Mimicking strategic choices: the secret of setting defence agendas?, Friedérick Richter, doctorante au CEVIPOF

Résumé :

This article analyses how defence issues rise on government agendas in France and the United Kingdom (UK), the two leading military powers in Europe. Both countries have the political and the military tools to match their international ambitions, including a large military-industrial base and nuclear weapons, and often share similar approaches within international organisations such as the United Nations. Given this comparability in defence matters, the aim of this article is (1) to determine if the UK and France devote the same level of attention to defence issues and (2) to examine how defence enters the government agenda, taking into account that there are significant differences between the institutions that shape defence policy in France and the UK. This article tests alternative explanations for stability and critical junctures in British and French defence policy over the period 1980-2017 in order to show under which conditions security-related issues - such as the recruitment of civilian and military personnel or the launch of major equipment programmes - become a political problem. A special focus is given to the choices governments make when allocating attention between manpower and equipment.

How group identities can undermine democratic accountability and what to do about it. Kevin Arceneaux, chercheur invIté au CEVIPOF 

Résumé :

In modern democracies, effective self-governance requires people to vote for candidates who share their values and against those who fail to live up to their expectations. Unfortunately, decades of research suggests that people are often more motivated to reinforce and validate their identities with social and political groups than they are in holding elected officials accountable. This project considers how people can be nudged toward having a more open mind.