Related Groups Calls

Table of Contents

Related Group Contact List

Aging Policy and Politics Group
Michael Gusmano (gusmanom@thehastingscenter.org), The Hastings Center

The theme of the 2017 American Political Science Association’s Annual Meeting is: “The Quest for Legitimacy: Actors, Audiences and Aspirations.” The issue of legitimacy and its meaning overlap with concerns about population aging in a variety of ways. Critics of social programs for older people frequently question the legitimacy of such programs by suggesting that they unfairly direct resources from younger people to older people. Students of interest group politics raise questions about the legitimacy of groups like AARP, which claim to represent older people. Gerontologists and advocates for older adults argue that, in contrast to the perception that older people wield enormous political power, they often face discrimination in the media, politics and the workplace. The Aging and Politics Committee invites paper and panel proposals that address these and other related questions. Questions can be directed to Michael K. Gusmano at Rutgers University (mkg93@sph.rutgers.edu).

American Enterprise Institute
Dennis Coyle (coyle@law.edu), The Catholic University of America

American Public Philosophy Institute
Christopher Wolfe (cwolfe@udallas.edu), University of Dallas

American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy
Andrew Valls (coytheasplp@gmail.com)

Asian Pacific American Caucus
Charles Lee (ctl@asu.edu), Arizona State University and Jeanette Harvie (jeanette.harvie@gmail.com), University of California, Santa Barbara

The Asian Pacific American Caucus welcomes proposals for papers on the engagement of Asian Pacific Americans in both transnational and domestic politics. In accordance with this year’s theme, “The Quest for Legitimacy,” we especially encourage proposals that tackle questions dealing with legitimacy, broadly defined, for the Asian Pacific American community. While we are most interested in topics related to civic engagement and mobilization for Asian Pacific Americans, we will also consider papers on all issues related to Asian Pacific American politics.

Association for Israel Studies
Oded Haklai (haklai@queensu.ca), Queen’s University

The theme statement for the 2017 APSA annual meeting deals with the “quest for legitimacy”, a highly pertinent issue for Israeli politics. At its core, legitimacy is a socially constructed and contested concept. As institutions, organized groups, and individual actors engage in contention about what constitutes “the legitimate” in Israel, they aim to shape such things as national identity, regime characteristics, minority rights, boundaries of political debate and protest, representation, territorial boundaries, and more.

The Association for Israel Studies seeks papers that examine this theme in Israeli politics. We encourage papers that examine contestation between various segments and institutions in Israeli society about what constitutes, or ought to constitute, the legitimate and acceptable in diverse realms of Israeli politics. We welcome submissions from all subfields of political science and are open to papers that examine Israel as a case study or in comparative perspective.

Association for Politics and the Life Sciences
Albert Somit (albertsomit@gmail.com) and Steven Peterson (albertsomit@gmail.com), Pennsylvania State University, Harrisburg

This represents the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences’ “call for papers” for the 2017 annual meeting (to be held in San Francisco).

APLS focus is represented well on the organization’s official web site: “The Association for Politics and the Life Sciences (APLS) is an international and interdisciplinary association of scholars, scientists, and policymakers concerned with evolutionary, genetic, and ecological knowledge and its bearing on political behavior, public policy and ethics.”

The Association for Politics and the Life Sciences is organizing one panel, workshop, or symposium for the 2017 American Political Science Association meeting. We invite proposals for papers as well as offers to serve as panel discussants and chairs. Papers on all topics are welcome, whether bioethics, biopolicy, neurobiological aspects of behavior, evolutionary effects on politics, etc.

The conference theme for APSA in 2017 is “The Quest for legitimacy.” APSA encourages submissions that tackle questions of legitimacy with special attention to such subjects as: What

Is legitimacy? Who bestows legitimacy? What are the processes underlying the legitimation

of actors, institutions, aspirations, and political goals? And so on. . . . Papers addressing this theme are welcomed, too.

Association for the Study of Nationalities
Zsuzsa Csergő (csergo@queensu.ca), Queen’s University, Canada

Association Française de Science Politique
Sylvain Brouard (sylvain.brouard@sciencespo.fr), Sciences Po, and Jennifer Fredette (fredette@ohio.edu), Ohio University

The AFSP Group welcomes paper, panel, roundtable and short course proposals on a wide range of topics related to the study and/or practice of French and European Political Science.  Proposals that include political scientists from France as well as other countries are encouraged along with proposals that focus on the theme of this year’s meetings (The Quest for Legitimacy: Actors, Audiences and Aspirations).   Co-sponsorships with other groups/divisions are required for acceptance. The group is co-administered with the French Politics Group.

CONTACT – Convener, Sylvain Brouard (Sciences Po)  & Jennifer Fredette (Ohio University) : sylvain.brouard@sciencespo.fr ; fredette@ohio.edu

Association of Chinese Political Studies
Steven Balla (stevenjballa@gmail.com), George Washington University

The Association of Chinese Political Studies (ACPS) welcomes submissions from interested scholars and practitioners for its panel at the 2017 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association. The conference theme, “The Quest for Legitimacy,” is immediately relevant in the study of contemporary and historical China.  The ACPS invites paper proposals that apply diverse theoretical and empirical approaches to the analysis of China-related research questions, particularly those that, as called for by the conference theme, “tackle questions of legitimacy.”  In the Chinese context, such questions naturally span a wide array of issues in both domestic politics and China’s relations with other nations and its place in the international system.

Association of Korean Political Studies
HeeMin Kim (recount01@gmail.com), Seoul National University

The Association of Korean Political Studies is, with the cooperation of the American Political Science Association, pleased to announce that the annual meeting will be held in San Francisco, CA  August 31 – September 3, 2017. The Association is open to a wide range of proposals encompassing diverse theoretical, empirical, and policy perspectives. Please enter your proposal into the APSA website by the official deadline.

Brazilian Political Science Association
Renato Perissinotto (monseff@gmail.com), UFMG, and Cristina Buarque de Hollanda, (cristinabuarque@iesp.uep.edu)

British Politics Group
Janet Laible (jml6@lehigh.edu), Lehigh University

The British Politics Group welcomes proposals for papers, panels, roundtables and other innovative formats on any topic related to British politics for the 2017 APSA annual meeting in San Francisco. We are open to proposals that focus on the United Kingdom as a case study as well as those that provide comparative perspectives on British politics.

Proposals may wish to consider the theme for the 2017 APSA Annual Meeting, “The Quest for Legitimacy: Actors, Audiences and Aspirations.”

