Reference no: EM132341569 , Length: word count:1500

Term Paper Assignment -

The purpose behind this term paper assignment is to develop and evaluate the student's ability:

• To comprehend - and critically engage with - a particular problem and its relevant literature in comparative politics research.
• To select an appropriate case or two for further study.
• To articulate both the topic (or research question) and argument (or hypothesis) through a case study and close reading of at least two academic articles.
• To write a concise and effective social science research paper, with a clear thesis statement, evidence-based reasons, organized conclusion, and cited sources.

Outside research for this assignment is required. This means that developing and writing your term paper based only on the course textbook and the assigned article(s) assigned will not be enough. At least one additional scholarly source is required as well. All sources, assigned and additional, must be significantly cited in your paper (i.e. more than one or two in-text citations of each source will be needed). The expected citation format will be according to the APSA 2018 Style Manual, which will be posted on Portal. Please consult the "Parenthetical Citations" and "References" sections (pp. 38-56) and see me if you have any further questions about citations.

The articles and chapters below can be found online on CAMS in the "Course Documents" section.

Essay questions:

1. Of the 193 states in the world today, only 25 are federations, i.e. countries that constitutionally divide their governing powers between federal (or national) and regional governments. Some comparativists argue that federalism, more so than unitary systems of government, leads to more stable democracies and higher (economic) development. Is this claim true? Explain the major advantages and disadvantages of federalism before arguing why (or why not) federalism leads to more developed, consolidated democracies. Use the assigned readings as well as at least two empirical cases to support your claims.

Assigned reading:

• Stepan, Alfred. 1999. Federalism and Democracy: Beyond the U.S. Model. Journal of Democracy 10(4): 19-34.
• Rodden, Jonathan and Erik Wibbels. 2002. Beyond the Fiction of Federalism: Economic Management in Multi-Tiered Systems. World Politics 54(4): 494-531.

2. How can we explain the origins and likelihood of ethno-national conflict and violence? In attempting to answer this question, comparativists often focus on either the construction of cultural (e.g. ethnic, religious, racial, etc.) groups and boundaries, on the one hand, or the rational calculation of material interests and political opportunities, on the other hand. Through a close reading of the two assigned articles and with support from at least two empirical cases, make an argument for why either the culturalist or rational choice approach to ethnic conflict and violence is the most plausible theory.

Assigned reading:

• Jowitt, Ken. 2001. Ethnicity: Nice, Nasty, and Nihilistic. In Ethno-Political Warfare: Causes, Consequences, and Possible Solutions, ed. Daniel Chirot and Martin Seligman, 27-36. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
• Fearon, James D. and David D. Laitin. 2003. Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War. American Political Science Review 97(1) 75-90.

3. States that are rich in natural resources (i.e. fossil fuels, certain minerals, or other high- value commodities) tend to have worse economic, democratic, and development outcomes than states with fewer natural resources. This well researched correlation is known as the "resource curse," and it largely applies to states in the developing world. Through two empirical cases, explain why and how this "resource curse" works. Then briefly but critically discuss how generalizable your explanation is before concluding.

Assigned reading:

• Weinthal, Erika and Pauline Jones Luong. 2006. "Combatting the Resource Curse: An Alternative Solution to Managing Mineral Wealth." Perspectives on Politics, Volume 4, Number 1 (March), pp. 35-53.
• Frankel, Jeffrey. 2012. The Natural Resource Curse: A Survey. In Brenda Shaffer and Taleh Ziyadov (eds.), Beyond the Resource Curse. University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 17-57.

4. Tunisia and Egypt both experienced a major social revolution - the 2010-2011 "Arab Spring" - around the same time that replaced their respective long-time authoritarian leaders with the Muslim Brotherhood. Although the mass protests demanded democratic government in both countries, only Tunisia has made relatively successful steps toward becoming a democracy today. Egypt remains authoritarian under military rule. Why did Tunisia transition into a democracy, but not Egypt, after the 2010-2011 Arab Spring mass protests? Use the comparative method (and in this case, Most-Similar-Systems design) to demonstrate your hypothesis and argue why, according to empirical evidence, it explains the outcome (i.e. that Tunisia transitioned into a democracy while Egypt remains an authoritarian regime today). The last part of the paper should discuss one possible objection to your hypothesis (e.g. Could there be another variable that explains the outcome better than the one you presented as your hypothesis? Is there another variable that may cause the outcome as much as your hypothesis? Could it be that both the cause (or your hypothesis) and the outcome affect each other, thereby weakening the cause-effect relationship you attempt to explain?). Make sure to reply critically to the objection you raise.

Assigned reading:

• Stepan, Alfred. 2018. Mutual Accommodation: Islamic and Secular Parties and Tunisia's Democratic Transition. In Stepan (ed.), Democratic Transition in the Muslim World: A Global Perspective. Columbia University Press, chapter 3.
• Bou Nassif, Hicham. 2018. Patterns of Civil-Military Relations and Their Legacies for Democratization: Egypt Versus Tunisia. In Stepan (ed.), Democratic Transition in the Muslim World: A Global Perspective. Columbia University Press, chapter 6.

Length: 1200 - 1500 words.