Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities

Deadline: December 17, 2007

Division 1—Political Thought and Philosophy: Historical Approaches

Eileen Hunt Botting, University of Notre Dame, ehunt@nd.edu

Richard Boyd, Georgetown University, rb352@georgetown.edu

In the spirit of the 2008 APSA conference, the Political Thought and Philosophy: Historical Approaches section invites paper and panel proposals that address the conference theme, “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities.”

The tension between equality and inequality is one of the oldest themes in Western political thought, with roots in classic texts like Plato's Republic and Aristotle's Politics. We are interested in papers that illuminate the emergence of ideas of equality and inequality in the history of political thought. How did individual thinkers such as Aristotle, Locke, Rousseau, Wollstonecraft, Tocqueville, Marx, and de Beauvoir theorize the sources of human inequality, especially inequalities associated with gender, race, class, and colonial domination? How (if at all) should canonical (and not so canonical) texts inform contemporary dilemmas of social justice and globalization? Do these historical texts reveal anything surprising about the way inequality shapes political institutions, market economies, or the moral texture of everyday life? Are their analyses, and the “categories” to which they give birth, adequate or inadequate for understanding how we should deal with inequality? From a comparative perspective, are there significant differences in the “categories” that Western and non-Western political thinkers bring to bear in theorizing inequality? How have protests and social movements contributed to changes in the social, legal, and political categories pertaining to inequality? Papers might also consider related concepts like democracy, justice, recognition, identity, sex, family, civic engagement, power, or domination in which equality or inequality play a key role.

The conference theme raises broader questions about the enterprise of historical political theory. Are historians of political thought really any different from other social scientists who invent “categories” by which to interpret the “politics of global inequalities”? Are some methodological approaches deployed by political theorists (with their associated “categories” of ancient versus modern, liberal versus republican, analytical versus historical, originalist versus contextualist, liberal versus radical feminist, post-modern, post-structural, or post-colonial, etc.) more helpful than others in clarifying the politics of inequality? Have the “categories” generated by modern liberal theory—for example, natural rights, property, consent, justice, public and private—done more to abate or to deepen the effects of inequality? How have these categories been gendered, racialized, and sexualized such that women and minorities have experienced displacement in both politics and the study of political thought?

The preceding are only suggestions, but we hope they will stimulate creative, insightful, and intellectually rigorous proposals. We encourage the submission of entire panel proposals, particularly those bringing together scholars at different stages of university life and those incorporating diverse methodological approaches to the study of the history of political thought.

Division 2—Foundations of Political Theory

Jodi Dean, Hobart and William Smith Colleges, jdean@hws.edu

The theme of the 2008 conference, “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities” is well-suited to the concerns of division two, “Foundations of Political Theory.” Political theorists have long explored the workings of categories and concepts, the ways thinking opens some experiences and arranges them into worlds while at the same time closing off and casting into shadow people, places, and possibilities. This year, the conference theme invites us to inquire into the ways global inequality informs the categories of thought as well as into the ways categories contribute to these very inequalities.

Accordingly, this division encourages papers and panels that explore the politics of categories. How are categories sites of antagonism, contestation, deliberation, or solidarity? What conditions or habitats enable some categories to flourish or resonate and others to decline or disturb? What prevents or allows categories to link together into discourses, fundaments, arguments, ontologies, forms of knowledge, machines, identities, or movements? Whose categories matter and for what purposes? What are the repercussions of certain intensive attachments to some categories rather than others? In what ways do categories encounter their constitutive limits and what might be the political repercussions of such encounters? Does political change entail refiguring old categories, producing new ones, attempting to move beyond categories altogether? How does politics exceed the categories of global inequalities? How might categorical failures be failures of political imagination or will (in this vein, the conference theme might be rephrased: categories or the politics of global inequalities)?

Panels featuring confrontations between differing approaches to political theory are particularly welcome. Such panels might address a single category or concept (e.g., desire, sovereignty, enjoyment, neoliberalism, neoconservatism, freedom, rights, biopolitics, nonhuman, inhuman, revolution, subject, agency, object, act) from various perspectives: are perspectives on or usages of a term so different as to be ultimately incommensurable or are points of commonality possible? What are the political repercussions of incommensurability and/or commonality in these specific instances? In this vein, interdisciplinary proposals and proposals with explicit connections to contemporary politics are encouraged.

Papers, panels, and roundtables on topics other than the conference theme are acceptable as are experimental formats. Panels comprised of established and emerging scholars are encouraged.

Division 3—Normative Political Theory

Hawley Fogg-Davis, Temple University, hfd@temple.edu

Holloway Sparks, Emory University, hsparks@emory.edu

Broadly conceived, “Normative Political Theory” refers to political theories that are informed by and geared toward political problems: their explication and redress. Under this umbrella, we welcome proposals from all corners of political theory consistent with this year's conference theme of “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities.”

Which theoretical methodologies help us to understand the concept of political inequality in a global sense? How might we theorize the relationships among national, transnational, and international frameworks of political analysis? What role do categories play in and among these frameworks? How do various categories contribute to political inequalities, and what potential do categories hold for the easing of such inequity? How should we envision the relationships between law and politics, between politics and morality, and between individuals and groups under the rubric of the global?

We especially encourage proposals that meld empirical evidence with novel and experimental theoretical approaches that challenge us to rethink our understanding of past and existing political problems, and to anticipate and develop practical strategies for tomorrow. We invite interdisciplinary theoretical work on these themes, and individual and panel proposals from scholars, activists, and practitioners.

We recognize that the subdivision of Political Theory into the three categories of “Political Thought and Philosophy,” “Foundations of Political Theory” and “Normative Political Theory” poses some categorical difficulties of its own. We expect there to be some overlap among these divisions, and will work together with the other political theory division chairs to achieve a well-balanced and inclusive political theory panel line-up.

Division 4—Formal Political Theory

Michael Chwe, UCLA, michael@chwe.net

This division welcomes papers which use formal mathematical models broadly speaking, including game theory, social choice theory, computational and agent-based approaches, and behavioral and other psychological approaches. Papers which are concerned with theoretical development as well as applied papers, including the application of formal models to new areas and experimental and field tests of formal models are welcomed. Papers which engage the 2008 conference theme, “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities,” are especially welcomed.