The theme invites conference participants to consider a wide range of questions about legitimacy, including its relationship to debates about representation, equality, voice, accountability, institutionalization, and protest. The context of the United Kingdom suggests many possibilities for considering political legitimacy, such as the referendum on Brexit, the strength of nationalist parties, debates about social policy, and the politics of immigration, along with other themes.

Note that all proposals must go through the APSA on-line process and must be submitted by the regular APSA deadline. Please follow APSA guidelines for submissions, e.g. paper proposals will need an abstract of the paper and full contact details for the presenter(s); panel proposals will need panelist names, paper titles, and abstracts. Please also note that all presenters including co-authors must be dues-paying members of the BPG in order to appear on the program (presenters may join the BPG after acceptance to the conference). Information about the British Politics Group, including membership information, may be found at britishpoliticsgroup.blogspot.com

Additional questions may be addressed to the BPG Executive Director, Janet Laible, at jml6@lehigh.edu

Campaign Finance Research Group
Michael Malbin (mmalbin@cfinst.org), Campaign Finance Institute, and Diana Dwyre (ddwrye@csuchico.edu), California State University, Chico

The 2017 Annual Meeting in San Francisco is an opportunity for the Campaign Finance Research Group to bring together scholars, policymakers and others to discuss the state of political finance policy, practice and scholarship. The Campaign Finance Research Group invites proposals for individual presentations or papers that address new developments in campaign finance scholarship, practical analyses, policy proposals, and practice. We welcome proposals that address the 2017 conference theme, The Quest for Legitimacy: Actors, Audiences and Aspirations. 

Cato Institute
John Samples (jsamples@cato.org), Cato Institute, and Christopher Preble, Cato Institute

The Cato Institute, a related group of the APSA, will be organizing at least one panel/workshop/symposium for the 2017 American Political Science Association meeting. The Institute seeks to broaden the parameters of public policy debate to allow consideration of the traditional American principles of limited government, individual liberty, free markets and peace. Toward that goal, the Institute invites proposals for papers that address either foreign or domestic policy.

Center for the Study of the Constitution
Guy Burnett (gburnett@hsc.edu), Hampden-Sydney College

Constitutional Legitimacy
The United States Constitution contains many provisions that may be interpreted in different ways. Scholars, critics, citizens, noncitizens, and politicians often use language that seeks to legitimate their claims to interpreting the Constitution. What makes a specific provision in the Constitution legitimate and others not? How are these arguments made and how do they affect democratic operation and constitutional enforcement and understanding? Which interpretation of the Constitution (or its provisions) is legitimate and which is not? The Center for the Study of the Constitution invites scholars to submit papers on the topic of constitutional legitimacy, including those focusing on political philosophy, history, public policy, law, and related fields.

Center for the Study of Federalism
Troy Smith (tesmith@byuh.edu), Brigham Young University

The Center for the Study of Federalism at the Robert B. and Helen S. Meyner Center for the Study of State and Local Government invites papers that examine state and local challenges and resistance to federal authority and policies, such as suits filed by state attorneys general; state and local resistance to Secure Communities and now the Priority Enforcement Program; the rise of sanctuary cities; opposition to the Affordable Care Act, REAL ID, NCLB, or D.C. vs. Heller (2008); marijuana legalization; nullification and secession threats; abortion and abortion-provider regulations; resistance to climate-change policies; stands on fracking; and expansive consumer protection laws. Papers might also examine the roles of political parties. For example, do state officials less often challenge the feds when their party controls the White House and/or Congress? Do federal officials push back less vigorously against states or local governments controlled by the president’s party?

Christians in Political Science
Darren Guerra (daniel.guerra@biola.edu)

Christians in Political Science invites proposals for papers and panels.  We celebrate the diversity of our work as Christian scholars from a variety of institutions – small colleges and large research universities, secular and religious campuses.  We welcome and encourage proposals from members of CPS active in any sub-field within political science.  Individual paper submissions are welcome, but we especially encourage proposals of entire panels that offer a coherent and unifying theme.

The Churchill Centre
James Muller (afjwm@uaa.alaska.edu), University of Alaska, Anchorage

The Churchill Centre will organize its related group panel at the 2017 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association in San Francisco, focusing on the theme “Winston S. Churchill on the Legitimacy of Empire.”

Widely viewed as a defender of empire, Churchill raised questions about its legitimacy throughout his career. Soon after he delivered his first public speech on behalf of liberty at the Empire Theatre in London, he had to consider which was more important when the two came into conflict: self-government or good government. Our panel will consider Churchill’s understanding of the requirements for legitimate government through an examination of his writings and statesmanship.

Ciceronian Society
Peter Haworth (peterhaworth@me.com)

Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy
Ronald Pestritto (rpestritto@hillsdale.edu), Hillsdale College

The Claremont Institute is dedicated to the study of the principles of the American founding and to enhancing and maintaining an understanding of those principles in the academy and in the public mind.  The Institute understands this mission in broad terms, and is thus interested in the tradition of political philosophy that was read by the founders and that influenced their thinking, as well as issues in contemporary American politics and foreign policy that might be informed by the principles of the Founding.  The Institute sponsors panels and roundtables at the annual meeting that explore these themes; interested parties should contact Institute Senior Fellow Ronald J. Pestritto (rpestritto@hillsdale.edu), who serves as organizer for these panels.

Committee for Political Sociology
Emilie van Haute (evhaute@ulb.ac.be), Université Libre de Bruxelles and Laurence Morel (laurence.morel@eui.eu), European University Institute

The Legitimacy of Political Executives in Democratic and Authoritarian Regimes

Political executives play a key role in political systems. Unlike other political institutions, executives can be found in all kinds of political regimes and have always been a central object of study in political science. Notwithstanding the centrality of executives there is not clear-cut research on the different aspects of legitimacy under which political executives operate in various political regimes. What does legitimacy mean in the context of executive studies? What do we currently know about the legitimacy of political executives under comparative perspective? Does, for instance, the increasing ‘presidentialization of politics’ have any consequences on the legitimacy (or a lack thereof) of political executives in liberal democracies? How are the creation of order and the exercise of power legitimized in political executives beyond democracies (i.e. in quasi-democracies, autocracies, absolute monarchies, and military regimes)? In keeping with the main theme of the 2017 APSA Annual Meeting (The Quest for Legitimacy), the CPS invites paper proposals, which look at the legitimacy of political executives in various political regimes. Given the nature of the Committee, comparative papers will be favored.

