This is Suzie De Luca's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Suzie De Luca's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Suzie De Luca
Interests: Political Science.
Recent Activity
Comments on the "Arctic Council" section: "Given that it is possible to discern evidence of the current hegemonic project reflected in the Arctic Council, is there evidence that it also works to assimilate counter-hegemonic forces?" - The parts that lead up to this point did not emphasize that the Arctic Council is hegemonic. Is your central argument that the Arctic Council is hegemonic or counter-hegemonic? Comments on "Emergence of Counter-hegemonic Forces?" The connection to theory was not clear in this section. General Comments: Overall, it's a good draft and I enjoyed reading it! Make sure to always connect your points back to the theory you outline in the beginning as this will strengthen your argument. Hope this helps and thank you for your comments as well! Take care, Suzie
Dear Greg, I really like your topic! You examine a very interesting research question and incorporate theory which is great. Your disclaimer comments (and Max's comment) are hilarious. :) Comments on "Introduction": "In this way cooperation in the Arctic will be understood not by the mechanisms used to facilitate it, but instead by analyzing the underlying factors that have led to those mechanisms being used in the first place" - Make sure you are as specific as possible. I'd recommend dropping the first part of this sentence to add clarity. What mechanisms are you discussing? Make sure to provide more of a robust introduction clearly outlining your points. The part about Arctic institutions needs more emphasis in your introduction since it is greatly focused upon in the essay. Comments on "Understanding Hegemony": "This historic bloc reproduces it's (omit apostrophe) hegemony through a network of institutions, norms, ideas and social relations that enforce a consented coercion." - This part appears to be crucial to your argument. Make sure to clearly define what is meant by "historic bloc". "consented coercion" - Please reword this.
Thank you very much for the helpful comments, Greg!! :)
Dear Max, Great draft section! I like how you identified and defined the key terms. I pasted some articles below to help frame your arguments. I think these articles will help when discussing the challenges that Nauru faced and how Greenland might be different. The first article talks about Nauru's failures. The second article talks about Greenland's potential (starting at the bottom on page 234). Connell, J. (2006). Nauru: The first failed Pacific state?. The Round Table,95(383), 47-63 Nielsen, J. K. (2001). Government, culture and sustainability in Greenland: A microstate with a hinterland. Public Organization Review, 1(2), 229-243. Hope this helps! Take care, Suzie
Hi Rós! Your project is developing nicely! I like the changes that you've made and it's looking great! I think it would be important to include some background information on the relationship between the indigenous groups and Sweden, as well as former state policies. You mentioned a very interesting (and disappointing) point in our group today about how an entire project was funded to research the "perceived genetic inferiority" of the indigenous groups in Sweden. This could definitely speak to the continued disconnect between Sweden's indigenous image and lack of indigenous rights. Also, is there a reason that Sweden wants to be seen as being amicable towards indigenous rights? Is there some sort of self-interested motive? I think this article that I've pasted below will be helpful when describing the background relationship between the Saami people and Swedish. The article talks about institutionalized racism in state policies and how these policies only started to change in the 1970s. This is similar to Canada's indigenous people in many ways, as the last residential school closed in the 1996 (which is awful), and relations still remain strained today. Kvist, R. (1994). The racist legacy in modern Swedish Saami policy. Canadian Journal of Native Studies, 14(2), 203-220. Looking forward to your draft! Thank you again for all of your helpful comments! Take care! :)
Dear Hayley, I like your topic and I think it will be interesting to see how Greenpeace has tried to rectify its relationship with Indigenous communities. In response to your question, if you should include the changing relationship of Greenpeace with Indigenous communities, I think it would be interesting to incorporate into your paper. Especially since Greenpeace might not have intentionally meant to impact Indigenous communities with their efforts against whaling and sealing. I also think you should focus on how the policies have changed. In your background section, you could include a major event that initiated a change in certain policies and improved the relationship of the Indigenous communities with the environmental organizations. This article talks about how the Inuit perceive Greenpeace as an intrusion on their culture. It was published in 2008. I wonder if anything has changed since then or if the relationship still hasn't improved? Tyrrell, M. (2008). Nunavik Inuit perspectives on beluga whale management in the Canadian Arctic. Human Organization, 67(3), 322-334. Looking forward to reading your draft! Take care!
Thank you, Rós!
