Israeli Leadership and Public Attitudes Toward Federal Solutions for the Arab-Israeli Conflict Before and After Desert Storm

This first empirical investigation of support for federativesolutions to the Arab-Israeli conflict among the Jewish politicalleadership and general public of Israel suggests that, despitethe Palestinian Intifada and the Gulf War, there is a potentialbasis within Israel for federal approaches to intercommunaland interstate conflict resolution. Both leaders and the publicare dissatisfied with the status quo. Political leaders aremore supportive than the public of federative arrangements,while the public is somewhat more supportive of an autonomyarrangement for the Palestinians than it was before the Gulfcrisis. While the Intifada appears to have produced a slightlymore dovish trend among leaders and among voters, the Gulf Warappears not to have produced any basic changes in the viewsof political leaders or general citizens.     

The utility of the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory with offenders

Self-report instruments can provide useful information as part of a thorough clinical assessment. However, their use in forensic settings can be problematic. The State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI) has recently been proposed as an effective instrument for screening and outcome measurement in anger management programs. This study evaluated the effectiveness of this instrument in a sample of both voluntary and court-ordered anger-management clients, all of whom were determined through diagnostic interviews to have significant anger problems. Contrary to findings in nonforensic samples, the STAXI Trait Anger scale identified only about half of the participants as having anger-management problems severe enough to require intervention. Supplemental analysis with two additional scales did not significantly improve sensitivity. In addition to thorough diagnostic interviewing, forensic use of the STAXI (like similar assessment methods) may require additional validity scales to detect denial or socially desirable response patterns.     

Regulatory harmonization and agricultural biotechnology in Argentina and China: Critical assessment of state‐centered and decentered approaches

The international harmonization of technology‐related regulations seeks certain norms across diverse contexts. Harmonization efforts are based primarily on the promulgation of state‐centered command and control forms of regulation, though they may also be accompanied by the diffusion of more plural approaches that are decentered from the state. We contrast the ways in which the “proper” use of transgenic cotton seed technologies is understood in harmonizing regulations with the way this technology is used in practice in regions of Argentina and China. We find divergence that poses challenges for both state‐centered and decentered approaches to harmonization. While state‐centered approaches are blind to some critical processes on the ground, decentered strategies are found wanting in situations where norms remain deeply contested amongst actors situated in very uneven power relations. In both cases, we find that establishing and securing norms that are socially just and environmentally sustainable means attending much more explicitly to the political economies in which technological practices actually take root.