Committee on Viable Constitutionalism
R. Kent Weaver (weaverrk@georgetown.edu), Columbia University

Communitarian Network

Comparative Urban Politics
Jeffrey Paller (jpaller@usfca.edu), Columbia University

Complexity and Public Policy Group
Michael Givel (mgivel@ou.edu), The Ohio State University

Conference Group on Italian Politics and Society
Martin Bull (m.j.bull@salford.ac.uk), University of Salford, Manchester
Italian Politics after a Decade of Economic Recession
2017 will mark nearly a decade since the unleashing of the biggest economic crisis the western world has experienced since the 1930s. No country has been immune from this crisis, and Italy in particular has found itself, for lengthy periods, at the forefront of one important regional reflection of that worldwide recession, the Eurozone crisis. Unlike the previous decade, since 2008 the economic recession has provided not just an essential backdrop or context to the changes that have occurred in the Italian polity but the prime motivating factor. The economic downturn in 2008 brought to the fore – although not immediately – the deep-rooted structural problems in the Italian polity and exposed them in a dramatic manner, visibly placing a country which had long aspired to be seen alongside its more modern northern counterparts as clearly part of ‘southern’ Europe. The impact on Italian politics and the political economy, the challenges to the legitimacy of the established political parties and elites as well as the responses of those elites, has been nothing short of dramatic. Nearly a decade on, it is clear that the crisis has left a lasting impact on the Italian polity, despite the persistence of many features. This panel invites papers by Italian specialists which analyse any aspect of the Italian polity (politics, political economy, society, political legitimacy) in this decade of economic recession, assessing and explaining the degree of change that has been experienced.

Contact Point: Martin Bull, Program Chair, CONGRIPs: m.j.bull@salford.ac.uk

Conference Group on Jurisprudence and Public Law
David Fagelson (dfagel@american.edu), American University
Following the general theme of 2017 Annual Meeting, the Conference Group On Jurisprudence And Public Law is focusing on the theme of legitimacy.   The justification of the state’s monopoly of force is perhaps the central question of Jurisprudence.  So papers focusing on the moral basis of law, or indeed, whether or not the law has any moral basis will be welcome.  In addition to this abstract question, the Conference Group is also interested in specific applications of legitimacy to public law generally.   This includes not only the legitimacy of certain acts of state, but concomitant questions about the obligation to obey the law.  Papers that apply these concepts to specific questions are especially welcome.  As an example, papers might examine the legitimacy of various policies of the “War on Terror” or the actions of whistleblowers exposing those policies they considered illegitimate.  Papers that examine the legitimacy of institutions are also invited especially those related to the legitimacy of international organizations, international law and human rights regimes.  Finally, papers are also invited that examine the legitimacy of our traditional concept of legal responsibility in light of changing conceptions of human nature posited by neuro scientists, evolutionary psychologists and other social scientists.

While papers on these issues are especially welcome, any paper examining the legitimacy of law or the obligations of people to obey it are welcome.

Conference Group on the Middle East
A. Richard Norton (arn@bu.edu), Boston University

Associational Life in the  Contemporary Middle East
With the retrenchment of authoritarian regimes in the Arab world following the transient hopes prompted by the “Arab Spring”, it is understandable that many people, scholars included, have adopted a pessimistic perspective on the region’s future.  That perspective is arguably buttressed by the growing authoritarianism of the Turkish government, as well as the continuing political repression witnessed in Iran.

Even so, the region reveals a variety of examples of associational efforts to address social and economic ills, redress human tragedies and even speak truth to power.  The Syrian refugee crisis represents an obvious instance in which a various of groups have risen to the challenge, but other cases include the provision of essential legal or medical services, efforts to promote minority rights or protect vulnerable categories of people (children, for instance).

The CGME welcomes empirically informed papers that rigorously address single cases, including studies of single associations, parties, kinship-based formations or interest groups, country studies, or comparative studies. Theoretically oriented papers are welcome as well.

Conference Group on Taiwan Studies
Kharis Templeman (dchen@ramapo.edu), Stanford University

The 2017 American Political Science Association (APSA) Annual Meeting will be held from August 31-September 3 in San Francisco, CA. The conference theme is “The Quest for Legitimacy.”

CGOTS invites paper and panel proposals on Taiwan’s domestic politics and cross-Strait and international relations that are consistent with the theme of “The Quest for Legitimacy.”

The concept of legitimacy is fundamental to many classic debates in political science. At the same time, legitimacy is core to numerous contemporary political issues. Across the world and our discipline, questions about political legitimacy ensue. Salient debates—whether about representation, equality, voice, accountability, institutionalization, protest, revolutions, international norms, disputes, war—can all contain questions of legitimacy at their core. Moments of social and political change often center on contestation about what is considered legitimate, including some of the more prominent movements in Taiwan in the last several years such as demonstrations against nuclear power, government land expropriation, the death of a military conscript due to harsh corporal punishment, and of course the Sunflower Movement. Legitimacy is also closely tied to numerous core concepts, including the creation and maintenance of order, the proper exercise of power, and the nature and role of political authority. The legitimacy of state actions in Taiwan has become more contested in recent years, most notably in the conduct of cross-Strait relations with the People’s Republic of China. So has the legitimacy of the law-making process, particularly questions about how far majorities can go to implement policies over minority objections.

For the 2017 Annual Meeting, we encourage participants to consider questions about legitimacy in contemporary Taiwanese politics. These could include exploring legitimacy in the context of Taiwan’s contested international standing, or its complicated and shifting relationship with the People’s Republic of China. And on the domestic front, a wide range of questions speak to the issue of legitimacy. How, for instance, is the issue of “transitional justice”—itself a highly contested concept—understood by different sides of the political spectrum? What does public opinion tell us about the relative legitimacy of different democratic institutions—the judicial system versus elected officials, for instance? How is the spread of new technologies reshaping how citizens understand “legitimate” political behavior and discourse, or affecting the accountability of representatives to their constituents? How do citizens and elites understand the rule of law, and how might this vary across different issue areas and subsets of the population? There are also important questions about procedural legitimacy: to what extent do those on the losing side of political outcomes, from elections to government policies to judicial rulings, accept the legitimacy of decisions which hurt their own interests? Finally, there are important unresolved questions about the legitimacy of the definition of citizenship in Taiwan: should immigrants from the PRC be treated differently from immigrants from Southeast Asia, for instance?

We encourage papers that tackle these and related questions.

Please send proposals to APSA: (http://community.apsanet.org/annualmeeting/call/papers)

If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Kharis Templeman (kharis@stanford.edu), CGOTS Coordinator. Travel support for CGOTS panelists is subject to the availability of external funding.

