Explore the vast range of titles available.

Democracy and political parties go hand in hand. Strong parties are fundamental for advancing, stabilizing, and improving democratic governance. But how exactly do political parties relate to, and contribute to, the survival of presidential administrations? Since 1979, over twenty Latin American chief executives had been forced out of office, without a democratic breakdown—a phenomenon known as \"presidential failure.\" Why Presidents Fail offers a nuanced assessment of how political parties influence how and when executives weather political crises and unrest. Christopher A. Martínez takes a close look at how different factors come into play to explain why some presidents complete their terms in office without incident, others barely make it to the end after stumbling upon crisis after crisis, and some are forced out or impeached before their term is finished. Drawing on a novel theoretical approach, an original database on presidential scandals and anti-government demonstrations, regression (survival analysis) models, country case studies, and interviews with more than one hundred country specialists and top-level politicians, Why Presidents Fail provides an innovative, comprehensive assessment of how political parties influence presidential survival and contributes fresh ideas to the debates on the stability of presidential governments.

Purpose - This study attempts to figure out the factors that contributed to deposing certain elected presidents before the end of their constitutional terms, alongside tracing the new political context that prevailed in Latin America since 1978 and its impact on direct political participation and military behavior during presidential crises. Design/methodology/approach - The paper uses the comparative method to investigate the causes of presidential instability in three case studies. Findings - The likelihood of presidential instability increases when a president enacts austerity economic policies that marginalize large sectors of the citizenry, becomes implicated in acts of corruption and develops a hostile relationship with members of the ruling coalition. Originality/value - This study integrates the social movement theory with analytical perspectives from parliamentary behavior to explain presidential instability. It attempts to investigate the dynamics of interaction between the acts of furious citizens and disloyal legislators through the in-depth analysis of three case studies.

President Park faced a leadership crisis after revelations that she relied on a confidant with no official position for key decision-making in state affairs. Heavy industry met with serious financial difficulties, and a strong anti-corruption law was enacted. North Korea tested more nuclear weapons and missiles. Controversy over the deployment of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense strained South Korea's relations with China.

Este artículo explica por qué algunas crisis presidenciales culminan con la renuncia del presidente y otras desencadenan su remoción. Los resultados de la investigación sugieren que: a) algunas de las variables que moldean la relación Ejecutivo-Legislativo y desencadenan la inestabilidad política explican también la forma en que ésta se resuelve en el marco del régimen presidencial; y que b) la influencia aislada de estos factores relevantes no explica, por sí misma, las modalidades de salida anticipada de los mandatarios electos.

It is now my pleasure to introduce a very special roundtable that brings together four of my distinguished predecessors as president of the Society. Taken together, their terms of office span the last twenty-five years. Edith Brown Weiss is University Professor and former Francis Cabell Brown Professor of International Law at Georgetown Law. José Alvarez is the Herbert and Rose Rubin Professor of International Law at New York University School of Law. Lucinda A. Low is a partner at Steptoe & Johnson LLP, where she heads the Compliance, Investigations, Trade, and Enforcement Department, and Sean D. Murphy is the Manatt/Ahn Professor of International Law at George Washington University Law School and a member of the UN International Law Commission. Welcome, welcome.

Why has U.S. grand strategy persisted since the end of the Cold War? Despite shocks such as the 2008 global financial crisis and the costs of the war in Iraq—circumstances that ought to have stimulated at least a revision—the United States remains committed to a grand strategy of “primacy.” It strives for military preponderance, dominance in key regions, the containment and reassurance of allies, nuclear counterproliferation, and the economic “Open Door.” The habitual ideas of the U.S. foreign policy establishment, or the “Blob,” make U.S. grand strategy hard to change. The United States’ military and economic capabilities enable the U.S. government to pursue primacy, but the embedded assumptions of the Blob make primacy the seemingly natural choice. Thanks to the Blob’s constraining power, alternative grand strategies based on restraint and retrenchment are hardly entertained, and debate is narrowed mostly into questions of execution and implementation. Two cases—the presidency of Bill Clinton and the first year of the presidency of Donald Trump—demonstrate this argument. In each case, candidates promising change were elected in fluid conditions that we would expect to stimulate a reevaluation of the United States’ commitments. In each case, the Blob asserted itself successfully, at least on the grand strategic fundamentals. Change in grand strategy is possible, but it would require shocks large enough to shake the assumptions of the status quo and a president willing to be an agent of change and prepared to absorb the political costs of overhauling Washington’s traditional design.