Hi Osvaldo! I agree with the above comments that you need to narrow your research question. "Is Russia becoming less integrated in Arctic politics than before 2013?" This is a little ambiguous and you need to be as clear and specific as possible. Here are some comments that I hope you will find helpful: In particular, I really like the comments on comparing Russia's relationship with only one or two countries of interest. This article talks about Russia's foreign policy in the Arctic prior to 2013. I think you will find it useful for your research. Roberts, K. (2010). Jets, flags, and a new Cold War? Demystifying Russia's Arctic intentions. International Journal, 957-976. If you decide to focus on Russia's relationship with the West, here are two articles that talk about the "fraying" relationship of the West with Russia prior to 2013. Trenin, D. (2006). Russia leaves the West. FOREIGN AFFAIRS-NEW YORK-,85(4), 87. King, C. (2008). The five-day war. Foreign Affairs, 87(6), 2-11. Hope this helps! Good luck with your research! Take care, Suzie
Dear Stephen, Great outline! I like how your topic has developed from the literature review and I'm looking forward to reading your draft. I have two comments that I hope you will find useful for the development of your project. 1) "This section will evaluate the potential problems with applying the principle and possible reasons why it isn't more widely adopted." Based on the initial setup of your outline, this part surprised me a bit. When explaining the subsidiarity principle (in your introduction) make sure to explain why it isn't widely adopted (to provide context). I'd recommend adding a background section at the beginning of the paper to flesh out how it is not widely adopted. 2) "Research Question: Does the application of the subsidiarity principle by Arctic states result in increased Arctic environmental protection policy?" I think there are two parts to your research question and this needs to be made clear at the beginning of your paper. I recommend rephrasing the research question to encompass both the environmental policy element as well as the lack of adoption (of the subsidiarity principle) by some Arctic states. For example, it could be rephrased to, "Why hasn't the subsidiarity principle been widely adopted, in the Arctic, when it is currently being used for environmental protection policy?" Hope this helps! Have a good weekend! Take care, Suzie
Hi Dhrti and Clarissa, Nice outline! You have a solid plan and I look forward to reading the draft section. I have a few comments (with respect to the clarity of your argument) that I hope you will find helpful. 1) The thesis in the introductory paragraph is a little ambiguous. You state, "Find that increased immigration has positive and negative impacts on the economy but poses no threat to Norway’s arctic security." Why does increased immigration pose no security threat? Also, make sure to clearly define what is meant by "security" in the introduction. 2) "There exist ample tools and institutions which safeguards against cross border criminal activity as Norway and Russia work cooperatively to reduce potential threats." This point is very interesting! What institutions will you be discussing? Make sure to be as clear as possible. 3) Also, make sure to clearly distinguish the following: migrant, asylum seeker, refugee, and immigrant. These terms should not be used interchangeably. See you next week! Take care, Suzie
Thank you very much, Jessica! Your comments are very helpful and I will make sure to incorporate the funding and structural issues into my paper. To follow up on our class discussion today, I've decided to take out the portion about interviewing women who have experienced IPV. I think the risks of outweigh the benefits.
Hi Paul, Fantastic outline! I like how you clearly indicated your hypotheses. I recommend including, "the possible competition among various organizations" in your hypotheses section. In response to section V of your outline about the, "possible competition between organizations" I have found an article that discusses the competition between the OSCE and NATO: Dean, J. (1999). OSCE and NATO: Complementary or Competitive Security Providers for Europe?. IFSH (ed.) OSCE Yearbook, 429-434. In addition, this article talks about Russia's negative attitude towards the OSCE: Zellner, W. (2005). Russia and the OSCE: From high hopes to Disillusionment.Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 18(3), 389-402. Hope this helps! Good luck! Take care, Suzie
Hi Jessica! I really like your research question and look forward to seeing how your paper develops! As mentioned in class today, it will be very important to clearly define what you mean by "sovereign" or whether you mean "influence". You've done an excellent job with the research! Here are some comments that I thought of when reading through your outline: 1) The article pasted below discusses "International Nesting" and "Institutional Linkages". It might help to frame your work around these ideas. Young, O. R. (1996). Institutional linkages in international society: Polar perspectives. Global Governance, 1-23. 2) Also, to avoid "cherry-picking" it might be beneficial to focus on "why" civil society is starting to play more of a role at influencing state policy rather than "where" or "when" it has occurred. What has changed within the last decade that accounts for this change? Hope this helps! Take care, Suzie
