Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback


National Foundation of Political Science
Country: France
129 Projects, page 1 of 26
  • Funder: EC Project Code: 101067703
    Funder Contribution: 211,755 EUR

    The research projet ‘Developing Ethical Abstention Contextualism’ (DevEthAC) deals with the ethics of electoral abstention, i.e. the ethics of voluntary non-voting in political elections by enfranchised citizens. The project specifically addresses an existing view in electoral ethics that it calls ethical abstention contextualism, and that is to the effect that abstention is ethically permitted in some circumstances, but not in others. Looking to elaborate and bolster this particular view, DevEthAC examines how ethical abstention contextualism should evaluate the forms of electoral abstention that are most characteristic in practice, e.g. abstention by young citizens, abstention by poor citizens, abstention in non-proportional election systems, etc. DevEthAC further seeks to flesh out the ethical bottom-line responsibilities that ethical abstention contextualism should ascribe to individual citizens when different circumstances coincide in one and the same election, causing abstention to seem both pro tanto permissible and pro tanto prohibited. And DevEthAC thirdly aims to clarify what ethical abstention contextualism implies for how electoral systems should receive and register abstentions. Notably, DevEthAC aims to understand how abstention contextualism assesses electoral systems that simply count and report abstentions, and how it evaluates electoral models in which abstentions are instead rendered politically consequential, e.g. through the use of quorum rules or other institutional devices. By pursuing these three research objectives, DevEthAC strives to elaborate and strengthen a philosophical position that enjoys prominence in the electoral ethics research debate, but remains undertheorized nonetheless. Additionally, the project aims to further the general public’s ability to normatively asses current patterns of electoral abstention and its ability to gauge how democratic electoral systems might respond to those patterns.

  • Funder: EC Project Code: 101032546
    Overall Budget: 275,620 EURFunder Contribution: 275,620 EUR

    Religion has become a salient issue within the United Nations (UN), especially in its human rights activities. This is especially due to a widespread perception of the growing threat posed by Islam, especially to the universality of human rights. The academic debate on the topic is highly polarised, with one view defending secularism as a basis of the universality of human rights and the suppression of religion, and the other seeing religion as a basis of universality and secularism as a threat to it; a more critical view questions both the neat distinctions between these rival views, and their internal coherence. Taking a different path, this project takes secular and religious visions as two sides of the same equation, and explores the question of how states negotiate the unending conflict between these two visions in relation to the construction of human right norms and institutions within the UN. It aims to write a revisionist history of the sources and consequences of the conflict between secular and religious vision in the field of human rights. The project proposes an entirely new theory to conceptualise the dialectic conflict between these two visions, and to select the case studies that exemplify the different configurations of the positions of states on the matter. These positions are then assessed in relation to five critical junctures in the development of human right norms and institutions, based on primary sources collected from UN archives and semi-structured interviews, analysed through the process-tracing method. In producing a theoretically informed and empirical investigation, the project aims to reframe the terms of the debate across disciplines, and allow for the formulation of innovative policy recommendations to help EU states cope with the tension between secular and religious visions domestically and at the UN, in a way that transcends binary or absolutist perspectives that dominate academic and public debates.

    Powered by Usage counts
  • Funder: EC Project Code: 841111
    Overall Budget: 196,708 EURFunder Contribution: 196,708 EUR

    How do the media report EU affairs, and to what extent may such coverage shape public attitudes and behaviour towards integration? MEDPOL aim is twofold: to investigate how media coverage of the EU has evolved since the signature of the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992 until today, and to assess the impact of news content and frames on political attitudes and behaviour towards the EU in different member states. Drawing on various disciplines - Political Science, Communication Studies and Political Economy - the project follows a mixed methods approach grounded on agenda-setting and framing theories. It consists of a qualitative and quantitative analysis of media content in four states: Italy, Portugal, Spain and France. Manual and automated coding of press content and Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques will be used to analyse large amounts of textual data while maintaining rigorous methodological standards. MEDPOL brings together content analysis, electoral data and open-access social and economic indicators in order to analyse how issue visibility and media framing may influence electoral behaviour in different countries and social groups. Findings will further our understanding of how certain terms or sentences have been used to frame EU affairs and to express different ideas about the EU. MEDPOL analyses how these frames emerge and evolve over time, and through which mechanisms they may compete with each other and contribute to political polarisation. Finally, MEDPOL contributes to the diffusion of content analysis techniques, mixed methods and interdisciplinary approaches devoted to understand the role of the media as a political actor. Outputs include two peer-reviewed publications, a monograph, an open-access code that allows the method to be adapted to other cases, an academic workshop, a series of evidence-based comments aimed at a non-specialised audience (journalists, policy-makers, watchdog organisations), and public engagement activities.

    Powered by Usage counts
  • Funder: EC Project Code: 236477
  • Funder: EC Project Code: 101025500
    Overall Budget: 184,708 EURFunder Contribution: 184,708 EUR

    In the Second World War, the Allies waged war on a truly global scale for the first and, one hopes, last time in history. Victory required the mobilisation and transportation of wo/men and materiel on all continents and across four out of the Earth’s five oceans. Success would have been impossible without extensive inter-Allied coordination, organisation and planning. Starting in 1939, a system of inter-Allied organs was set up by Britain and France, whose mission it was to coordinate the supply of the Allied war effort from a common pool. It survived France’s fall in 1940 and, upon US entry in 1941, was revived. By 1942, it had evolved into a global network of military, production and logistics experts from India to Canada and South Africa to Norway, organised into a series of so-called Combined Boards and dedicated to the nuts and bolts of worldwide coalition warfare. Yet we lack a history of this extraordinary organisation. Despite the Second World War’s self-evidently global nature, the tendency to frame it in national, comparative and Eurocentric terms is very deeply entrenched. INTERALLIED, by contrast, seeks to highlight the global, transnational and interdependent character of the Allied war effort. The project asks: how did the Allies seek to couple, then uncouple their war economies, and mobilise (then demobilise) global markets for war, between 1939 and 1945? It seeks (1) to provide an account of the political economy of global Allied warfare, and thus to reach for a history of the global economy at war, which has yet to be written; (2) to advance a recent 'global turn' in Second World War studies, and thus to resist nationalistic and Eurocentric readings of the conflict, frequently deployed politically today; and (3) to produce new, practical knowledge about how societies can cope with massive shocks to their systems of supply, production and trade, and prevent damaging and wasteful competition for scarce resources.

Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback

Do the share buttons not appear? Please make sure, any blocking addon is disabled, and then reload the page.

Content report
No reports available
Funder report
No option selected

Do you wish to download a CSV file? Note that this process may take a while.

There was an error in csv downloading. Please try again later.