The Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) has positioned itself as a regional security organization aimed at reducing the influence of the Organization of American States (OAS) in South America. At the same time, the OAS paradoxically serves as a model for UNASUR because of its operational capacity and its legitimacy as a regional organization. This article analyzes the seemingly contradictory tendencies of replication and dissociation that UNASUR exhibits towards the OAS in terms of security conceptions and practices. In the first part of the paper, we will draw on recent debates on international regime complexity to develop a framework to study institutional overlap. The second part analyzes to what extent and in which respects UNASUR, and particularly its Defense Council, overlaps with the OAS in terms of security conceptions and practices, while the third part examines the causes of the emergence of a "competitor" for the OAS in South America.

Research linking heterogeneity and democracy usually focuses on one single dimension of heterogeneity, such as the distribution of power resources, income inequality, gender inequality, or ethnic fractionalization. Empirical results have so far been inconsistent. This article attempts a sound conceptualization of the phenomenon of heterogeneity. In order to assess whether and how heterogeneity hampers democracy, we will first define what "heterogeneity" means and examine its various dimensions. Then we will discuss why and in which respect heterogeneity constitutes a challenge to democratic transition and consolidation and will review previous research. Our empirical analysis gauges the effect of various dimensions of heterogeneity on the political trajectory of states since the beginning of the third wave of democratization. We find that, while most facets of heterogeneity do not hinder democratic transition, most of them complicate democratic consolidation. Our final discussion offers some suggestions on how the obstacles that heterogeneity poses for democratic development could be overcome and which principles, procedures and institutions are most appropriate to deal with each of the different dimensions of heterogeneity.

No abstract

Do academic publication standards reflect or determine research results? The article proposes minimal criteria for distinguishing useful 'unpublishable' results from low-quality research, and argues that the virtues of negative results have been overlooked. We consider the fate these results have suffered thus far, review arguments for and against their publication and introduce a new initiative -a journal to disseminate negative results and advance debate on their recognition and use.