Division 5—Political Psychology

Adam Berinsky, MIT, berinski@mit.edu

Political psychology is one of the most diverse fields in political science, encompassing the study of mass political behavior, decision-making by political leaders, and the roots of conflict and cooperation between states. As new fields of psychology, such as cognitive neuroscience and evolutionary psychology, attract the attention of political scientists, the field promises to become even more diverse. Is it possible to maintain a coherent view of “political psychology” in the face of this diversity? Should we even strive for such unity?

I particularly welcome proposals that address the relationship among different subfields of political psychology and the relationship between the subfields of political psychology and their non-psychological counterparts. Keeping with the theme of the meeting, I encourage proposals that explore the processes and consequences of differentiation, stratification, and marginalization based on status and identity. I also welcome proposals that address traditional question of political psychology, including leadership studies, political communication, voting, and the relationship among groups in society. I welcome full panel and roundtable proposals, as well as offers from people interested in serving as discussants.

Division 6—Political Economy

Catherine Hafer, NYU, catherine.hafer@nyu.edu

The Political Economy section invites submissions on any topics related to the theoretical and/or empirical analysis of the relationship between economic and political phenomena. Examples of substantive topics include, but are not limited to, property rights, redistribution, lobbying, trade, the relationship between monetary and fiscal institutions, corruption, the evolution of public credit, the economic determinants of collective action and institutional change, economic globalization, the determinants and consequences of foreign aid to developing countries, etc.

In keeping with this year's theme, we particularly encourage submissions that address economic and political inequality: its causes in various environments, its short- and long-term consequences, and the effectiveness of various policy approaches in addressing it. We encourage submissions of proposals for individual papers as well as for special panels, and especially welcome proposals that aim to bridge field and subfield boundaries while maintaining methodological rigor.

Division 7—Politics and History

James Mahoney, Northwestern University, james-mahoney@northwestern.edu

Adam Sheingate, Johns Hopkins University, adam.sheingate@jhu.edu

The Politics and History section invites proposals that analyze the historical, developmental, and temporal aspects of politics. We especially encourage proposals that engage in comparative research, and we welcome submissions that explore North-South comparisons and developing countries, as well as proposals that focus on the United States or other advanced industrial countries. Submissions from a diverse range of methods and approaches, including comparative-historical analysis and historical institutionalism, are strongly encouraged. Special consideration will also be given to papers that address the conference theme by exploring the ways in which categorical boundaries and inequalities between groups are historically constructed, maintained, and possibly transformed over time.

Division 9—Teaching and Learning in Political Science

Tony Affigne, Providence College, affigne@providence.edu

For the 2008 panels on Teaching and Learning in Political Science, we invite proposals for papers, poster presentations, panels and roundtables which closely join new directions in graduate and undergraduate political science pedagogy, with the overall conference themes of global inequality and social categorization. (We encourage potential authors and presenters to think creatively about these questions, but the most successful proposals will be those which engage the conference theme directly.)

For example, your work might evaluate best practices in the political science classroom, for exploring political, economic, and social inequalities, at home and abroad. Do particular exercises, experiences, or materials facilitate deeper understanding of inequality in the political lives of individuals, communities, and nations? In a broader sense, does the conventional political science curriculum, as generally presented, encourage critical thinking about inequality? Are there clear benefits—or particular difficulties—in utilizing service learning, study abroad, or community-based research? How should we assess outcomes for these diverse modes? Do students learn different lessons about global inequality, for example, depending on where their study abroad experiences occur? How might political science students' overseas study be enhanced to address questions of inequality, irrespective of host country or institution?

Closer to home, is it possible to design internships or civic education projects which confront patterns of inequality directly and successfully? How can international dimensions of inequality be understood through local projects? What works best, a focus on immigration, or on political economy and globalization more broadly conceived? In our use of classroom technology, how might course management software and related tools help illuminate (or perhaps obscure) the nature of inequality among and within nations, ethno-racial communities, social classes, and traditional castes? Are political science Ph.D. programs, and professional, master's-level programs in public policy and public administration giving new teachers, practitioners, and analysts the skills they need to research and teach the scope and the impacts of inequality?

Beyond these questions, there are other innnovative ways to frame your proposal for this division. One might ask: How do inequalities within the classroom itself shape the learning experience? In other words, what distinctive challenges or opportunities do we face, as we work with economically, culturally, and racially diverse student populations, as well as growing numbers of female students, and international students drawn from an ever-wider group of regions and countries? Finally, how does unequal access to educational resources, whether between public and private, small and large, rich and poor institutions in the U.S., between colleges in the U.S. and abroad, or between individuals, groups, or classes of students, shape the kind of political science instruction which is possible?

The Division organizer welcomes preliminary inquiries from potential presenters prior to the final proposal deadline, and is committed to a diverse, inclusive Division program.

Division 10—Political Science Education

Carolyn Shaw, Wichita State University, carolyn.shaw@wichita.edu

This division welcomes proposals for panels, papers, and posters that address education in political science from a variety of theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches. Examples of relevant topics include but are not limited to pedagogical analysis, assessment of student learning, contemporary trends in undergraduate and graduate education and research. Proposals that address the program theme of “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities” are especially welcome. Such proposals might explore the way structural inequalities in educational institutions result in unjust outcomes, the way patterns of inequality operate in the academic framework, different ways of addressing the topic of inequality in the classroom, and ways of assessing and addressing inequality in the classroom.

Conference organizers encourage conference participants to engage in conversations beyond the customary disciplinary territory, and welcome panels that include practitioners, activists, and inter-disciplinary scholars. In addressing issues of “Categories and Global Inequalities” as they apply to education, panels might include librarians as well as administrators.

The Political Science Education section is strongly committed to honoring the diversity of institutions with which APSA members are associated and we welcome submissions from political scientists at community colleges and two-year colleagues as well as four-year colleges and universities.