Critical Policy Studies
Frank Fischer (ffischer@rutgers.edu), Rutgers University, and Jennifer Dodge (jdodge@albany.edu), University at Albany, SUNY

A recent forum in the Critical Policy Studies journal explores the question: “What is critical” in critical policy analysis? Critical policy analysis draws on a wide range of critical theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches but generally shares a set of common concerns. It involves critiquing ideology and forms of domination in ways that go beyond “being critical” to lay bare underlying assumptions, problem definitions, organizing categories, and arguments for the purpose of “disclosing empirical inadequacies, theoretical inconsistencies and anomalies, silences, exclusions, contradictions or other defects” (Jessop and Sum 2016). It seeks to be “socially relevant” by aiming to empirically understand the most pressing policy issues of the day and put them into context by grounding empirical investigation in normative analysis (Fischer 2016). The point is not critique for its own sake or to wallow in negativity, as some would describe it, but to understand the mechanisms that create oppression and to reimagine new and more just possibilities and help support their development. It is fundamentally a hopeful project. The last decades have seen incredible societal changes – from the Black Lives Matter movement to the expansion of LGBTQ rights, and from mass migration from war-torn countries in the Middle East to the rise of populist politics. In this context new critical voices have emerged in society and in academia, or perhaps are struggling to articulate the significance of these broader changes. We seek papers that draw on new developments in critical theorizing – particularly from communities that have struggled to develop their own social critique in the face of oppression – and apply it to understand contemporary policy struggles.

Disasters and Crises
Daniel Aldrich (daniel.aldrich@gmail.com), Northeastern University

The Disasters and Crises Related Group (DCRG) brings together scholars from a broad variety of subfields within political science along with researchers from outside the discipline to foster collaboration and diffusion of ideas on disasters and crises. The DCRG invites proposals for its related group panels at the 2017 American Political Science Association meeting in San Francisco, California which has the theme of The Quest for Legitimacy. Potential topics include (but are not limited to) how vulnerable groups gain legitimacy in the eyes of the public and aid agencies, how disasters influence the legitimacy of public figures seeking election, the interaction between failed states, disasters, and legitimacy, and how social networks bestow (or remove) legitimacy during crisis.  We encourage proposals using a variety of methodological approaches including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods.

Eric Voegelin Society
David Walsh (walshd@cua.edu), Catholic University of America

The Eric Voegelin Society, for its 33rd annual international meeting in 2017, to be held in San Francisco as part of the APSA Annual Meeting, invites papers in the general field of political philosophy with particular attention to the work of Eric Voegelin and the broad range of interdisciplinary and comparative concerns reflected in his scholarship.  This includes: resistance to tyranny, classical philosophy, Christian thought, philosophy of history, the interface of religion and politics including radical Islam, modernity, post-modern thought, terrorism, ideological politics with its authoritarian and totalitarian manifestations, and contemporary challenges (both foreign and domestic) to liberty, free government, rule of law, the integrity of the American constitutional order and federal system including Liberty, individual rights, and the tradition of Anglo-American Constitutionalism, as well as artistic and cultural explorations of order–all prominent interests of the Society.

European Consortium for Political Research
Martin Bull (m.j.bull@salford.ac.uk), University of Salford, Manchester

Europe in a Post-Brexit World
On 23 June 2016, the European Union (EU) experienced what may turn out to be the most significant event since its founding: the decision, by referendum, of the UK people to leave the EU. There was an immediate impact in the short-term on the UK currency and various sectors of the economy. However, what is not yet clear is the longer-term impact not just on the UK and the European Union but on Europe as a whole in economic, political and social terms as well as (in keeping with this year’s APSA Meeting theme) the legitimacy of the European project and its mission. The scale and complexity of the UK’s projected exit from the EU is unprecedented in economic, political and social terms, and it needs extensive research across and within a range of sectors to provide any level of understanding of the process and outcome for Europe. This panel invites papers on the implications of Brexit in political, economic and social terms for Europe broadly understood. Papers may address individual sectors or engage in cross-sectoral analysis. They should analyse the past and current situation and assess the impact that the UK decision is already having and will have in the longer-term. In keeping with tradition, the ECPR welcomes papers from Europeans and North Americans (and beyond) to provide a distinctive mix of analyses and discussion.

Contact point: Martin Bull, Director, ECPR: director@ecpr.eu

Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies
Anthony Deardurff (anthony.deardurff@fed-soc.org), The Federalist Society, and Christopher Goffos, The Federalist Society

Roundtable: “Challenges to the Rule of Law”

The Federalist Society invites proposals for a roundtable discussion that will consider challenges to the rule of law. Among legal scholars and political scientists, there are competing conceptions about what, exactly, the rule of law is with respect to modern American governance. Possible questions for consideration may include: Does the modern administrative state threaten the rule of law? Do special interest groups? What roles do Congress, the Executive, and the Judiciary play in upholding or undermining the rule of law? Is the rule of law an essential predicate for economic growth?  Can the freedoms guaranteed in the Bill of Rights persist in the absence of the rule of law? We welcome proposals for a moderated discussion that addresses these or related questions.

French Politics Group
Jennifer Fredette (fredette@ohio.edu), Ohio University, and Sylvain Brouard (sylvain.brouard@sciencespo.fr), Sciences Po

The FPG welcomes paper, panel, roundtable and short course proposals on a wide range of topics related to the study of French Politics.  Comparative proposals are encouraged along with proposals that focus on the theme of this year’s meetings (The Quest for Legitimacy: Actors, Audiences and Aspirations).  Co-sponsorships with other groups/divisions are required for acceptance.

CONTACT – Convener, Sylvain Brouard (Sciences Po)  & Jennifer Fredette (Ohio University) : sylvain.brouard@sciencespo.fr ; fredette@ohio.edu

Global Forum of Chinese Political Scientists
Quansheng Zhao (zhao@american.edu), American University, and Zhiqun Zhu (zhiqun.zhu@bucknell.edu), Bucknell University

Green Politics and Theory
Jennifer Lawrence (jenniferleighlawrence@gmail.com), Virginia Tech, and Michael Lipscomb (lipscombm@winthrop.edu), Winthrop University

The organizers for the Green Politics and Theory Related Group invite paper submissions for the 2017 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.  Though the organizers will fully consider any paper related to Green Politics and Theory, we particularly encourage submissions related to the conference theme of “the quest for legitimacy.”  That broad theme raises issues that are particularly pertinent to Green politics, ranging from questions about how to apportion and negotiate questions of sovereignty related to cross-border environmental issues, particularly in the context of neoliberal economic globalization, to concerns about whose voice counts in our deliberations, whether legal or extra-legal, about how to navigate our environmental futures.  Who, in the variety of contexts that determine the breadth of Green politics, has legitimacy: nation-states? Corporate and financial actors? International, supra- or sub-national organizations? Labor, tenant or unions of the un- and under-employed and/or similar community groups? Municipalities, counties, towns, cities and/or specific human populations? Humans in general? Non-human animals? The non-human or extra-human in some broader sense?  And how is it possible to make sense of an environmental political scene riven by competing claims for legitimacy?  The organizers encourage papers that address these and related questions from a variety of theoretical perspectives and orientations.

