No abstract

The literature on civil society in postcommunist regimes highlights its weakness as compared with civil society in other democracies. In this article the authors make a general argument on how different patterns of antecedent dictatorship affect the development of civil society across a range of democracies. They examine the slow emergence of two behaviors associated with a robust civil society—participation in organizational life and in protest—and explain variation across countries as a function of regime history. They draw their individual-level data from the World Values Survey and analyze the behavior of over forty-one thousand citizens from forty-two democracies. Using methods of hierarchical linear modeling to control for both national-level and individual-level factors, the authors find that different types of dictatorship and variation in their duration produce different negative legacies for the development of civil society.

This study investigates the impact of the latest wave of globalization on anti-immigrant prejudice. We discern and test two contradictory accounts of the impact of globalization on anti-immigrant prejudice from the prejudice and globalization literatures. On the one hand, there is the ‘civilizing/integrative globalization’ thesis, which implies that globalization should help to decrease prejudice by creating sustained and equal contact between previously alien cultures and peoples, and by spreading economic gains to everybody. On the other hand, there is the ‘destructive globalization/globalization as a threat’ thesis, which argues that globalization should increase anti-immigrant prejudice by intensifying competition over resources and by increasing perceived threat by native populations as a result of increasing immigrant populations. We test these two accounts using a multi-level analysis of 64 countries and nearly 150,000 individuals, derived from the World Values Surveys (waves 3–5). Our analyses reveal support for ‘destructive globalization/ globalization as a threat’ thesis, but emphasize the multi-dimensional character of globalization. We find that citizens of countries with higher levels of trade openness have significantly more anti-immigrant sentiments. There is also some evidence that in countries where unemployment is accompanied by high levels of trade openness or the existence of large immigrant populations, citizens hold high anti-immigrant prejudice. By contrast, foreign direct investment (FDI) has a weak effect.

In recent years, a variety of efforts have been made in political science to enable, encourage, or require scholars to be more open and explicit about the bases of their empirical claims and, in turn, make those claims more readily evaluable by others. While qualitative scholars have long taken an interest in making their research open, reflexive, and systematic, the recent push for overarching transparency norms and requirements has provoked serious concern within qualitative research communities and raised fundamental questions about the meaning, value, costs, and intellectual relevance of transparency for qualitative inquiry. In this Perspectives Reflection, we crystallize the central findings of a three-year deliberative process—the Qualitative Transparency Deliberations (QTD)—involving hundreds of political scientists in a broad discussion of these issues. Following an overview of the process and the key insights that emerged, we present summaries of the QTD Working Groups’ final reports. Drawing on a series of public, online conversations that unfolded at www.qualtd.net, the reports unpack transparency’s promise, practicalities, risks, and limitations in relation to different qualitative methodologies, forms of evidence, and research contexts. Taken as a whole, these reports—the full versions of which can be found in the Supplementary Materials—offer practical guidance to scholars designing and implementing qualitative research, and to editors, reviewers, and funders seeking to develop criteria of evaluation that are appropriate—as understood by relevant research communities—to the forms of inquiry being assessed. We dedicate this Reflection to the memory of our coauthor and QTD working group leader Kendra Koivu.1

Abstract. Canadian provinces have long been considered as “small worlds,” each with its own cultural distinctiveness and province-building dynamics. This article examines whether these same provincial specificities are observed in terms of attitudes toward immigration intakes and racial diversity. Three questions are asked. First, are there important variations in views toward immigration and racial minorities across Canadian provinces within the native-born white Canadian population? Second, have the differences and similarities changed between 1988 and 2008? And third, do specific provincial economic, demographic, and cultural realities shape provincial public opinion on these matters? The findings indicate that there are significant differences and commonalities in how all provinces react to immigration and racial diversity, that native-born white Canadians have grown increasingly accepting of immigration and racial diversity over time and that views toward immigration and racial diversity are distinct from each other and each responds to a specific set of provincial realities.Résumé. Les provinces canadiennes constituent de “petits univers,” chacune possédant sa propre culture et sa propre dynamique politique. Cet article explore si de telles spécificités provinciales peuvent être également observées en ce qui a trait aux attitudes par rapport à l'immigration et à la diversité raciale. Nous posons trois questions. Premièrement, y a-t-il des différences d'opinions quant à l'immigration et aux minorités raciales entre provinces canadiennes au sein de la population blanche née au Canada? Deuxièmement, est-ce que les similarités et les différences entre les provinces ont changé entre 1988 et 2008? Et troisièmement, est-ce que les réalités économiques, démographiques et culturelles provinciales influencent l'opinion publique provinciale sur ces questions? Les résultats de l'étude indiquent qu'il y a à la fois des similarités et des différences quant aux attitudes des différentes provinces sur l'immigration et la diversité raciale, que la population blanche née au Canada s'est montrée de plus en plus ouverte à l'immigration et à la diversité raciale au cours de la période à l'étude, et que les attitudes par rapport à l'immigration et la diversité raciale ne sont pas identiques et qu'elles répondent chacune à leur façon à un certain nombre de réalités provinciales.