Division 11—Comparative Politics

Ben Schneider, Northwestern University, brs@northwestern.edu

Steven Wilkinson, University of Chicago, swilkinson@uchicago.edu

The Comparative Politics section, using this year's APSA theme of Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities as our inspiration, especially invites panel and paper proposals that reexamine the analytic categories we use in comparative politics. Proposals, for instance, might wish to examine how categories such as class, ethnicity, race, developing world, institution, globalization, or corruption were formed, whether these categories are valid, and also how the use of these categories shapes our interpretations of outcomes (and categories) such as conflict, economic development, democratic consolidation, party competition or economic, ethnic, and gender inequalities. In addition, inequality has long been a central concern in comparative politics, both across countries and within. We welcome proposals that interrogate conventional wisdom on inequality, as well as the impact of global economic integration and democratization on it.

Because APSA meetings provide rare opportunities for debate among scholars working on different regions, we welcome cross-regional panels on topics such as immigration, rentier and failed states, party and electoral systems, and varieties of capitalism, as well as the categories and inequalities mentioned above.

In addition to these thematic panels, we also as usual encourage panels from the full range of diversity of areas, topics, and theoretical and methodological perspectives that together constitute comparative politics.

Division 12—Comparative Politics of Developing Countries

Pierre Englebert, Pomona College, pierre.englebert@pomona.edu

Susanna Wing, Haverford College, swing@haverford.edu

This division welcomes paper and panel proposals that identify important substantive and theoretical questions in the politics of developing countries. The division particularly welcomes proposals that employ comparative approaches whether of countries, regions, economic sectors, firms, individuals, time periods, institutions, or policies, but quality and instructive single case studies will also be considered. Papers and panels that present original ideas and generate and appropriately use new data are especially encouraged. We encourage papers from a diversity of methodological approaches. Proposals for panels that include papers that complement one another will be particularly welcome.

Although all high quality proposals will be considered, special attention will be given to proposals that are consistent with the conference's emphasis on “global inequalities.” The division is particularly interested in proposals for papers and panels about the ways in which categorical distinctions may construct and reify inequality and marginalization in developing countries.

Division 13—Politics of Communist and Former Communist Countries

Jack Bielasiak, Indiana University, bielasia@indiana.edu

The 2008 theme of categories and global inequalities is especially pertinent to the communist and post-communist world. First, conceptual boundaries must be reconsidered in an environment where communist power exists along market economies, where transition politics leads to open and closed polities, and where commitments to equality meet the forces of globalization and separatism. Second, the construction of categorical understandings must confront the interactive effects of multiple hierarchies; differences that reach well beyond the structure of politics to encompass identity and symbolic meanings or the reproduction of social and economic practices.

The division therefore encourages the consideration of diverse forms of inequality, be it based on ethnicity, gender, status, wealth or political access, in single country, cross-national or varied temporal settings. Proposals that examine the cross-fertilization of political, social, cultural, and economic privilege or marginalization under the impact of globalization and transnational forces are of particular interest, as are papers and panels that consider local, national and international strategies to redress inequalities, foster social justice, and facilitate political inclusion. As in the past, the section is committed to the scholarly pluralism of comparative politics and welcomes paper, panel and roundtable proposals from all theoretical and methodological schools of political science.

Division 14—Comparative Politics of Advanced Industrial Societies

Amie Kreppel, University of Florida, kreppel@polisci.ufl.edu

The Comparative Politics of Advanced Industrial Societies division welcomes paper and panel submissions that address the broader conference theme of “categories and global inequalities.” In many ways the division itself is emblematic of academia's reliance on categories that create dvisions on the basis of inequalities by differentiating between “industrialized” and “developing” countries. While the creation of this differentiation highlights the inherent disparity between the developed and the developing world, it also arguably serves a purpose within comparative politics by drawing our attention to the broader political implications of these inequalities.

Research that investigates the impact and significance of categories based on political institutions, organizational structures, level of governance and/or policy outcomes among other topics within the industrialized world would all fit within this broad thematic framework. Paper and panel proposals from all theoretical and methodological paradigms are welcome. Submissions that are explicitly comparative in character and/or incorporate interdisciplinary approaches are especially encouraged.

Division 15—European Politics and Society

Anna Grzymala-Busse, University of Michigan, abusse@umich.edu

The European Politics Section welcomes a diverse set of papers for the 2008 APSA meeting under the theme “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities.” While some European countries have long fought inequalities in income, social security, and economic and political opportunities in a relatively stable institutional framework, others have had to reorient and restructure their policies as part of broader regime changes. Europe thus offers a set of comparative perspectives on global inequalities. We are especially interested in comparative work that examines the different forms that inequality takes in Europe: whether political, economic, social, or ethnic. Other critical questions include the ways in which new and old welfare states address the potential tradeoffs between equality and efficiency, the impact of European Union on the inequalities between “old” and “new” Europe, the international ramifications of European policy diffusion, foreign assistance, and NGO work, and the ways in which citizenship and social policy have become linked and challenged.

Division 16—International Political Economy

James Raymond Vreeland, Yale University, james.vreeland@yale.edu

The theme of the 2008 APSA Conference presents the sub-field of International Political Economy the opportunity to pose important questions about ongoing debates over categories and the politics of global inequalities. In the context of vast disparities of power and influence, the question of representation looms large on the agendas of several international financial institutions. The world's poorest countries and especially emerging market countries are demanding a greater say in the affairs and management of the global financial architecture. As governments vie for a stronger voice in the international political economy, however, forces of globalization continue to confront the state in new ways. The mobilization of capital as well as the movement of people across borders present growing challenges, which democratic and authoritarian regimes may manage in distinctive manners.

How have the forces of globalization contributed to inequality both amongst and within countries? Can changes to the governance of the international political economy address global inequities? Can we expect any such changes to impact sub-national groups who may not be represented by the state? Do such impacts depend on domestic political imperatives shaped by the institutions under democracy and authoritarianism? How do actors outside of formal state structures, be they multinational corporations, immigrant groups, or NGOs, voice and pursue their concerns through international negotiations and institutions? Which categories of people have benefited from globalization, and which have not?

This division is particularly amenable to the broad themes of the 2008 conference, and we will privilege papers, panels, and roundtables that address them.

