Delegating Terror: Principal–Agent Based Decision Making in State Sponsorship of Terrorism

State sponsorship of terrorism, where a government deliberately provides resources and material support to a terrorist organization, is common in the international system. Sponsorship can provide significant strategic and political benefits for a state, but there are inherent international and domestic risks associated with delegating foreign policy to these actors. Using principal–agent analysis, I develop a model that evaluates the impact of potential costs and benefits on a state’s decision to sponsor terrorism. I test my model by using a novel dataset on sponsorship behaviors that ranges from 1970 to 2008. The results of my analysis support the validity of the principal–agent model in explaining sponsorship, as states will be more likely to engage in sponsorship when the strategic benefits of weakening the targeted state are high and the risks of international reputation loss and domestic dissatisfaction are low.     

Shame,ontological insecurity and intercountry adoption

Romania and South Korea were once among the top sending countries for adoptive American families. In recent years, though, both have adopted significant restrictions on intercountry adoption. What leads countries to introduce such severe restrictions? This article argues that shame plays a significant, yet underappreciated, motivating factor for leading governments to change their laws on intercountry adoption. Political leaders seize on nationalist rhetoric to argue that intercountry adoption is shameful. The article explores the interaction between intercountry adoption and shame through brief case studies on Romania and South Korea. Finally, it examines the role of the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption (Hague Adoption Convention) in ameliorating these feelings.     

Evaluating Thatcher: Sceptical Versus Synthetic Approaches

Sceptical approaches to the Thatcher governments provide a useful corrective to exaggerated accounts of their impacts. In particular they point to dependencies in policy-making and implementation. However, evaluating Thatcher via comparison with other post-war UK governments questions excessive scepticism. It suggests that Thatchers governments have made more of a difference than most of their predecessors. In contrast with sceptical views, synthetic views see the significance of the Thatcher governments as more than the sum of their parts. They identify dynamic qualities in the Thatcher governments' approach to policy change, particularly regarding 'policy learning' and 'rolling agendas'.     

The privatisation of British Telecom: a case study of the extended process of legislation

Abstract. One of the main ingredients in discourse about British politics concerns the extent to which, and under what conditions, central government can get its own way. Since 1979, the country has been ruled by a prime minister and a government placing at least rhetorical emphasis on the 'politics of conviction'. At the same time we have a well established academic literature giving emphasis to the various hurdles in the policy-making process which face even a government with a working parliamentary majority. The purpose of this paper is to trace the steps in the process towards the government achieving one of its manifesto commitments; the sale of 51 per cent of British Telecom shares to the private sector. In so doing, it is intended to analyse this example of the policy process in terms of the predominant British policy style.