Hi Max! I enjoyed reading your outline and like your new research question. In class today, it sounds like you wanted to focus on this outline so I have a few comments for you. 1) Make sure to provide the contextualization for Nauru in addition to the contextualization for Greenland. In your outline, you only mentioned Greenland so I wasn't sure if you were also going to include some background information on Nauru as well. 2) In your definition section (and you might have already thought of this) but make sure to include information about what you mean by "microstate" as this will be very important to define for your paper. 3) Here is a source that I think you will find helpful when developing your argument: Smits, C., Bertelsen, R. G., & Justinussen, J. C. S. (2014). The Challenges & Opportunities for Arctic Microstates in Developing an Energy Sector: The Role of Human Capital and Knowledge Institutes. Arctic Yearbook, 3(1), 1-17. 4) Also, these two articles will be helpful in your definition section on microstates: Anckar, D. (2004). Regime choices in microstates: the cultural constraint. Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 42(2), 206-223. Chicago Anckar, D. (2010). Small is democratic, but who is small?. Arts and Social Sciences Journal, 2, 1-10. I like your new focus and look forward to seeing your draft section next week! Take care, Suzie
Hi everyone! Here are some of my interview questions. Any thoughts/feedback that you might have on them would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! 1. Does the Inuit Circumpolar Council work to mitigate social issues, such as intimate partner violence (IPV), in Canada's Arctic? If not, do you see the ICC addressing these issues in the future? 2. Do you know if there have been petitions to raise awareness about violence against women in Canada's Arctic, specifically IPV? 3. Are there shelters for women to seek help when affected by IPV in Canada's Arctic? If there are no shelters, what is currently being done to help these women? Are there other community based programs that help Inuit women who experience IPV? 4. Accourding to Pauktuutik Inuit Women of Canada, Inuit women are more likely to experience IPV. What factors do you think contribute to this? Do these factors include a lack of resources in Canada's Arctic? What recommendations would you provide and is there a way the ICC and Arctic Council can help address these social concerns?
Hi Greg! Very interesting topic! I'm looking forward to reading your draft! In your second last paragraph you ask different questions that are relevant to your research. I'd recommend focusing on a few that will support your argument the best (possibly two). This will streamline your research. You mention that, "From this jumping off point, this paper will focus on the world order, or more accurately, if and how these concepts are manifested in the Arctic." This is great and I'm interested to see how your argument develops. I think the article that I've pasted below will be helpful for your research. It talks more about world order in relation to the Neo-Gramscian thought. As you've mentioned, you'd want to explain this in more detail for the reader to set up your argument around this framework. Burnham, P. (1991). Neo-Gramscian hegemony and the international order. Capital & Class, 15(3), 73-92. In response to your comment, I'm interested to see how you connect "an international group of elites (executives, heads of state, senior diplomats, etc.) and serves their interests (namely commercial). The Arctic forums, institutions, conferences, etc. are all just ways in which this elite class entrenches and guarantees these interests" to Neo-Gramscian thought. I thought this was a good point and I'd recommend adding this part to your literature review/draft. Hope this helps! :)
Clarissa and Dhrti, Great collaboration! I'm particularly interested in refugee issues (I almost wanted to write on a similar topic) and look forward to see how your project develops. I'd recommend adding a bit more in your introduction about the current migration crisis to provide context for the reader (you mention it briefly but you could add a bit more). Your project is very timely and by explaining the motivation (e.g. the current refugee crisis and how millions are displaced) this would illustrate its importance and relevance to the reader. How will you be answering your research question? The article citation that I've pasted below will be helpful for your research. It has a section on asylum seekers in Norway. I like the way they framed their research by interviewing staff at asylum processing centres. Lauritzen, C., & Sivertsen, H. (2012). Children and families seeking asylum in northern Norway: Living conditions and mental health. International Migration,50(6), 195-210. Hope this helps!
Hi Andreas, You have a great start to your research! I'm looking forward to reading your draft. I found some articles on the mackerel dispute that I think you will find helpful. In particular, the last article references the "Cod wars" of the 1950s and 1960s. Ørebech, P. (2013). The international journal of marine and coastal law: The "lost mackerel" of the north east atlantic-the flawed system of trilateral and bilateral decision-making Graham & Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff. doi:10.1163/15718085-12341276 Britain: Overfished and over there; mackerel wars. (2010, Sep 04). The Economist, 396, 36-n/a. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/docview/749679772?accountid=14656 Ward, A. (2010). Iceland defiant over mackerel catches. FT.Com, Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/docview/746763748?accountid=14656 Towards the end of your literature review you mention that you will make, "use of the various strands in international relations theory..." Which theory/theories will you be using? Looking forward to reading more of your work! Hope this helps!
Hi William! I like your research question and the approach that you are taking. I'm looking forward to reading your draft. Below is an article that I think you'll find useful for your research. It talks about China's strategic and economic interest in the Arctic. Alexeeva, O., & Lasserre, F. (2012). China and the Arctic. Arctic Yearbook, 2012, 80-90. I like how you will be connecting your ideas to Oye's concept of payoff structure. It sounds very applicable to your research question. I think you will find this book helpful when outlining Oye's concept in your paper. Oye, K. A. (1986). Cooperation under anarchy. Princeton University Press. Hope this helps!