Division 17—International Collaboration

Etel Solingen, University of California Irvine, esolinge@uci.edu

The theme of the 2008 meeting highlights the centrality of global inequalities to political science scholarship at the dawn of the 21st century. The Section on International Collaboration invites papers, panels, and roundtables with a particular focus on various types of international, transnational, and global collaboration geared to address problems of economic, ethnic, gender, racial, social, legal, religious, political, cultural, educational, and other forms of inequality. A central aspect of this collaboration is the challenge to develop mechanisms of international governance capable of promoting sustained efforts to eradicate all forms of inequality.

We encourage panels and roundtables that: (1) Identify the most promising research paths for understanding the nature and sources of international inequality; (2) Evaluate broad trends in the direction of reduced, persistent, or enhanced inequality in a particular issue area; (3) Appraise the various theoretical strands our discipline has relied on for improving our knowledge and measurement of inequality in its various forms; (4) Take stock of failures and successes in the design of international institutions responsible for overcoming any form of inequality; (5) Compare and contrast different mechanisms, agreements, and practices for reducing inequality; (6) Explore the synergies across different forms of inequality within and across states (such as overlapping social, ethnic, economic, and gender inequalities, among others); (7) Elucidate the synergies between/among international efforts to decrease inequity at the local, regional, national, international, and trans-national levels; (8) Evaluate the extent to which international efforts to reduce one form of inequality may have detrimental effects for another.

These and other important research agendas regarding international collaboration to reduce inequality can be advanced through various methodological, ontological, and epistemological approaches; at the structural, state, regional, social movement, group, individual or any other levels of analysis; through theoretical, empirical, and normative modes of investigation; by enhancing synergies across various disciplinary perspectives on inequality (political, economic, legal, anthropological, psychological, sociological, and others); and across academic, practitioner, and policy-making endeavors.

Division 18—International Security

Elizabeth Kier, University of Washington, ekier@u.washington.edu

This division invites paper, panel, and roundtable proposals on international security, broadly defined. Consistent with this year's convention theme, this division especially welcomes submissions that address the implications of global inequalities, the influence of identities and categories on international security, and the opportunities for building stable and just societies in the wake of violent conflict. Scholars are also encouraged to submit proposals on traditional security issues such as the causes of war, civil military relations, and deterrence theory. Also welcomed are submissions on some of the newer debates such as humanitarian intervention and military effectiveness, and on emerging topics such as counterinsurgency, war crimes, and post conflict stabilization. Interdisciplinary work will be especially welcome.

Division 19—International Security and Arms Control

Timothy Crawford, Boston College, timothy.crawford@bc.edu

Inequalities bedevil if not drive most aspects of both conflict and cooperation in international security. The categories conveying these inequalities form key concepts for security studies research, and the politics they implicate are the foci of much of our theorizing. The debate over American hegemony and its various synonyms (unipolarity, primacy, empire, global leadership, forward engagement, etc.) is, among other things, about the implications of inequality for international stability. So is theorizing about the structural patterns of conflict between satisfied status quo powers and rising revisionists and the propensities of great powers to “balance.” We study alliance politics between big and small allies, and “asymmetric conflicts” and the “asymmetric strategies” weak actors use in them; and both research programs speak to the present conflict between states and transnational terrorist groups. The “war on terrorism” is, indeed, premised on a fundamental inequality: the illegitimate violence of terrorists (unlawful enemy combatants) is distinguished from the violence inflicted by regular forces (lawful combatants) operating under state authorities.

The politics of nuclear non-proliferation is a struggle between the haves and have-nots which plays out in geopolitical, international legal, and normative arenas, as interested actors tout concepts that legitimize or de-legitimize the blatant inequality of the NPT regime. At the United Nations, inequalities run rampant in the politics of international peace and security and UN reform, starting with the veto power of the Security Council's five permanent members and continuing down to the rights, obligations, and prerogatives of member states vs. non-state-actors and NGOs.

Research into the nature and dynamics of civil war inevitably revolves around inequalities and the categories we use to represent them. Rebel minorities resist unjust rule while central governments battle terrorist insurgents and criminal elements. Powerful outside actors that intervene, for humanitarian reasons or otherwise, bolster one side or another in the struggle, and thus introduce new inequalities.

The division seeks proposals for papers and panels relating to the themes noted above, and any others addressing major security issues broadly defined. Research reflecting the gamut of social science methods and approaches is welcome.

Division 20—Foreign Policy

Brenda Shaffer, University of Haifa, bshaffer@univ.haifa.ac.il

The Foreign Policy division welcomes proposals for papers and panels that address central issues in the study of foreign policy. It welcomes papers and panel proposals on topics analyzed from a wide variety of research paradigms. Proposals relating to both U.S. foreign policy and the study of the foreign policies of other states are encouraged. The division welcomes proposals from non-U.S. based scholars. Proposals on any aspect of foreign policy are welcome, but the division especially encourages panels on officially declared identity of the state (religion, ethnicity, liberal, environmentally friendly, etc.) and foreign policy. In addition, in keeping with the general theme of APSA 2008, the division is especially interested in panels and papers that address the interaction of inequality and foreign policy. Potential topics that could be explored in this context are the dissimilar impact on states of global climate change and its impact on foreign policy; foreign politics related to natural resource haves and have nots; new axes of states evolving in the international system that attempt to appeal to perceived inequality in regions and the global system; the rise of the role of international corporations and tycoons as political actors in the international system; the use of rhetoric of inequality by political movements, states, and organizations and its impact on foreign policy; and the impact of states' foreign policies on existing social, political and economic inequalities.

Division 21—Conflict Processes

Ben Fordham, SUNY Binghamton, bfordham@binghamton.edu

The Conflict Processes section invites proposals for papers, panels, and roundtables presenting rigorous theoretical analysis and empirical research about the causes and consequences of violent conflict. In keeping with this year's theme, “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities,” we are especially interested in proposals that examine the relationship between inequality and conflict. Inequality relates to a range of issues that are important for those of us who do research on conflict. Economic and political inequality may influence the outbreak of domestic and international conflict. Conflict between adversaries who are very unequal in power has long been an important question in the field, has enormous contemporary relevance in light of the ongoing war in Iraq. Conflict may also affect the distribution of political and economic power, shaping future inequalities within and between states. Proposals on these and other topics are welcome.

