Publics and biobanks in China and Europe: a comparative perspective

We compare public perceptions of biobanks in China and in Europe, reporting similarities and differences in how publics in Europe and China view key issues in the realm of biobank research. Despite many differences in perception, the similarity in the perception of biobanks in China and in Europe is striking. Our research finds that Chinese with lower education levels are less concerned about privacy, while those with higher education levels have preferences in privacy protection that are similar to those in Europe. Transnational research is perceived positively in both regions, but specific historical experiences shape how people approach these issues. While Chinese publics focus on certain effects of international research on the Chinese state, Europeans are mainly concerned about data security and impacts on research. The study is based on 66 focus groups conducted in China (6) and Europe (60), with approximately 700 participants.     

The Probability of Being Decisive

The probability of a voter being decisive (P_D), that is, of one vote affecting the outcome of an election, has generally been incorrectly calculated for the last twenty or more years. The method normally used is due to Banzhaf (1968) and generalised by Beck (1974). It assumes that voters know in advance how many people will vote for each candidate, which is clearly not the case. The correct formulation was given by Good and Mayer in 1975, but was ignored and has subsequently been all but forgotten since then. A simple explanation of these methods is given. Using the incorrect method, errors of magnitude of more than 10¹⁰⁰ in calculating P_D correctly can be made. The appropriateness of using a decision-theoretic formulation instead of a game-theoretic one is also discussed.     

Towards Development-Oriented Foreign Policy in Latin America: The Cases of Ecuador and Chile

Latin American nations have, in varying degrees, struggled to form a foreign policy which successfully incorporates developmental issues. Through an institutional analysis, this article identifies the institutional frameworks within which a development-oriented foreign policy (DOFP) is more prone to emerge. It is argued that DOFP has not been able to be consolidated, as foreign policy has primarily remained a tool for regime survival. This is largely because of the institutional exclusiveness and presidentialism embedded in Latin American diplomacy – making foreign policy notoriously vulnerable to regime appropriation. By conducting a comparison between Ecuadorean and Chilean foreign policy, the article sheds light on the institutional components which have allowed the latter to successfully incorporate a development agenda and the former to stumble in its efforts.