Hi Stephen! Interesting topic! I look forward to reading your draft and seeing how things develop. I agree with the above comments. Here are some articles that discuss the subsidiary principle in the Arctic. I think you will find them useful for your research. Bailes, A.. Understanding The Arctic Council: A 'Sub-Regional' Perspective. Journal of Military and Strategic Studies, North America, 15, Jan. 2014. Available at: . In particular, the citation that I've pasted below discusses the subsidiary principle in relation to land claims of Indigenous people. It might be interesting to discuss this in your paper. Rodon, T. (2015). Resource Development and Land Claim Settlements in the Canadian Arctic: Multilevel Governance, Subsidiarity, and Streamlining. Paper presented at ICPP Milan. Hope this helps!
Hi Paul, Very interesting topic! I enjoyed reading your literature review. I agree with the above comments on re-focusing your research question. I think your second last paragraph is the crux of your paper and should be moved to your introductory paragraph. Also, why is there a need for the OSCE to be involved in the Arctic? How would the Arctic states benefit from its involvement? The article citation that I've pasted below provides some background information on the OSCE and why certain countries (such as Russia and the US) might not view the OSCE as relevant when compared to other IOs. I think this article will be helpful when framing your interview questions to see the other side of this debate. Boonstra, J. (2010). Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. The European Union and Democracy Promotion: A Critical Global Assessment, 78. Hope this helps!
Hi Parmida! Your topic is very original and I'm looking forward to reading your paper! I also love your research question. I like the above comments as focusing on point 8 would narrow the scope of your paper. You could modify your definition of "secure" (perhaps focusing on economic security) to determine why some Arctic states are more "secure" than others? Or, if you wanted to do a comparative study you could take a country that is very prone to armed conflict and then compare it to the Arctic. Your justification for comparing the Arctic with the other country could be its likelihood of conflict. Why is that particular country more prone to conflict when compared to Arctic regions? I've pasted an article that I think you'll find helpful. It is a policy brief that talks about how international conflict in the Arctic is unlikely due to the amount of cooperation in the region. Kraska, J., & Baker, B. (2014). Emerging Arctic Security Challenges. Center for a New American Security, Briefing Paper. To answer some of your imbedded questions... Should you be using conflict as your indicator of security? When I first read your literature review, when you posed the question, "Can we figure out why some regions are more secure than others?" I immediately thought you'd be discussing how prone certain states are to armed conflict. I like how you outlined your measurements in point 6 and provided a definition of "secure". That said, you could always change your definition of secure. Should you use secure and stable interchangeably? I wouldn't use secure and stable interchangeably. A country can be viewed as stable (currently not under conflict) without being secure (the likelihood of conflict). Hope this helps! :)
Hi Osvaldo! Great topic! I'd recommend starting your project by outlining the motivations behind it. Why is, "Russia’s feeling of isolationism in the Arctic can have destabilizing impacts on Arctic matters and the ability for Arctic Council members to collaborate on issue areas" important to IR? I think you will find the article that I've pasted below useful for your research (it should be the translated version). It outlines Russia's main goals and strategic priorities in the Arctic. Russian Government, 2008. Russian strategy for the Arctic. Available from: http://www.scrf.gov.ru/documents/98.html Hope this helps!
Very ambitious and interesting question! You could re-frame your question to, "Why does Greenland want sovereignty (what is currently lacking that makes them want sovereignty?) and how would this change, or improve, the current relationship of Greenland with the rest of the Arctic states?" You might choose to focus on Greenland's Self-Government Act. I've pasted an article below that you might find useful. Kuokkanen, R. (2015). ‘To See What State We Are In’: First Years of the Greenland Self-Government Act and the Pursuit of Inuit Sovereignty.Ethnopolitics, 1-17. Hope this helps!
Great topic! I'm excited to see what you find from your research and look forward to reading your paper. I think you have a great approach and found this part of your literature review very interesting, "In this way, the purpose of this study is to illustrate the Arctic as a region of multilateral cooperation under the auspices of the Arctic Council, to challenge existing notions of Arctic geopolitics that place states at the center". Will you be examining case studies/specific events to determine whether or not the non-state actors "set the agenda" for the state actors? Prof. Byers mentions a petition that spread awareness about climate change in the US on pages 227-228 in his book, "International Law and the Arctic". He cites this article that I think you will find useful for your research: Jessica Gordon, "Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to Hold Hearing After Rejecting Inuit Climate Change Petition." (2007) 7 Sustainable Development Law and Policy 55. Hope this helps!