Print

Print


*Dear Colleagues*


**

*I hope you are all well. I am writing in my capacity as Convenor of the
Development Politics Specialist Group in the PSA. I am circulating the Call
for Papers for the Development Politics Group in the PSA again. Apologies
for cross-posting. We now have three panels - regionalism, natural resource
politics, and democratization. The deadline for abstract submission is the
end of this week (October 14). Kindly send us your abstracts if you would
like to present on-going research or more finished papers. I will be very
grateful if you can circulate the CFPs to your students and colleagues.
*

*
*

*Kind Regards,*

**


**

*Jojo
*

*
*

*POLITICAL STUDIES ASSOCIATION (PSA) ANNUAL CONFERENCE 2013*

*DEVELOPMENT POLITICS SPECIALIST GROUP*

*Cardiff, UK*

*March 25-27, 2013*

* *

* *

*LIST OF PROPOSED PANELS*

* *

* *

*(1)               **Regional social policy: cross-border social standards
to reduce inequity and poverty*

*Convenor: Pia Riggirozzi, University of Southampton (**
[log in to unmask]* <[log in to unmask]>*)*

*
*Like all forms of governance, regionalism is a form of coordination across
and between different policy areas. Regionalism is organised in different
forms of institutional architecture that open different kinds of political
engagement; and thus different types of activism. Despite a wide array of
political economic projects of varying compositions, capabilities and
aspirations, expectations of what regional governance can deliver have been
evaluated primarily in terms of management, trade liberalisation and trade
integration. It is not surprising then that despite a wealth of literature
offering normative references to the capacity of regional frameworks to
provide social development, this has largely remained a rhetorical aspect
in the way regionalism has unfolded and has been studied. However, recent
developments in regional formations across the globe are seeking social and
political integration to address issues of poverty and inequality and ways
to mitigate trans-border social issues and harms. The facilitation of
cross-border labour mobility has featured as a principal policy aim, but
increasingly regional policy cooperation is emerging beyond strict
regionalisation of commercial markets. Examples include regional
cooperation on communicable diseases, the referral of patients between
member states, access to medicines (UNASUR, SADC, CARICOM) and regional
food security programmes (SAARC, ASEAN). This panel is seeks to discuss
social policy in relation to regional governance exploring empirical
linkages between regional integration, social policy and social
development, and academic links between regionalism and development studies.





*(2)               **How Resources Shape the Global Political Economy:
Commodity Booms and Developmental Spaces in a Multipolar World Order*

*Convenor: Jojo Nem Singh
(**[log in to unmask]*<[log in to unmask]>
*)*

* *

This panel explores the changing global political economy from the
perspective of resource production. In some ways, scholars have begun to
recognise the uniqueness of the current boom, in particular (a) the
economic opportunities being given to resource-rich states due to the
longevity of the boom as well as (b) the new political dynamics emerging
from the globalization of political decision-making. This panel seeks to
critically examine the implications of the changing political economy of
resource extraction within the global-domestic nexus. We encourage papers
that deal with issues on the shifting levels of political authority,
state-market relations in the context of the current export bonanza, the
growing importance of corporate actors in international governance
initiatives, the new roles of multilateral institutions, the role of
emerging powers and resource-rich states in response to the economic crisis
in the core economies, and the rise of new types of states in the
post-Washington Consensus context.



*(3)               **Managing Democratic Transitions: Problems of State
Capacity, Agency and Organisation*

*Convenor: Teddy Brett (*[log in to unmask])**



Democratising authoritarian societies dominates the political agenda in
most LDCs, driven by donor demands and resistance to predatory despotism.
However, these reforms fail when power is heavily contested, state and
economic capacity is weak, and societies are dominated by patrimonial
elites and divided by adversarial conflicts based on antagonistic
sectarian, ethnic or class identities and inequalities.  This raises
complex issues of state capacity, sequencing, economic policy, and
political processes and organisation that we will explore in this workshop.
The need for democracy is clear since even weak elected regimes are more
likely to respond to popular pressures than predatory autocracies, while
popular movements find it much easier to resist abuses of power in even
weak democracies than in oppressive dictatorships. However, electoral
competition in societies without the necessary capacities can intensify
class, sectarian or ethnic conflicts, encourage rulers to adopt populist
policies, and allow regressive elites to capture power by using their
social and economic power to build clientalistic parties and manipulate
elections.



Indeed, many weak democracies have performed worse than strong autocracies
like South Korea and China that have imposed the discipline needed for
rapid industrialisation, and created good public services and safety nets.
This does not negate the need for democracy since few autocracies live up
to these standards, but it does offer most LDCs an unenviable choice
between predatory autocracy and weak and contested democracy. We will
address the problems raise by this gap between democratic aspirations and
substantive capacities by examining the structural pre-requisites for
effective democratic transitions, and the problems of sequencing, economic
policy, and political agency involved in implementing them in order to
identify the organisational structures and political processes needed to
facilitate transitions from situations where democratisation intensifies
corruption and destructive conflicts, to those where it enables all
citizens to play an active role in political processes.



We will use recent work on state formation and democratic transitions that
identifies the pre-conditions for viable democratic transitions, and shows
that successful democratisation is directly related to the levels of state,
economic and civic capacity achieved during earlier authoritarian regimes,
and that weak, intermediate and strong pre-democratic states confront
different opportunities and threats as they attempt to make these
transitions. We attribute democratic transitions to the ability of
different classes to resist oppression and fight for their rights, and the
ability of weak states to turn procedural into substantive democratic to
their ability to create strong and diverse representative organisations –
political movements, parties, interest groups and formal and informal
associations - that enable the poor as well as the rich to assert their
rights, identify their needs, develop viable policy agendas and demands,
and negotiate agreed compromises through legitimated political processes.
Jewellord T. Nem Singh
Research Associate
Sheffield Institute for International Development (SIID)
ICOSS Building, 219 Portobello Road
Sheffield, S1 4DP
United Kingdom


Latest Publications:


 'Who Owns the Minerals? Repoliticizing Neoliberal Governance in Brazil and
Chile', Special Issue, *The New Politics of Mineral Extraction in Latin
America*, *Journal of Developing Societies,* 28 (2): 229-256.
http://jds.sagepub.com/content/28/2/229<http://jds.sagepub.com/content/28/2.toc>

Reconstituting the Neostructuralist State: Political Economy of Continuity
with Change in Chilean Mining Policy, Third World Quarterly, 31 (8):
1413-1433.
http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article&issn=0143-6597&volume=31&issue=8&spage=1413