of a community and individual race plays a critical role in shaping the effects of performance among White participants, who appeared more sensitive to community context than African American participants. Implications for research and practice are discussed.     

Mandibular ramus: an indicator for sex in fragmentary mandible

Mandible is the hardest and most durable bone of the skull exhibiting a high degree of sexual dimorphism. Especially ramus of mandible is subjected to greater stress than any other bone of the skull because of the process of mastication. This study has been performed to establish the osteometric standards for practical use in forensic context over Indian population using mandibular ramus. The sample consists of 116 mandibles of Northern Indian population (M:F; 92:24, mean age 37.4 years), collected from the Department of Forensic Medicine, IMS, BHU, Varanasi. Osteometric informations about five metric parameters (coronoid height, projective height, condylar height, and maximum breadth and minimum breadth of ramus) were taken with sliding calipers. These parameters were subjected to different discriminant function analysis using SPSS 16.0. All parameters showed significant sexual dimorphism (p < 0.001 in all cases) with an overall accuracy of 80.2%, and coronoid height was the single best parameter providing an accuracy of 74.1%.