Division 22—Legislative Studies

Craig Volden, The Ohio State University, volden.2@osu.edu

Legislative politics both reflects and seeks to address societal inequalities. The 2008 APSA theme of “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities” is thus especially relevant to the subject matter of the legislative studies division. The division is particularly interested in papers and panels reflecting this theme. The legislative studies division is also looking for papers that address the array of topics that arise naturally in the study of legislative politics: parties, coalition formation, committees, rule changes, budgets, leadership, chamber floor strategy, elections, and patterns of legislative behavior in a historical context. Comparative studies of state legislatures or national legislatures are encouraged. Although both panel and individual paper proposals are welcome, individual paper proposals are typically easier to accommodate. We encourage a wide range of methodologies as long as they are used to investigate clearly stated theoretical or empirical puzzles.

Division 23—Presidency Research

Diane Heith, St. John's University, heithd@stjohns.edu

The division invites proposals for papers that will contribute new empirical or theoretical insights to the study of the presidency. In keeping with the 2008 conference theme, “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities,” the division encourages papers which consider the “construction, interpretation and maintenance of categorical boundaries” in our understanding of the presidency as well as the role of the presidency in global perspective.

In addition, papers and roundtables which evaluate the 2008 presidential election are especially welcome, particularly papers and roundtables that address the complexity of the 2008 processes and the diversity of categories. Papers which consider the compressed primary calendar, media challenges, campaign finance, as well as the role of groups and gender are encouraged. The division also invites papers and panels to consider the totality of the Bush Presidency, particularly in terms of its impact on the institution.

Division 24—Public Administration

Charles W. Gossett, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, cwgossett@csupomona.edu

In large part, public administration is the study of how governments proceed to turn policies into action. Consistent with this year's theme, “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities,” scholars of public administration have long made use of categorization to understand what governments do, how they do it, and why they do it: Do different types of policies require different implementation strategies? Which categories of clients or citizens benefit or lose from the choices that are made? Does it matter whether implementation is performed by political appointees or civil servants? And in recent years, the field has been encouraged to revisit the question of social equity as a criterion against which the actions of public administrators should be judged.

While paper and panel proposals on all aspects of public administration are welcome, we are particularly interested in panels that will address the theme of the conference. Papers and panel proposals on the administrative aspects of international and non-governmental organizations that specifically address remedying global inequalities are invited, as are papers that look at the use of categories in comparative national, state, or local contexts. The impact of globalization on public administration at the national, state, and local levels would also be welcome.

Division 25—Public Policy

Frank R. Baumgartner, The Pennsylvania State University, frankb@psu.edu

The 2008 meeting overall focus on global inequality is especially appropriate for the study of public policy. Research in our area has traditionally dealt prominently with issues of the distribution of resources through government action. Papers fitting within these themes are particularly welcome, including those that incorporate an international perspective and those that fit with themes of interest beyond the public policy section itself. Proposals for papers, panels, and posters are welcome from all methodological orientations and from all segments of the field. Of course, those with broader theoretical and practical applications or lessons are particularly welcome, as are those which bring together diverse perspectives for a single panel. Proposals explicitly addressing important methodological and research approach questions are strongly encouraged. Public policy research has often been subject to the silo-effect where scholars focused on a single policy question have worked in isolation from the work of their colleagues working in other policy areas. Proposals that bridge these divides are particularly welcome, including those that cover several policy areas, that discuss public policy in more than one political system, or which have explicit methodological or broadly theoretical orientations. Proposals for innovative panel formats, beyond the traditional four-papers-and-a-discussant are also welcome.

As in previous years, we welcome proposals across the full array of interests and concerns within the study of public policy, but are especially interested in how political science and other disciplines link empirical, theoretical and normative aspects of policy. We urge those who submit proposals to incorporate empirical, theoretical, and normative concerns in their paper and to involve scholars from different fields of inquiry in the panels. We welcome all methodologies and encourage papers on the value of different approaches ranging from discourse analysis to complex quantitative modeling. We are especially interested in explicit comparative work across disciplinary boundaries, historical periods, and with reference to several nations or political systems. Proposals may also focus on international organizations, the international system, or politics within developing countries in addition to the more common approach focusing on the US and developed countries. Gender and racial aspects of public policy are particularly relevant aspects of global inequality, and papers investigating these are therefore strongly encouraged.

The overall focus on global inequality naturally leads to an interest in how students in public policy have addressed these issues and how they might in the future. To what extent are public policies the reflection of social inequalities and to what extent are they the cause? In sum, we encourage a wide range of proposals of all types reflecting the healthy diversity of approaches in our field and beyond.

Division 26—Law and Courts

Stefanie Lindquist, Vanderbilt University, stefanie.lindquist@vanderbilt.edu

The theme of this year's APSA conference involves inequalities based on social status, class, race, and gender. In connection with this theme, scholars have long recognized the critical role courts and legal institutions play in correcting or exacerbating the marginalization of different groups in society. Since the time of Marc Galanter's famous thesis regarding Haves and Have Nots in court, judicial scholars have been sensitive to systems or patterns of inequality that arise within the law's institutional frameworks. Pursuant to the conference theme, the section seeks proposals for papers that consider the ways that courts, judges, litigants and lawyers affect societal inequalities. Work that addresses the relationship between legal outcomes and race, gender or social status are particularly encouraged.

Division 27—Constitutional Law and Jurisprudence

Julie Novkov, University at Albany, SUNY, jnovkov@albany.edu

The conference organizers have invited us to consider the intersections of categories and the politics of global inequalities, topics well suited for examination through jurisprudential and constitutional lenses. While all panel and paper proposals are welcome, the Constitutional Law and Jurisprudence Division especially encourages submissions that explore the relationship between constitutional and legal design on the one hand and the production and dismantling of inequality in state/local, national, and international locations on the other. Proposals that critically consider constitutional and extra-constitutional commitments to human rights and justice in the contexts of militarization and/or extreme poverty are particularly welcome. The section also encourages critical consideration of relationships between constitutionalism and justice, and constitutionalism and evil. While the panels will likely reflect the field's significant interest in American law and jurisprudence, comparative and international studies of jurisprudence and constitutionalism are encouraged. The section also welcomes panel proposals that incorporate other disciplinary or interdisciplinary perspectives, as well as the perspectives of practitioners and activists engaged with these topics.

