Abstract: The proportion of U.S. prison inmates who were black increased dramatically between 1940 and 2000. While about two-thirds of the increase occurred between 1940 and 1970, most recent research analyzes the period after 1970, focusing on explanations such as the war on drugs, law-and-order politics, discrimination, inequality, and racial threat. We analyze the growth in the racial difference in incarceration between 1940 and 1980, focusing on the role of demographic processes, particularly population growth, migration, and urbanization. We implement three analyses to assess the role of these demographic processes: (1) a simple accounting model that decomposes the national trend into population growth, changes in arrests, and changes in sentencing; (2) a model of state variation in incarceration that decomposes the racial difference in incarceration into population change, migration between states with different incarceration rates, and other processes; and (3) race-specific models of within-state variation in incarceration rates using state characteristics coupled with a decomposition of the role of changes in state characteristics.
Abstract: This study investigates when individuals from advantaged and disadvantaged groups are in favor of reducing income inequality. Using a model that considers both an individual’s absolute income and relative income, I examine the conditions under which income equalization is supported by some members in the advantaged group and, more interestingly, opposed by part of the disadvantaged group. In equilibrium, the valuation towards relative income, the initial endowment the difference between the two groups and the amount of income transfer upon equalization have opposite effects on different groups’ likelihood of favoring equalization. To this end, I conduct a comparative statics analysis, and the results suggest that in order to incentivize more individuals to support inter-group income transfer, a policymaker’s optimal strategy substantially depends on how much the society values relative income.
Abstract: A new tool is presented for facilitating greater objectivity in the chaotic field of genocide studies: first, assembling the available factual data about any event of mass murder systematically; second, contextualizing each of our judgments of the nature of the crime as a choice being made by a given scholar or institution (e.g., a specific court), but not as “God’s word.” The Worksheet for Describing and Categorizing a Genocidal Event is believed to be innovative in several ways: (1) This model presents researchers with a methodology for developing systematic, extensive and objective information about many different aspects of an event of mass killing; (2) Emphasis is placed on identifying each researcher’s guiding concept of genocide; (3) The proposed methodology purposely postpones any effort at classification—including whether an event constitutes “genocide”—until after factual data have been assembled; (4) Categorization of an event is also to be understood as an act of judgment by each researcher, not as scientifically established truth; (5) It is also to be understood that classification in the language of social sciences is different than legal classifications that in turn also are to be understood as based on whatever specific code of law.
Abstract: Communities across the United States, in both urban and rural areas, are seeking ways to promote well-being for their citizens in sustainable ways. This paper provides a descriptive case study of one rural community that used an inquiry-based approach to ask, “How can we engage our citizens to improve child and family well-being in our community?” The group also wondered “What if Brookings had one place for families to access all family resources that support well-being?” “What if all families had a place where their needs were heard?” and “What if all resources for families looked at the well-being of children and families in a holistic way?” This paper describes the initial journey of a community of practice advocating on several different community levels, including the role of university students, the process of the community of practice formation, its growing connections to community agencies and its initial efforts to build calls to action through participatory research and grassroots community efforts. While conveying a linear narrative, the authors also maintain a focus on the organic processes of knowledge construction and the evolution of a community of practice. Data collection, using the Delphi approach, is underway to access initial ground-up definitions of well-being and to identify areas of focus.
Abstract: At the very start of a chapter on hysteria in her book From Mastery to Analysis: Theories of Gender in Psychoanalytic Feminism, Patricia Elliot cites Nietzsche’s “truths are illusions of which one has forgotten that they are illusions”. This paper follows this connection between hysteria and the work of Nietzsche. This paper will highlight how a Lacanian interpretation of hysteria can elucidate Heidegger’s reading of Nietzsche’s Will to Power and how this interpretation of the Will to Power can better explain the value and importance of hysteria for psychoanalysis and philosophy. I will show that the hysteric’s discourse has a “higher value” than the master’s discourse because it meets Nietzsche’s definition of art, which aims at life’s enhancement rather than the master’s knowledge or truth which aims at the preservation of life. My work will explain how the hysteric’s discourse can transform the master’s discourse into the analyst’s discourse through the Will to Power. This is important, as this is the ultimate aim of psychoanalysis where “At the end of analysis the subject passes to the position of analyst”. This is the ultimate aim of psychoanalysis because “For Lacan, the Discourse of the Analyst is revolutionary because it articulates the truth of the (unconscious) subject”. Fundamentally, the objective of this article is to demonstrate that “hysteria is to be understood not as an ‘abnormal’ condition but as one possible manifestation of the subject’s uncanny relationship to itself”.
Abstract: In light of recent developments such as the COP21 Paris climate agreement, the UN adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals for 2030, and the Habitat III Conference, there is increasing recognition of the role of human settlements as key components of both global challenges and global solutions. “Urban sustainability” under various names has matured over the last three decades not only in planning and related fields, but also in wider professional and popular discourse. In this paper we trace a historical overview of urban sustainability theory and practice, and explain why urban sustainability planning and development currently face limited and inconsistent application. We show that this lack of public uptake is due in part to monitoring, assessment, and decision-support frameworks and tools that do not engage citizens and their governments in a shared “strong sustainability” analysis and/or vision. We argue that urban sustainability today clearly needs to embrace equity, inclusion, and other social considerations; contribute to constructive societal mobilisation and compelling policy-making; advocate for development as a better alternative to growth; encourage the integration of human and environmental health interests; and encompass triple-bottom-line-inspired outcomes. Focusing on community capital productivity and regeneration may be the key to advancing healthy and sustainable communities.