Land grabbing in Latin America and the Caribbean

Land grabbing has gained momentum in Latin America and the Caribbean during the past decade. The phenomenon has taken different forms and character as compared to processes that occur in other regions of the world, especially Africa. It puts into question some of the assumptions in the emerging literature on land grabbing, suggesting these are too food-centered/too food crisis-centered, too land-centred, too centred on new global food regime players – China, South Korea, Gulf States and India – and too centred on Africa. There are four key mechanisms through which land grabbing in Latin American and the Caribbean has been carried out: food security initiatives, energy/fuel security ventures, other climate change mitigation strategies, and recent demands for resources from newer hubs of global capital. The hallmark of land grabbing in the region is its intra-regional character: the key investors are (Trans-)Latin American companies, often in alliance with international capital and the central state. Initial evidence suggests that recent land investments have consolidated the earlier trend away from (re)distributive land policies in most countries in the region, and are likely to result in widespread reconcentration of land and capital.     

Dialogues,Trialogues and Triangles: The Geometry of Germany's Foreign Policy of Trust-Building

This article explores three formats for interstate relations developed by, or at least significantly influenced by Germany in the post-Cold War period: the Petersburg Dialogue, the German–Russian–Polish Trialogue and the Weimar Triangle. An examination of the form and function of each of these formats is followed by a discussion of what these formats have in common and why they are worthy of further study. The paper addresses whether this ‘variable geometry’ of Germany's foreign policy of trust-building is likely to survive a period of turbulent relations or changes in leadership and, furthermore, how the effectiveness of dialogues, trialogues and triangles might be evaluated.     

More than Risk? Longitudinal Changes in Friendship Support with Serious Adolescent Offenders

Journal of Youth and Adolescence - Research on the friendships of adolescents who offend has overwhelmingly focused on delinquency, despite developmental evidence that friendships are a large...     

Role call: sex,gender roles,and intimate partner violence

ABSTRACT

Intimate partner violence (IPV) continues to be viewed in gendered and heteronormative ways. Stanziani, Cox, and Coffey (2018, Adding insult to injury: Sex, sexual orientation, and juror decision-making in a case of intimate partner violence. Journal of Homosexuality, 65(10), 1325–1350) presented participants with a case of alleged IPV while manipulating the sex and sexual orientation of the aggressor/victim dyad. Results suggested participants view violence perpetrated by a man against a woman most abhorrently. The current study replicated and expanded that study, exploring how gender role beliefs influence participant decision-making. Female participants held more adverse attitudes towards IPV when a male assaulted a female. Further, participant gender role beliefs influenced decision-making. Specifically, males who endorsed higher levels of hegemonic masculinity perceived the crime to be less serious, while females who endorsed the same beliefs perceived the defendant as less likely to benefit from treatment. Overall, results suggest individual beliefs regarding gender roles and masculinity may influence their perceptions of IPV, regardless of the gender and sexual orientation of the aggressor and victim.