Division 28—Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations

Jocelyn Johnston, American University, johnston@american.edu

The Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations Section is especially well positioned to address the theme of the 2008 APSA conference: “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequities.” One of the key challenges of this year's theme is to engage in a “close examination of the construction, interpretation, and maintenance of categorical boundaries.” The 2008 program also asks us to examine inequalities based on “distinctions in social status, class, race, and gender,” and the sources and characteristics of “structural inequalities in institutions, culture, and the practice of politics that result in unjust outcomes.” The chairs of the conference invite us to address these thematic elements through domestic and/or global frameworks.

Because scholars of federalism and intergovernmental relations frequently explore issues related to jurisdictional, legal, trade and policy boundaries in federal systems, and the structural inequities that may result, our section can make important contributions to the 2008 conference discussions. Panels and papers that directly engage the conference theme are of course strongly recommended, but we also invite those that indirectly treat distinctive elements of the topic. We especially encourage proposals that rely on legal, political, fiscal and administrative frameworks. In addition, we are interested in papers and panels that investigate these issues from a policy perspective. Social welfare policy scholarship seems clearly relevant, but many other policy areas—including environmental policy, urban policy, health policy, education policy, security policy, and others—can also offer important insights. Appealing theoretical frameworks include network theory, spatial analysis, institutional theory, and other theories that inform the concepts of structural and social inequality.

Division 29—State Politics and Policy

Chris Bonneau, University of Pittsburgh, cwb7@pitt.edu

This year's conference theme “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities” invites scholars to consider how the categorization of groups and people contributes to inequality of treatment. Both at the state and sub-state level, there is considerable variation in how government units deal with several issues related to inequality, such as economic development, welfare policies, the treatment of minority groups, and government capacity, to name a few. The State Politics and Policy section welcomes proposals that utilize the diverse institutional and social settings of the American states to address issues of categorization and inequality, broadly defined. As always, the section also encourages theoretically grounded and methodologically rigorous proposals on all aspects of state politics and policy. Proposals that make use of new and innovative data sources or methodological techniques are particularly welcome. In sum, the section invites all proposals that contribute to our knowledge of politics in the states, and the program will fully represent the richness and diversity of the State Politics and Policy field.

Division 30—Urban Politics

Melissa Marschall, Rice University, marschal@rice.edu

Lester Spence, Johns Hopkins University, unbowed@gmail.com

The theme of this year's conference is “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities.” Given both the historical and the contemporary role that urban spaces play in the production and reproduction of inequalities, whether in global cities like New York, Tokyo, and Mexico City, or more provincial cities such as New Orleans and Torino, this theme taps the myriad areas of inquiry central to urban politics research. Panels from past conferences have highlighted the way that norms, behaviors, and attitudes inscribe patterns of inequality in such areas as housing, schooling, employment, electoral participation, and civic involvement, via both formal institutions (zoning rules, mortgage lending practices, urban governing arrangements) and more informal or unconscious conventions (locational decisions, stereotyping, neighborhood context). We welcome panels and proposals that highlight these enduring issues and relationships.

However we are also interested in work that highlights comparisons across jurisdictions in order to examine how various combinations of local, state/province, and national factors produce unequal outcomes. As the central hub for international labor pools, cities are faced with increasing complexities associated with immigrant populations. At the same time, urban residents, both old and new, are confronted with a host of new challenges and incentives that have interesting and uncertain implications for how they compete or cooperate with one another for scarce resources in today's cities and in the cities of tomorrow. Given porous borders and other “limits” inherent to cities, we are interested in proposals that investigate both how cities are grappling with more contemporary issues (homeland security, voting rights, disaster management, culture wars), particularly as they relate to potential inequities in outcomes, and with how urban populations (and subpopulations) organize themselves and their urban environments to deal with and overcome these inequalities. We welcome all methodological approaches, including more traditional and established modes of inquiry as well as work that expands the boundaries of what we consider politics in order to consider the role that various cultural phenomena (the role of French hip-hop in the Paris riots come to mind) play in fighting and in crystallizing inequalities.

Division 31—Women and Politics Research

Debra J. Liebowitz, Drew University, dliebowi@drew.edu

The 2008 meeting theme “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities” brings to the fore issues that are, and have always been, central to inquiry in the women and politics subfield. Focus on the relationships between identity and inequality offers scholars of gender and politics an opportunity to highlight the myriad ways of theorizing and researching the connections between processes of categorization or differentiation on the one hand, and the lines of inequality that get mapped onto bodies, locations, and social, cultural or political groupings on the other. The conference theme also provides space to explore the ways that politically salient categories are themselves constituted and conceived and asks us to think creatively about how political processes can be used to redress the pernicious nature of inequality. Indeed, in many cases, it is activism (in all its forms) to redress gendered and racialized hierarchies that lead the way toward change.

The Women and Politics section welcomes submissions from a broad range of theoretical and empirical approaches and encourages theme and non-theme panel proposals that bring together junior and senior scholars.

Division 32—Race, Ethnicity and Politics

Ange-Marie Hancock, Yale University, Ange-Marie.hancock@yale.edu

Adrian D. Pantoja, Pitzer College, adrian_pantoja@pitzer.edu

This year's conference theme and call for papers focuses on the role of categories in global inequality. In particular, the REP section has long been a contributor to this theme and seeks work from scholars across subfields who reflect the power of traditional race scholarship but we emphasize and encourage scholars who work within new and emerging paradigms such as intersectionality and transnationalism. We seek scholarship that brings together the wealth of knowledge regarding race, ethnicity and native status and the recognition of such socio-political categories as contingent and dynamically interactive with categories of gender, class, national status, and sexual orientation. While fluidity and diversity characterize these socio-political identities; all, to varying degrees share the category of marginal status groups whose categorical distinction places them outside dominant norms and institutions.

We welcome papers that discuss the substantive findings of race and ethnicity research across subfields, in the longstanding tradition of the best work of this genre. In particular, we encourage submissions that cross subfields in a substantively thematic way, through explorations of topics such as identities, orientations, affiliations, allegiances, distributive politics, institutions, representation, and conflict and violence. As well, we would encourage submissions that examine intersectionality and other new paradigms in comparative context for the future of race politics in national, international and transnational settings.