We study the implications of the Great Recession for voting for antiestablishment parties, as well as for general trust and political attitudes, using regional data across Europe. We find a strong relationship between increases in unemployment and voting for nonmainstream parties, especially populist ones. Moreover, unemployment increases in tandem with declining trust toward national and European political institutions, though we find only weak or no effects of unemployment on interpersonal trust. The correlation between unemployment and attitudes toward immigrants is muted, especially for their cultural impact. To explore causality, we extract the component of increases in unemployment explained by the precrisis structure of the economy, in particular the share of construction in regional value added, which is strongly related both to the buildup preceding and the bursting of the crisis. Our results imply that crisis-driven economic insecurity is a substantial determinant of populism and political distrust.

Purpose The dissemination of fake news has accelerated with social media and this has important implications for both organizations and their stakeholders alike. Hence, the purpose of this study is to shed light on the effectiveness of the crisis response strategies of denial and attack in addressing rumors about consumer privacy when non-profit organizations are targeted on social media. Design/methodology/approach To test the hypotheses, a 2 (response type: denial vs attack) × 2 (privacy concerns: low vs high), between-group online experiment was conducted via Qualtrics. Findings The results indicated that one’s involvement level in the issue determines the effectiveness of the crisis response strategy. Data showed that attacking the source of fake news (as a crisis response) reduces the message’s credibility more than denying fake news. Furthermore, highly involved individuals are more likely to centrally process information and develop positive supportive intentions toward the affected non-profit brand. High issue involvement also predicted organizational and response credibility. Conversely, an attack rebuttal message increased the credibility of the circulated malicious rumors for low involved individuals. Research limitations/implications The findings suggest that issue involvement plays a key role in message perceptions of false information regarding consumer privacy in social media. Practical implications Practically, this study offers insights for organizations that are developing response strategies in the current environment of fake news. Findings from this study suggest that organizations need to consider the degree to which audiences are currently involved in an issue before deciding how aggressively to respond to perpetrators of fake news. Originality/value The present study examines the intersection of fake news and crisis management in the non-profit sector, with an emphasis on various response strategies and issue involvement. This is one of the first attempts to experimentally investigate how social media strategies can defend and protect non-profit reputation in the fake news era.

Background : This study examines the global media framing of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to understand the dominant frames and how choice of words compares in the media. Periods of health crisis such as the outbreak of coronavirus pandemic add to the enormous burden of the media in keeping people constantly informed. Extant literature suggests that when a message is released through the media, what matters most is not what is said but how it is said. As such, the media could either mitigate or accentuate the crisis depending on the major frames adopted for the coverage. Methods : The study utilises content analysis. Data were sourced from LexisNexis database and two websites that yielded 6145 items used for the analysis. Nine predetermined frames were used for the coding. Results : Human Interest and fear/scaremongering frames dominated the global media coverage of the pandemic. We align our finding with the constructionist frame perspective which assumes that the media as information processor creates ‘interpretative packages’ in order to both reflect and add to the ‘issue culture’ because frames that paradigmatically dominate event coverage also dominate audience response. The language of the coverage of COVID-19 combines gloom, hope, precaution and frustration at varied proportions. Conclusion : We conclude that global media coverage of COVID-19 was high, but the framing lacks coherence and sufficient self-efficacy and this can be associated with media’s obsession for breaking news. The preponderance of these frames not only shapes public perception and attitudes towards the pandemic but also risks causing more problems for those with existing health conditions due to fear or panic attack.

PurposeCountry crises can provoke damages to a country's economic activity and citizens in a way that will always demand a deeper understanding of their determinants. Political issues are commonly mentioned as an important factor boosting these crises. This paper investigates the political factors behind financial crises and recessions.Design/methodology/approachUsing variables from the ICRG rating system, logistic panel regressions are run to determine whether or not the political risk variables explain country crises.FindingsResults disclose the importance of socioeconomic conditions to financial crises and recessions with no influence from the political arena. Against expectations, political instability does not help to explain crises. Political risk ratings also show their importance, demonstrating that the higher is the risk, the higher is the probability of debt and currency crises occurrence.Originality/valueThe findings in this paper contribute to a growing literature of political risk and crises, enhancing the value of political risk assessment and increasing the application of its consequences.