The International Studies Association Theory Section Book Award
The International Studies Association Theory Section Book Award recognizes the best book or edited volume published over the past two years that contributes to the theorization of world politics. The award is open to all forms and styles of theorization. Criteria include such considerations as innovativeness, quality of argumentation, and significance for the broad discipline of international studies.
Nominations should be emailed to the committee chair accompanied by a brief letter explaining why a work deserves consideration for the award. Authors may nominate themselves. A copy of each book must be sent to each member of the committee, with the line “Theory Section Book Award, c/o” at the top of each address.
Nominations are due by 15 August, 2013 and books must be received by 30 August, 2013. E-book formatted submissions are welcome.
Officers of the Theory section and members of the committee are ineligible for the award.
A little over a month ago, I wrote about the growing academic literature concerning human rights treaties and their lack of influence on human rights practices. Based on my own experiences growing up in parts of the U.S. where it’s assumed we can “[Rebuild] Our Culture One Purity Ball at a Time,” I likened human rights treaties to virginity pledges, saying that “in most circumstances, these human rights “pledges” don’t work to improve human rights practices. In some circumstances, they can actually lead to a worsening of governmental human rights practices.” There is a brand-spankin-new forthcoming article at American Journal of Political Science by Yonatan Lupu of George Washington University that may indicate my previous conclusion was overstated: when fully accounting for state preferences in treaty commitments, Lupu does not find any evidence that treaties make things worse. This is good news for human rights advocates everywhere and very important for human rights/treaty scholarship! Lupu’s article definitely deserves your attention.
Well, the American Community Survey’s “number of times married” question. I’m reprinting the following (mass) email from the Minnesota Population Center about pending changes to the ACS that will dramatically affect our ability to know how many times Americans have been divorced or married. Social science solidarity!
Good morning ducks! Here’s your update from District 12…