Division 33—Religion and Politics

Joel Fetzer, Pepperdine University, joel.fetzer@pepperdine.edu

Religious identification is one of the most important categorizations in the post-9/11 world. Although some political leaders would have us view adherents of the major world religions as undifferentiated blocs, scholars of religion and politics realize that reality is more complicated. The section would thus be eager to consider proposals exploring the causes and implications of political diversity among members of the same religious tradition as well as panels and papers investigating the conditions under which persons and groups from divergent traditions form effective pan-religious political coalitions. A related topic of interest is the political behavior of individuals whose religious identification seems to push in a political direction opposite that of their non-religious identity or status (e.g., ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, gender, immigration status, class).

Media reports proliferate about religious institutions and actors who give their blessing to oppressive social, economic, and political structures. Far less attention is paid to religious groups and religiously motivated individuals who resist structural injustice. The section would welcome papers seeking to explain why some religious people or traditions side with the powerless or marginalized and under what circumstances religion can be used to advance various kinds of equality instead of to whitewash repression.

Division 34—Representation and Electoral Systems

Matt Golder, Florida State University, mgolder@mailer.fsu.edu

This division welcomes paper, panel, and roundtable proposals on any aspect of representation and electoral systems that reflect the full range of the field's empirical, theoretical, and methodological diversity. While proposals focusing on established democracies are welcome, particular consideration will be given to proposals addressing elections, electoral systems, and representation in dictatorships and new democracies. In keeping with the theme of global inequality at the 2008 meeting, proposals exploring how electoral systems influence social, economic, and political inequality broadly conceived will also be looked upon favorably.

Division 35—Political Organizations and Parties

Seth Masket, University of Dallas, smasket@du.edu

Jennifer Nicol Victor, University of Pittsburgh, jnvictor+@upitt.edu

The 2008 program co-chairs invite paper, panel and poster proposals that speak to the theme “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities.” The theme invites scholars to consider the role that political groups play in creating, sustaining, or dismantling inequalities that exist in society, whether those inequalities come in the form of race, class, gender, or social status stratifications. Scholars may address the normative value of inequalities, the conditions under which inequalities exist, or the consequences of inequalities for political behaviors and institutions.

The program co-chairs additionally encourage proposals that address pertinent questions regarding political organizations and parties using rigorous scientific methods. We will consider projects concerning the nature, history, and function of parties as organizations, within institutions, and in the electorate. We are interested in projects that address parties as they function at the national, international, and sub-national level, as well as those that examine how non-party groups seek to influence political processes. We seek to include a wide range of methodologies, topics, and perspectives in the 2008 program, but we will give preference to proposals that describe compelling questions, utilize innovative research designs, and have the potential to provoke thoughtful discussion.

Division 36—Elections and Voting Behavior

Jan Leighley, University of Arizona, leighley@email.arizona.edu

The study of elections and voting behavior is rooted in categories, with classic and contemporary studies alike often emphasizing individual demographic characteristics to the exclusion of context, political, social or otherwise. Importantly, such characteristics are central to elites' efforts to mobilize, persuade and respond to the mass public. In an increasingly diverse and inter-dependent society, it is imperative to consider whether such categories are indeed meaningful as behavioral models, how elites use such categorization and how their meanings have changed over time.

As always, I encourage innovative and sophisticated papers with strong theoretical motivations. In the spirit of the general theme of the 2008 program, I will also highlight papers that challenge our conventional views of class, race and opinion—key concepts of categorization in our subfield—as they relate to elections and voting behavior. Comparative papers are also encouraged as they necessarily invite understandings of how individual characteristics and categorizations are indeed structured and given meaning by the political and social context. They also provide an opportunity to consider important issues of inequality. And, of course, this year's meeting theme provides a perfect opportunity to consider inequality and its implications for political behavior and policy consequences in the U.S. as well. Thus, conceptual, measurement and empirical treatments of inequality are especially welcome.

Paper proposals should provide some detail as to the theoretical framework, analytical approach and status of the paper (previously presented, currently in draft, on-going project, proposal only). Proposals for roundtables should include individuals who have already agreed to participate. I would also welcome suggestions for “meet the author” sessions of interest.

Division 37—Public Opinion and Political Participation

Stephen P. Nicholson, University of California, Merced, snicholson@ucmerced.edu

In keeping with the theme of the 2008 program, I encourage submissions that speak to questions of categories and inequality. Categorizing ideas, people, institutions, and nations is central to the study of public opinion. Important research in public opinion and political participation has sought to explain the origins of categories (e.g., social identity, stereotypes) as well as their consequences, especially social, economic, and political inequality. Proposals addressing the origins of categories, especially the roles played by political elites and political discussion in the formation and transformation of categories, are especially welcome. Proposals addressing the relationships between categories and inequality, such as the representation and participation of out-groups, and the implications of inequality on the formation of categories, are also encouraged.

Of course, I also welcome proposals on other important questions in the study of public opinion and participation. Among other topics, research investigating attitudes toward elites in positions of power, citizen competence, electoral polarization, and the role of heuristics and cognitive shortcuts in opinion formation are also of interest. In general, I encourage proposals that offer theoretically informed research.

Division 38—Political Communication

Dietram A. Scheufele, University of Wisconsin, scheufele@wisc.edu

Political Communication has always been an interdisciplinary field, drawing from communication, psychology, sociology, and other disciplines. The methodological approaches employed by political communication scholars have been equally diverse. This division therefore welcomes papers exploring political communication from a variety of perspectives. This includes papers dealing with political actors, such as social movements, elites, mass media, or political audiences. It also includes papers dealing with different theoretical or methodological problems in political communication, and with issues related to political communication very broadly. In line with the 2008 APSA conference theme—“Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities”—papers exploring the role of political communication at different levels of analysis and across national boundaries are especially encouraged.

Paper proposals should explain why the proposed research is important, detail the methodological approach, the data sources to be employed, and the hypotheses to be tested, and, if applicable, briefly outline preliminary findings.

