Behavioral Determinants of Citizen Involvement: Evidence from Natural Resource Decentralization Policy

This article examines the robustness of citizen involvement in decentralized governance. It develops two behavioral theories of citizen involvement and examines their relative explanatory power with survey data collected from subsistence households in forest‐dependent communities in Bolivia, Kenya, Mexico, and Uganda. Counterintuitively, the analysis finds that households that have been engaged with collective action the longest are the most likely to disengage from decentralized institutions once they confront crises. This result is interpreted in light of psychological self‐licensing theory: people justify noninvolvement with decentralization precisely because of their past effort. This result implies that policies that rely on local involvement may be unsustainable insofar as they fail to address the underlying vulnerability of local users. In order to ensure that citizen involvement with decentralized governance is consistent and effective, policies need to address the structural factors that make users vulnerable to crises.     

Conflict,Cooperation, and Institutional Change on the Commons

Rational choice scholarship posits two principal theories to explain why political institutions emerge and change: cooperation theory and conflict theory. We evaluate cooperation theory and conflict theory to explain the emergence of common property institutions among a group of Maasai pastoralists in southwestern Kenya. Our empirical results show that the change to common property is best explained by conflict theory.     

The Mediator as Face-Giver

Face issues under the surface can make mediation akin to negotiating a minefield. This article proposes to help mediators map the terrain, uncovering critical face issues that can stymie the negotiation. The author demonstrates how, by using face-giving techniques to diffuse uncovered face issues, mediators can help move the parties through sensitive conflicts to sustainable resolution—with egos and relationships intact.     

Social Movements and Social-Change Litigation: Synergy in the Montgomery Bus Protest

Two competing schools of thought have emerged to explain how the Montgomery bus protest of 1955–56 brought about changes on the city's Jim Crow buses. The dominant explanation attributes the changes to the bus boycott led by Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Montgomery Improvement Association. A second interpretation emphasizes the critical role of the Supreme Court's decision striking down the state and local bus segregation laws. This essay prooides a third explanation: that these two strategies–the boycott and the litigation–interacted, each shaping and reinforcing the other. Each strategy war a critical part of the struggle, but neither brought change by itself. This essay argues that the two strategies of the Montgomery protest created a synergy that was the key to bringing about changes on the buses.