Iberian Politics
Kerstin Hamann (kerstin.hamann@ucf.edu), University of Central Florida

We invite proposals that address questions of legitimacy, broadly understood, in Iberian politics. The global financial crisis has resulted in a political context that is more fragmented. New political actors in Portugal and Spain are emerging that articulate aspirations questioning the legitimacy of entrenched political and social actors. In addition, the legitimacy of political processes is being questioned, and pressures for more direct democracy have surfaced.  In Spain the question of legitimacy also extends to decisions about territorial integrity and independence, including who the legitimate political actors are that should decide on demands for independence of Catalonia. We invite papers that analyze dimensions of legitimacy of politics in Portugal and Spain, regardless of methodological approach. Papers that analyze issues of legitimacy in Iberia in a broader comparative context are welcome.

Indigenous Studies Network

Laura Evans (evansle@u.washington.edu), University of Washington

Institute for Constitutional Studies
Mark Graber (mgraber@law.umaryland.edu), University of Maryland

The Institute for Constitutional History is interested in receiving proposals relating to constitutional development, history, law, politics, or sociology.  We are particularly interested in proposals that explore whether constitutional democracy is in crisis, the nature of any crisis and possible resolutions.

Intelligence Studies Group
Glenn Hastedt (hastedgp@jmu.edu), James Madison University

The conference theme is “The Quest for Legitimacy: Actors, Audiences, and Aspirations.”  In the realm of intelligence research, the Intelligence Studies Group would like to explore the legitimacy of the actors responsible for intelligence activities in the United States—that is, the proper planning, direction, and supervision of the seventeen secret agencies that provide the president and other policymakers with information about threats and opportunities facing the nation; that help shield Americans against attacks from hostile nations, factions, and terrorist groups; and that, occasional, engage in aggressive secret operations to advance U.S. interests abroad.  The key question here has to do with the perceived legitimacy over intelligence activities of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), still a fairly new and inchoate organization expected to lead the Intelligence Community; the judicial branch, whose Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court has played a major role in supervising secret operations, but has fallen under criticism during recent years for authorizing metadata collections programs by the National Security Agency; the Congress, which has intelligence oversight committees that have operated with uneven results; and the executive branch, roiled by disputes over the lack of supervision for a number of intelligence activities, from rendering  and torture to the metadata program and warrantless wiretaps against Americans.  In short, profound question of legitimacy exist in America’s attempt to balance questions of security and order, on the one hand, and liberty and privacy, on the other hand.  Papers for the Intelligence Studies Group will look at the future of intelligence legitimacy across all three branches. An effort will be made, as well, to invite the DNI (James R. Clapper) to join the panel as a discussant.

International Association for the Study of German Politics
John Olsen (jolsen1@mail.twu.edu), Texas Woman’s University
LEGITIMACY IN GERMAN POLITICS

For the 2017 APSA annual meeting the International Association for the Study of German politics is particularly interested in paper or panel submissions that, in keeping with the main APSA theme, considers the role of legitimacy in German politics. For example, how might we understand the state of party competition or political leadership in Germany today through the lens of legitimacy? What are the new challenges to legitimacy for German political institutions? What is the role and impact of legitimacy on the German economic model and economic debates? How might the concept of legitimacy help inform contemporary debates on economic inequality, the global refugee crisis, the rights of minority groups, etc?  While all submissions relating to German politics will be considered, priority will be given to complete panel submissions, those submissions closely related to the conference theme, and to paper proposals from (or panel submissions including) graduate students.

Interpretive Methodologies & Methods
Lee Ann Fujii (lafujii@chass.utoronto.ca), University of Toronto

The Interpretive Methodologies and Methods Conference-related Group provides a forum for the discussion of methodological and methods issues related to interpretive research, as well as issues arising from their position within contemporary political and other social sciences.

Interpretive methodologies and methods are informed by philosophical traditions such as hermeneutics, phenomenology, pragmatism, and symbolic interaction. Notwithstanding their differences, these traditions presuppose that the meaningfulness and historical contingency of human life differentiates the social realm from the natural one, with implications for how research is conducted. Although diverse in their modes of identifying or generating and analyzing data, research processes in the interpretive tradition are typically characterized by:

a) an empirical and normative prioritizing of the lived experience of people in research settings;

b) a focus on the meaning(s) of acts, events, interactions, language, and physical artifacts to multiple stakeholders; and

c) a sensitivity to the historically- and/or situationally-contingent, often-contested character of such meanings.

We call for paper, panel, and roundtable proposals that explore interpretive methodological issues or that apply interpretive methods (e.g., political ethnography, grounded theory in Strauss’s more phenomenological tradition, discourse analysis) in ways that demonstrate their “comparative advantage” for empirical research across all subfields of political science. Especially welcome are proposals that reflect on how political science itself is situated in the webs of meaning and historical context that it studies.

IPSA Research Committee #1 (Concepts and Methods)
Robin Turner (rlturne@butler.edu), Butler University

 

IPSA Research Committee #12 (Biology and Politics)
Albert Somit (albertsomit@gmail.com) and Steven Peterson (sap12@psu.edu), Pennsylvania State University, Harrisburg

This represents Research Committee # 12’s “call for papers” for the 2017 annual meeting (to be held in San Francisco).

The study of biology and politics (sometimes referred to as “biopolitics”) speaks to the many linkages between the life sciences and the study of politics. This might include policy implications emerging from the life sciences, biological influences on political behavior and institutions. . . . IPSA Research Committee # 12 (Biology and Politics) is organizing one panel, workshop, or symposium for the 2017 American Political Science Association meeting. We invite proposals for papers as well as offers to serve as panel discussants and chairs. Papers on all topics are welcome, whether bioethics, biopolicy, neurobiological aspects of behavior, evolutionary effects on politics, etc.

