Is the Future of SSR non-linear?

This article explores issues around security sector reform (SSR) and the involvement of the international community in peace-building. It argues that the international architecture which surrounds SSR privileges a particular form of knowledge that reflects a technocratic approach to security, and illustrates this by systematically examining the literature. Research on the literature itself shows that three core themes dominate: state-centric approaches, technocratic approaches, and approaches to local ownership. These comprise a current, linear approach to SSR that ignores much of the critical literature on peace-building. The article then goes on to draw on some of this critical literature to develop an alternative approach to SSR building using a non-linear approach which incorporates a better understanding of institutional politics, an emphasis on process rather than structures, and analysis of hidden politics.     

Authoritarian Abdication: Bargaining Power and the Role of Firms in Migrant Welfare

Throughout the Arabian Gulf, the immigration law known as the kafala formally delegates to firms and other “sponsors” control over migrants’ mobility, housing, and general welfare. These states have abdicated almost any responsibility over migrants, giving firms nearly unchecked power over their workers’ daily lives. In this paper, I consider the welfare implications of this system and explore the conditions under which migrants can extract concessions from firms. Drawing on a nationally representative survey from Qatar, I show that migrant satisfaction, workplace difficulties, and overall quality of life varies widely across camps and firms. In explaining this variation, I argue that welfare crucially depends on an individual’s bargaining power. Migrants with a contract or credible exit options hold greater bargaining power, which strongly associates with improved perceptions of welfare. All told, contracts and exit options appear to provide even the most vulnerable workers a means of protection within authoritarian states.     

Negotiation or Mediation?: An Exploration of Factors Affecting the Choiceof Conflict Management in International Conflict

The conditions under which negotiation or mediation are chosen in internationalconflict have been little studied. Previous research has tended tofocus on the motivations and rational calculations of the states involved.Scant attention has been given to examining the effect of the context onthis choice. In this article, we present a framework for studying the contextualconditions under which negotiation or mediation are likely to takeplace. Employing an original data set, we find that negotiation tends to beused when conflicts are relatively simple, of a low intensity, and when bothparties are relatively equal in power. Mediation, on the other hand, tends tobe used in disputes characterized by high complexity, high intensity, longduration, unequal and fractionated parties, and where the willingness ofthe parties to settle peacefully is in doubt.     

Oxaliplatin: a 'basic' patent problem

In an application for a declaration of non-infringement withrespect to a patent claiming a method of preparation for a drug,a claim specifying that the pH is adjusted to be between 3.0and 6.0 by adding an alkali solution required a distinct additionof alkali and was not infringed by use of a reagent that yieldeda pH within the specified range without the need for separateaddition of alkali.     

Coercion versus Choice: Citizen Evaluations of Public Service Quality across Methods of Consumption

Treating all respondents to citizen satisfaction surveys as "customers" risks misinterpreting the findings and misguiding managerial decision making. Citizen evaluations of the quality of public services are likely to vary based on whether citizens have a direct or indirect relationship to the service. Furthermore, citizens are likely to rate services differently based on whether they consume the services as a result of coercion or choice, although the quality of the interaction shapes the impact of the type of interaction. Based on a series of empirical analyses, this paper demonstrates that recipients who have superior-quality interactions with providers are likely to report high ratings for elective services, whereas citizens who have poor-quality interactions are likely to report low ratings for coercive services. In this way, the quality of the interaction influences citizens' predispositions to rate services high or low based on whether they consume the service by choice or coercion.