Backing Out or Backing In? Commitment and Consistency in Audience Costs Theory

Audience costs theory posits that domestic publics punish leaders for making an external threat and then backing down. One key mechanism driving this punishment involves the value the public places on consistency between their leaders’ statements and actions. If true, this mechanism should operate not only when leaders fail to implement threats, but also when they fail to honor promises to stay out of a conflict. We use a survey experiment to examine domestic responses to the president's decision to “back down” from public threats and “back into” foreign conflicts. We find the president loses support in both cases, but suffers more for “backing out” than “backing in.” These differential consequences are partially explained by asymmetries in the public's treatment of new information. Our findings strongly suggest that concerns over consistency undergird audience costs theory and that punishment for inconsistency will be incurred, regardless of the leader's initial policy course.     

Constructing citizenship: framing unauthorized immigrants in market terms

We show how conceptions of ‘market citizenship’ hold a central place in three distinct arenas: political theory; mainstream cultural narratives, and the views expressed by middle class Latino immigrants. Our analyses of both print media coverage and interviews with middle class Latino immigrants demonstrate that the narrative of market citizenship has heavily influenced the collective US understanding of state membership. This project not only finds a clear market framing in news coverage of the immigration issue, but finds that members of the Latino community have directly engaged with this frame and use it to refute the largely negative contentions of the popular press.     

Beyond the log frame: a new tool for examining health and peacebuilding initiatives

How do we move from identifying ethical principles to enhancing development practice? How can donors and NGOs move beyond the reporting of technical outputs to explore less tangible aspects of their health projects: contributions to rebuilding trust, promoting social cohesion, and enhancing good governance at community level? This article considers these questions in relation to health and peace-building activities in conflicted settings. It describes difficulties facing practitioners and donors seeking to undertake health and peace work, in particular focusing on the lack of appropriate tools for screening, monitoring, and evaluating projects. It critiques the logical framework, a tool commonly used in project planning, monitoring, and evaluation, and considers it alongside a new tool, the Health and Peace Building Filter, which has been designed to reflect on health programming in fragile or conflicted settings. The authors argue that such tools can help to move us beyond focusing on inputs and outputs to examining processes, relationships, and the indirect consequences of aid programmes.     

More than darning socks

Joyce Stevens, Taking the Revolution Home: Work Among Women in the Communist Party of Australia: 1920–1945 (Sybylla) Fitzroy, 1987.