The conference theme for APSA in 2017 is “The Quest for legitimacy.” APSA encourages submissions that tackle questions of legitimacy with special attention to such subjects as: What

Is legitimacy? Who bestows legitimacy? What are the processes underlying the legitimation

of actors, institutions, aspirations, and political goals? And so on. . . . Papers addressing such themes are encouraged.

IPSA Research Committee #36 (Power)
Giulio Gallarotti (pgcerny@andromeda.rutgers.edu), Wesleyan University

Legitimacy as Power

All authority requires some legitimacy to rule without excessive force. We wish to explore the power that legitimacy lends to authority in its many manifestations. The objective of our inquiry will be to try and look at the legitimacy of authority from a multidisciplinary perspective.

Japan Political Studies Group
Michael Strausz (Michael.strausz@tcu.edu), University of Oregon

Labor Project
Ian Hartshorn (imhartshorn@gmail.com), University of Nevada, Reno, and Biko Koenig (biko.koenig@gmail.com)

The APSA Labor Project promotes scholarship on labor related issues.  We invite papers and panels to be submitted on any theme related to labor, work, unions, and employment.  We encourage diverse perspectives on these topics from any range of academic specialties including, but not limited to human rights, political economy, public policy, interest groups and social movements, comparative politics, state politics, immigration, theory, gender, race, ethnicity, history, and law.  We look to connect diverse scholars and particularly welcome international and comparative scholarship along with international and junior scholars.

We would like to see relevant issues such as the role and influence of organized labor in reaction to populism in the US, migration and refugee issues, resurgent and alternative labor organizing, popular resistance to austerity, labor and parties in advanced economies, advocacy efforts, federal policies regarding employment, changes in union politics, and political organizations.

Latin American Studies Association
Cynthia McClintock (mcclin@gwu.edu), George Washington University

The 2017 meeting theme, “The Quest for Legitimacy: Actors, Audiences, and Aspirations,” highlights issues that are important in Latin American politics.  In accordance with the meeting theme, we are especially interested this year in papers that explore the determinants and consequences of legitimacy (or lack thereof) in Latin America.   Of particular interest also is the trajectory of legitimacy in Latin America in the twenty-first century and the possibilities of both increases and decreases in legitimacy.  How has the spate of corruption scandals across the region affected the legitimacy of democracy and the state?  How has the continuing scourge of criminal violence affected the legitimacy of democracy and the state?  Have corruption and violence altered the balance of legitimacy among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government?   Have actors pursuing honest governance or enhanced security been able to achieve legitimacy?  To what extent is legitimacy in Latin America today derived from adherence to international norms relative to domestic traditions?

The Latin American Studies Association Related Group welcomes submissions from a broad range of theoretical and empirical approaches and encourages theme and non-theme proposals.  Our preference is to co-sponsor panels with APSA sections; accordingly, submissions should be made to us and another section, such as Comparative Democratization, Comparative Politics of Developing Countries, Comparative Politics, International Collaboration, or International Political Economy.

Latino Caucus in Political Science
Mario Guerrero (mag@cpp.edu), Cal Poly Pomona

Consistent with its mission, the Latino Caucus in 2017 will organize a panel focused on the professional development of Latina/o scholars and emerging research in Latino politics. Also in keeping with the APSA annual meeting theme of “The Quest for Legitimacy: Actors, Audiences and Aspirations” the Caucus is particularly interested in receiving paper proposals that address current debates and issues in Latino politics including, but not limited to, Latino political representation and underrepresentation, immigration, the nature and meaning of citizenship and equal civil and human rights for Latinas/os. The Caucus thus especially welcomes papers directly related to the conference theme including those that address legitimacy in the context of US Latino politics in national, hemispheric, and/or global context. Our 2017 program will also include the Latino Political Science Awards reception (co-sponsored with the APSA Committee on the Status of Latinos y Latinas), and our annual Business Meeting and elections. For more information please visit and select “APSA 2017 Call for Papers and Conference Program.”

Law and Political Process Study Group
Bruce Cain (bcain@stanford.edu), Stanford University and Rick Hasen (rhasen@law.uci.edu), University of California, Irvine

The Law and Political Process Study Group has been sponsoring and co-sponsoring panels at the APSA for over thirty years. The group concerns itself with legal and policy questions related to elections and politics, and with empirical questions germane to the legal and policy questions. Our panels are interdisciplinary, with participation by political scientists, law professors, and sometimes academics in other disciplines and lawyers, government officials, and activists. Typical subjects for papers and roundtables include campaign finance, redistricting, voting rights, election administration, rights and regulation of political parties, ballot initiatives, bribery and corruption, and legislative lobbying and ethics. The Group welcomes papers and panel proposals in these areas.

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Caucus
Christine Keating (keating.60@osu.edu) and Helma de Vries (hdevries@pitt.edu)

The legitimacy of a state may result from the fair and equal protection afforded to all citizens. A central set of features of queer communities motivating political action are the non-heteronormative relationships and sensibilities that exist between or among adults. How then does the United States’ recent recognition and legalization of same-sex marriage — one form of queer relationship — affect queer communities’ determinations of state legitimacy? What other forms of state action or inaction must be addressed in order to underscore or extend the sense of legitimacy through reciprocity in queer communities? How does this recognition by many Western countries of one form of queer relationship affect conditions and relations with non-Western states? If the focus on marriage equality left some queer communities and relationships outside the new-normative paradigm, what is the sense of legitimacy of the state in general and the movement in particular held by those further-marginalized people?  The LGBT Caucus seeks proposals for papers that investigate these issues and question the assumptions from which they derive.  Proposals from all sub-fields and methodological approaches are welcome, as are papers that explore other state of the art research questions in LGBTQ politics.

McConnell Center for Political Leadership
Kelly Hanlon (kellymhanlon@gmail.com) and Lee Trepanier (ldtrepan@svsu.edu), Saginaw Valley State University

Leadership and Legitimacy
The McConnell Center for Political Leadership is looking for papers that focus on the question of political legitimacy for leaders. Papers should address the following questions: what is legitimacy and its relationship to political leadership? How is legitimacy achieved and sustained in politics? And can legitimacy and leadership be effectively translated into practical politics. By answering these and other questions, presenters will provide us knowledge about legitimacy, leadership, and politics.

