This chapter focuses on the absence of certain marginal groups from the United Nations’ Women, Peace, and Security Agenda and suggests correctives to those exclusions. The chapter discusses how men and boys as victims of sexual and gender-based violence have been erased in this agenda, and the consequences of this erasure. It challenges the assumptions of militarized masculinity as a uniformly shared identity among conflict-engaged men. It also looks at the outcome of pregnancies resulting from wartime rape and shows how children born of rape are presented and treated in their communities. The chapter draws on research conducted in Peru and Colombia and shows the necessity of understanding both the perpetration and experience of violence in nuanced ways.
Kevin J. Krizek and David M. Levinson
This article focuses on the access objective of urban planning. It aims to articulate a clear role for measures of metropolitan accessibility, and to demonstrate the utility of these measures in informing and influencing policy. The article describes the use and measurement of accessibility for metropolitan areas, evaluates the current state of knowledge and literature, and identifies important issues about measurement. It suggests that problem definitions should be reformed to bring them in line with current transportation goals and argues that the concept of accessibility may offer a compelling, attractive, and alternative basis for policies related to the built environment when operationalized using cumulative-opportunities measures.
Steven Rathgeb Smith
Accountability in nonprofits is complicated and multi-faceted. Nonprofits can also be sites of vibrant civic engagement, community governance, and providers of valuable local services. Contemporary accountability regimes emphasize organizational maintenance, competition, entrepreneurship, and sustainability. Civic engagement in the governance and operations of local nonprofits can be time-consuming, albeit very valuable. To achieve accountability and citizen engagement, nonprofits need to consult with their key stakeholders and think comprehensively and strategically about their mission. Government and private funders also need to approach accountability broadly and consider the different programmatic and community benefits of nonprofit programs.
José María Maravall
This article considers accountability and the survival of governments. A government is considered to be accountable when its citizens can hold it responsible for its actions and punish or reward it with their vote during the elections. The article begins with a look at the elections and the retrospective control of politicians. Some empirical evidence that has been gathered from retrospective models of elections is presented, and the limits of accountability are identified. Finally, non-electoral threats are discussed.
This chapter explores the ways in which public standards of accountability are brought to bear on a nominally private institution: the commercial corporation. It considers several classic arguments in favor of widening the set of interests in society that the corporation should serve. These classic positions, it is argued, fail to capture the range of social issues facing the company. A different way of identifying those issues is proposed. This in turn permits one to identify three types of interest that stakeholders have in the company. With these distinctions in place, a map of different types of corporate accountability is drawn, aimed at underpinning policies shaping corporate governance.
This chapter describes the development of reparations in international humanitarian and international criminal law. It then highlights the tension between judicial reparations and the harms that victims experience in conflict, particularly gendered harms such as sexual violence and discrimination against women. It demonstrates the importance of incorporating gender analyses into reparations programs and practice to fully redress victims’ needs and rights. It argues that reparations programs should acknowledge the challenges that victims of sexual and gender-based violence face, which may impact their participation in reparation proceedings. It also argues that reparations programs should focus on rectifying structural injustice to ensure gender atrocities are not repeated.
Amy B. Zegart
This article describes the insights and limitations of rational choice institutionalism in political science. It then shows that organization theory offers insights into agency evolution but has limited explanatory power for public sector agencies. Moreover, a general model of agency adaptation failure that combines elements of the two theoretical perspectives is provided. The literatures in organization theory, political science, public administration, and public management that appear most relevant for studying agency adaptation failure do not offer any off-the-shelf approaches. The article looks at adaptation from the perspective of agency leaders, and then represents the substance and logic of the model of adaptation failure. It finally presents some thoughts about promising avenues of future research on agency design and evolution.
This article discusses agenda setting, and is organized into four main sections. The first section looks at the possibility that some individual or institution may hold exclusive power over the agenda. This is a possibility that is usually overlooked by analysts situated outside the rational choice framework. The second section puts emphasis on the links between the study of agenda setting and democratic theory. This is followed by a discussion of another issue that is not sufficiently researched by students of agenda setting, namely: the selection of priorities within the decision agenda. The last section in the article highlights the growing impact of international factors on the formation of national agendas.
This article addresses the role of knowledge agents in governance, focusing on codified products produced by socially recognized experts and scientists; categorizes these agents into knowledge actors (individuals), knowledge institutions (in their organizational format), and knowledge networks; and describes their work. It also considers the politics of knowledge or scientific competition and highlights the struggles between different modes of knowledge or what are often described as discourses, worldviews, and regimes of truth.
Henry R. Nau
There are four standard American foreign policy traditions, and they have existed since the beginning of the republic. The traditions include isolationists/nationalists like George Washington and Andrew Jackson; realists like Alexander Hamilton and Teddy Roosevelt; conservative internationalists like Thomas Jefferson and Ronald Reagan; and liberal internationalists like Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt. Rooted in both the history and the logic of the American experience, the traditions are indispensable to ensure that America considers all of the elements of a changing world in meeting global challenges.