Continuity and change in Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution

Abstract

The aims and outcomes of the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela are fiercely contested. A sympathetic view sees the possibility of Left revolutionary transformation as destabilised by aggressive US and domestic opposition actions. Detractors trace an authoritarian path from President Hugo Chávez’s election in 1998 to an inevitable socialist implosion under his successor Nicolás Maduro two decades later. This article emphasises continuities between the Bolivarian Fifth Republic and the Fourth Republic that the Revolution displaced. These account for the limitations of the transformative process. Historical institutionalism explains the reproduction of rentier practices and centralised state management and political organisation, culminating in cascading crisis across regime types.     

De-canting ‘Trafficking in Human Beings’, Re-centring the State

Contemporary liberal states are eager to combat ‘human trafficking’, which state actors describe as ‘the scourge of modern slavery’ and a violation of human rights. The same states are also depriving migrants of their freedom on an unprecedented scale through immigration detention, forcibly moving them across borders through deportation, and sustaining a flourishing industry in the prevention and control of human movement. This is not a paradox. The ambition to eradicate ‘slavery’, as much as the desire to severely restrict freedom of movement, reflects a concern to preserve and extend state powers, in particular its monopoly on violence and on the control of mobility.     

Beyond contestation: conceptualizing negotiation in democracy promotion

ABSTRACT

This article presents an analytical framework that guides the contributions to this special issue and, in general terms, aims at enabling a systematic investigation of processes of negotiation in the international promotion of democracy. It first briefly introduces the rationale for studying democracy promotion negotiation, offers a definition, and locates the general approach within the academic literature, bringing together different strands of research, namely studies of negotiation in international relations as well as research on democratization and democracy promotion. The larger part of the article then discusses key concepts, analytical distinctions and theoretical propositions along the lines of the three research questions that are identified in the introduction to this special issue. More specifically, the article (1) offers a typology that facilitates a systematic empirical analysis of the issues that are discussed in democracy promotion negotiations; (2) takes initial steps towards a causal theory of democracy promotion negotiation by identifying and discussing a set of parameters that can be expected to shape such negotiations; and (3) introduces key distinctions and dimensions that help guide empirical research on the output and outcome of negotiations in democracy promotion.     

Developing and transfering technology in state S&T programs: Assessing performance

By 1996, all states had established a program focusing on the development of technology and technology-based economic development. As more agencies move to performance-based management, state S&T programs are increasingly under pressure to report outcome and output data for their programmatic activities. This paper presents findings on the extent and use of performance measurement and evaluation efforts in state science and technology programs. The 1995–96 study was based on a series of eight case studies and a mail survey of science and technology-based programs in all fifty states. The findings show that three groups of measures emerged as most important to state science and technology programs: employment-related data, leveraged or matching fund data, and anecdotal evidence. State programs are especially pressured to report short-term outcomes, yet show economic benefits. Many state program managers find value in performance data—the reseacch shows that the primary reason that many states assess their performance is the value of performance information as a management tool. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations here are those of the authors and do not represent the views of the National Science Foundation. This research was supported under NSF Grant No. SBR-9422433 from the Program of Research on Science and Technology and through the second author's NSF Independent Research Plan. The research benefited greatly from the contributions of two tireless research assistants, Arlene Allen and Michael Turton.