National Humanities Institute
Gregory Butler (gbutler@nmsu.edu), New Mexico State

Philanthropy, Policy, and Power
Kristin Goss (kgoss@duke.edu), Duke University

Policy Studies Organization
Max Skidmore (skidmorem@umkc.edu), University of Missouri-Kansas City, and Daniel Guttierrez-Sandoval (dgutierrezs@ipsonet.org), Policy Studies Organization

Politica: Study of Medieval Political Thought
Gerson, Moreno-Riano (gmorenoriano@regent.edu), Regent University

The Quest for Legitimacy in the Middle Ages
The concept of legitimacy is fundamental to many classic debates in political science and political thought. At the same time, legitimacy is core to numerous debates and works during the Middle Ages.  Politica: The Society for the Study of Medieval Political Thought seeks paper and/or entire panel submissions that tackle questions of legitimacy in the Middle Ages with special attention to the following sub‐themes in the Middle Ages: What is legitimacy? Who bestows legitimacy? What are the processes underlying the legitimation of actors, institutions, aspirations, and political goals? Are there multiple forms of legitimacy? And do they vary according to the international, domestic, societal and private spheres? What is considered legitimate? How is it defined? Is it based on a universal set of understandings? Moral commitments? Or simply the outcomes of power struggles? What is legitimate to study or not study? And what makes a set of political phenomena more legitimate than others?

Requests to chair and/or serve as a discussant for this panel are also welcomed.

Please send any query to Gerson Moreno-Riano, Ph.D., Regent University at gmorenoriano_at_regent.edu.

Political Forecasting Group
Helmut Norpoth (helmut.norpoth@stonybrook.edu), Stony Brook University, and Christopher Wlezien (wlezien@austin.utexas.edu), University of Texas

The Political Forecasting Group invites proposals for papers and panels at the 2017 APSA meeting from August 31 to September 3 in San Francisco.  Proposals on any aspect of political forecasting in all fields of the discipline are welcome.  We especially encourage proposals that evaluate forecasts and forecasting models or methods.  Please feel free to contact the group organizer (Christopher Wlezien) if you have questions or ideas.

Political Studies Association
James Sloam (james.sloam@rhul.ac.uk), Royal Holloway University of London

The UK Political Studies Association (PSA) is a ‘Related Group’ of the APSA and has a ‘guaranteed’ panel entitlement at the Annual Meeting to be held in San Francisco, 31 August – 3 September 2017. We are looking for ‘academic organisers’ to put together a panel, which should have a broad appeal to worldwide political studies, and should reflect a mix of UK-based (PSA members) and non-UK based (PSA/ APSA members) participants.

The Annual Meeting is organised around the topic of ‘legitimacy: actors, audiences and aspirations’. Panels should therefore pay attention to the following conference sub-themes:

  • “What is legitimacy? Who bestows legitimacy? What are the processes underlying the legitimation of actors, institutions, aspirations, and political goals?
  • Are there multiple forms of legitimacy? And do they vary according to the international, domestic, societal and private spheres?
  • What is considered legitimate? How is it defined? Operationalized? Even measured? Is it based on a universal set of understandings? Moral commitments? Or simply the outcomes of power struggles?
  • What role do political scientists play in the legitimation process? What is legitimate to study or not study? And what makes a set of political phenomena more legitimate than others?”

Panels should be comprised of four full academic papers or otherwise be organised as a roundtable (on a current and ongoing political issue). It should also include a chair and discussant – to be agreed by the PSA. Panel members (who are PSA members) are also eligible to apply for assistance to travel to the conference.

Please contact james.sloam@rhul.ac.uk, the PSA member responsible for the related group, if you have any further questions about a potential panel and/ or about the APSA submission process.

Political Studies Association of Ireland (PSAI)
Theresa Reidy (T.Reaidy@ucc.ie), University College Cork

Ireland After the Great Recession

Ireland held its first post crisis election in February 2016. While eight years of fiscal retrenchment have yielded considerable economic recovery, they have also begot significant political instability. The political landscape has become very fragmented and the longstanding civil war cleavage between Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael seems to be in major decline. The combined vote share of the two parties dropped below 50 per cent in 2016. Populist parties of the left and non-party candidates are at the fore of a wave of anti-establishment sentiment. Fine Gael has been joined in a minority administration by non-party TDs and is supported from opposition by Fianna Fáil. Expectations of another general election are high but polls suggest little reason to believe a different outcome is likely. The government is struggling to get its policies enacted because of its minority position and Brexit poses a major challenge on almost every policy dimension given the close integration of the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Irish politics is changing.

We welcome empirical and theoretical papers and topics may include party politics, electoral behaviour, government formation, gender and public opinion. We especially welcome papers which address the annual meeting theme ‘The Quest for Legitimacy: Actors, Audiences and Aspirations’ in their papers.

Proposals should be 500 words and submissions should be made through the APSA annual meeting website.

Please also note: all presenters including co-authors must be dues-paying members of the Political Studies Association of Ireland (PSAI) in order to appear on the program (presenters may join the PSAI after acceptance to the conference).

Any queries should be directed to Prof David Farrell (UCD) david.farrell@ucd.ie or Dr Theresa Reidy (UCC) t.reidy@ucc.ie

Poverty, Inequality, and Public Policy Caucus
Max Skidmore (skidmorem@umkc.edu), University of Missouri-Kansas City, and Daniel Gutierrez-Sandoval (dgutierrezs@ipsonet.org), Policy Studies Organization

The Caucus on Poverty, Inequality, and Public Policy and the journal Poverty and Public Policy (sponsored by the Policy Studies Organization and published by Wiley), wishes to submit the following related group proposal:

In keeping with the APSA’s theme of political legitimacy, the Caucus on Poverty, Inequality, and Public Policy issues the following request for submissions to a panel, “Poverty and its multiple ramifications for a political system, especially with regard to issues of legitimacy.” The panel will be a part of the annual meeting of the APSA for 2017. The panel chair will be Max J. Skidmore of the University of Missouri-Kansas City.

Practicing Politics
Duane Milne (dmilne@wcupa.edu)

Political actors are constrained by the boundaries of legitimacy.  These same actors are continually redefining legitimacy when they “push the boundaries.”  Political practitioners make these decisions and/or work closely with those who do.  The Practical Politics Working Group is seeking proposals that draw upon this unique perspective to enhance our understanding of social science theory and application.  These submissions should include a discussion of one or more significant questions of legitimacy, how political science understands these questions and how practical experience informs that understanding.  Especially welcome are ideas about how practical experience enhances scholars understanding of these great issues.

Project on the American Constitution
Kenneth Ward (kw12@txstate.edu), Texas State University – San Marcos

The Project on the American Constitution is accepting proposals for papers, panels and roundtables for the 2017 Annual Meeting.  We are particularly interested in proposals that address the issues in contemporary constitutional theory.  Paper proposals should include an abstract and full contact information for the presenter.  Panel proposals should include an abstract of each paper and full contact information for all participants.  Roundtable proposals should include a summary of the question to be addressed by the roundtable as well as full contact information for all participants.

Publius: The Journal of Federalism
John Dinan (publius@wfu.edu), Wake Forest University

The U.S. Supreme Court and Federalism
Authors will present papers assessing the consequences of U.S. Supreme Court decisions for federalism, with a particular focus on decisions issued in the 21st century.  Papers might focus on Supreme Court decisions regarding health care, voting rights, same-sex marriage, environmental policy, or drug policy, among other topics.

Russian Politics Group
Fred Eidlin (feidlin@gmail.com)

Russia is an important, interesting, and poorly-understood country.  Its size and potential political, economic, and military significance make it important from a policy point of view.  The profound transformations it has been undergoing present fascinating problems for research.  Greater attention to Russia could be a source of intellectual stimulation for political science, and could contribute to raising the level of understanding of this important country in the U.S.  We invite proposals of papers and round tables dealing with all aspects of Russian politics.

Slovenian Political Science Association
Miro Hacek (miro.hacek@fdv.uni-lj.si )

TRENDS AND PROCESSES OF DEMOCRATIC DEVOLUTION
Of all the issues that democracies face, it is arguably the case that legitimacy and democratic accountability rank among the most important. This has been reflected in a burgeoning literature addressing what is commonly referred to as the democratic deficit. At a European level this has spawned a vast number of studies that have sought to address the democratic deficit in the European integration project, of which the national level remains a particular focus of concern. This debate also extends to the local level, where it has been argued that there is a need for greater transparency and accountability in the decision-making process as a means of responding to declining voter turnout and the necessity of having appropriate structures to tackle the evermore complex and interlinked problems that local decision-makers face. Within the European political science community this discussion has extended into a debate about whether or not local citizens should be able to directly elect the local political leader or whether councillors or even somebody else should make that choice. It is a debate which espouses different interpretations of political concepts such as the political legitimacy to act locally, the visibility and profile of local leaders, the transparency of the local political decision-making process, the most effective mechanism for political accountability, the role of citizens in local democracy, and the role of political parties and partisanship in local government. Somewhat inevitably, the outcome of these debates about the rights and wrongs of direct mayoral elections are influenced and shaped by the distinct political culture and history of the country concerned. To this end, these discussions shed light on the similarities and differences between countries regarding the role of local government and local democracy, as well as providing templates and case studies with regard to how these responses may best be able to transfer across national boundaries.

The panel seeks to make a contribution to this discussion by providing a comparative analysis of how a long established western style democracies and a newer ones have responded to this debate, emphasizing the analysis of democratic reforms and new instruments of citizen participation (e.g. referenda, direct election of mayors). Major attempts at of local modernization have been directed at the revival of ‘old’ as well as to the introduction of ‘new’, participatory instruments at the local level of government and the inclusion of civil society into local policy making. This panel will study the strengthening of direct democracy (local referenda, direct election/recall of local executives) on the one hand and on new forms of participatory and cooperative democracy on the other (citizen forums, consultations, youth/ neighborhood councils, E-democracy).
The panel welcomes theoretical, methodological, empirical and comparative papers aimed at conceptualising the issues above.

Society of Catholic Social Scientists
Kenneth L. Grasso (kgrasso@txstate.edu), Texas State University

The Society of Catholic Social Scientists (SCSS) is accepting proposals for papers, panels and roundtables for the 2017 Annual Meeting. We are particularly interested in proposals that address the Catholic tradition in social thought and its contemporary relevance.

Society for Greek Political Thought
Mark Lutz (mark.lutz@unlv.edu), University of Nevada, Las Vegas

The Society for Greek Political Thought is an interdisciplinary organization devoted to the study of classical political thinking in all of its forms.  We welcome paper, roundtable, and panel proposals on the political philosophy, politics, and politically-relevant poetry of the Greeks.   While we join the Conference in encouraging participants to reflect upon the big transformations of our time, we also invite them to consider how great transformations in the classical past shed light on the character and enduring questions of human life.

Society for Romanian Studies
Claudiu Tufis (claudiu.tufis@fspub.unibuc.ro), Universitatea Bucuresti

The Related Group for Romanian Studies invites paper proposals for the 2017 APSA Annual Meeting, which will take place between August 31 and September 3, 2017 in San Francisco. This year’s conference theme is The Quest for Legitimacy: Actors, Audiences and Aspirations.

Romania does seem, in recent years, to experience a generalized crisis of legitimacy. Years of disappointment in incumbents seem to have transformed into questions about the legitimacy of key institutions, from the presidency to political parties and to the educational system. The rules of the democratic game, from the Constitution to electoral rules, are also questioned and debated. Old cultural wars that have simmered down in other parts of the world become increasingly relevant in Romania, the legitimacy of the demands of various groups being a highly contested issue.

We are particularly interested in proposals that use Romania in comparative perspective or as a single case study and that are related to the conference theme. The recommended length for the proposals is 500 words. Proposals from graduate students are encouraged. All proposals will be processed directly through the APSA website. The deadline for submitting a proposal is December 31, 2016.

For any additional information you can contact Claudiu Tufiș (e-mail).

Do not hesitate to circulate this call to anyone you think might be interested.

Southeast Asian Politics Group
Isabelle Côté (icote@mun.ca), Memorial University of Newfoundland St. John’s, and Shane Barter (sbarter@soka.edu), Soka University of America

The Southeast Asian Politics related group invites proposals for the 2017 APSA meeting in San Francisco, CA.  Proposals for individual papers as well as organized panels related to politics in the region as a whole or its countries (Burma / Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Indonesia, Timor-Leste, and the Philippines) are welcomed.  We are interested in quality scholarship regardless of method, welcoming qualitative, quantitative, or interpretive approaches, and comparative or single-case research.  In keeping with the meeting’s theme of “legitimacy”, we are especially open to panels that address to issues such as representation, soft authoritarianism, protest, and other areas where legitimacy represents a crucial facet of Southeast Asian politics.

Walter Bagehot Research Council on National Sovereignty
Joseph Prud’homme (jprudhomme2@washcoll.edu), Washington College

The Walter Bagehot Society will be conducting a panel entitled “Secularism and National Security.” The panel will explore the implications for US national security policy of the rise in religiously unaffiliated Americans. Will there be a more secular future in the US? If so, what implications might be drawn for America’s position in the world and global security posture? Please submit any questions to Professor Joseph Prud’homme at jprudhome2@washcoll.edu

Women’s Caucus for Political Science
Laurel Weldon (weldons@purdue.edu), University of Virginia