Finally, proposals for panels and roundtables on the 2008 campaign and on topics that intersect with other divisions within the Association (e.g., Political Psychology; Political Methodology; Science, Technology, and the Environment; Elections and Voting Behavior; Public Opinion; etc.) will be given careful consideration.

Division 39—Science, Technology, and Environmental Politics

Mark Zachary Taylor, Georgia Institute of Technology, mzak@gatech.edu

The 2008 Science, Technology, and Environmental Politics (STEP) section welcomes paper and panel submissions that take into account the following two factors:

First, political scientists who study science, technology, and the environment generally recognize the intrinsic relationship between developments in the real world and the shape and direction of their subfield. The politics and policies of technological change, scientific research, and environmental degradation (be it climate change, species decline, land usage, pollution, etc.) have palpable effects on our daily lives, both as social scientists and as citizens. Therefore, this division invites proposals that generate or utilize empirical data to test existing causal theories and hypotheses; address questions and problems that have clear and significant policy implications; and/or offer theoretically-innovative or empirically-grounded policy recommendations. All methodological and theoretical approaches are welcome.

Second, STEP scholars also recognize the interdisciplinary nature of their subfield. STEP research not only fits comfortably within debates held amongst scholars of international relations, comparative politics, American politics, political economy, and political philosophy, but STEP scholarship also draws research questions, methods, data, and analytical perspectives from the fields of economics, sociology, history, public policy, and anthropology. Therefore, submissions involving collaboration across specialties within STEP, across the APSA disciplines, or incorporating interdisciplinary insights from fellow social sciences will be especially welcomed.

Division 40—Information Technology and Politics

Derrick Cogburn, Syracuse University, dcogburn@syr.edu

The purpose of the Information, Technology and Politics (ITP) section of APSA is to provide a forum for scholars interested in understanding how information and communication technologies, especially the Internet and new media, are transforming politics and political processes, and how they are altering existing relationships between governments, societies and cultures, international institutions, and the private sector. Many of our members are interested in the governance of technologies and managing technological innovation. We are also interested in how these information and communication technologies are used in teaching and conducting research on policy and policy processes in political science and all related subfields and disciplines.

The 2008 APSA Conference Theme, “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities,” provides a wonderful opportunity for ITP section members to explore the role and implications of information technology in relationship to global inequality. This year, we are particularly interested in broadening the focus of the section to include a broader socio-technical approach, including information systems, as well as more technical issues such as security, geographic information systems, agent-based modeling, search and retrieval technologies and strategies, and various policy issues such as privacy, freedom of expression, and intellectual property.

Specifically, the section encourages the submission of panels, roundtables, and papers on the implications of information technology, new media, and transnational networks on: (1) all aspects of the digital divide, (2) democratic participation in multistakeholder policy processes and global governance; (3) the global economy and socio-economic development.

We are interested in going beyond eGovernment. It is not just about cool new technologies; but about asking how the Internet and these new communication technologies engage with and are influenced by core questions in political science in general, and specifically in sub-fields such as comparative politics, public administration, and international political economy. In what ways can information and communication technologies (ICTs) and information systems contribute to enhancing or limiting participation in local, national, regional, and global policy processes (such as electronic town halls and political websites)? Can ICTs create enhanced opportunities for participation in the global knowledge-based economy and strengthen societies (such as the growth of social networking sites, user generated content and Virtual reality worlds such as Second Life), or will they create further divisions and marginalization. In what ways can ICTs influence transnational social movements and contribute to the emergence of a “global” civil society (such as through Blogs, blogging, webconferencing, podcasting, social network, citizen or user generated content)? Do these new ICTs enhance or diminish power imbalances between developed and developing countries?

We hope to use the 2008 conference to stimulate new collaborations amongst diverse ITP scholars, including expanding our outreach to non-academic scholars and practitioners, and to encourage submissions to our organ, the Journal of Information Technology and Politics.

As with previous years, the ITP section is encouraging a wide range of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary work that is both theoretical/conceptual and empirical in nature, and utilizes multiple methods of analysis. We are especially interested in proposals that would be good candidates for co-sponsorship with other sections. These proposals should be submitted to both the ITP section and the potential co-sponsoring section (submitters may want to make a notation on their abstracts of potential co-sponsorship). Those submitting full panel proposals are also encouraged to leave one paper presenter position open so that a related single paper submission may be added to the panel, if appropriate.

We also encourage scholars who are working in non-academic settings relevant to ITP. Finally, we also encourage scholars to consider exploring ways to use new media technologies in their presentations, including data analysis, information visualization, and remote participation.

Division 41—Politics, Literature, and Film

Peter Josephson, St. Anselm College, pjosephs@anselm.edu

In keeping with the theme of the 2008 conference, “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities,” the Politics, Literature, and Film section invites proposals for papers and panels that consider works of literature and film in a comparative political perspective, either across contemporary cultures, or across history. We are especially interested in literatures of colonization, democratization, and religious and social movements, and what such works may reveal about particular political cultures and regimes, about instances of regime change, or about the nature of political life more generally.

Literature broadly understood unveils aspects of the human condition in its political contexts that may not be captured empirically, or that may be fully realized only by an exercise of the moral imagination. The Politics, Literature and Film section is therefore interested in promoting research that investigates the epistemology of art, as well as studies of particular works of literature, philosophic treatments of the arts in political contexts, and the role and power of literature (broadly understood) in political discourse. Participants might consider the following questions: Do artists have “knowledge” of political life, and if so what is the source of their knowledge? What may we learn—or convey—about a political culture or regime through its literature, and what are the limits of such a method? In what ways might such imaginative representations be advantageous to political life, and in what ways might they be disadvantageous? The Politics, Literature, and Film section invites members to consider the ways in which representatives of other academic disciplines, as well as writers, artists, and filmmakers, may be included in our ongoing efforts to enrich our understanding of political life. In addition to the panel format of presentation and discussion, we encourage proposals that present scholarly work in creative ways.

Division 42—New Political Science

Clyde Barrow, University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, cbarrow@umassd.edu

Globalization is often understood as the inexorable result of impersonal technological and market forces that operate beyond the control of existing governments, institutions, and organizations. The New Political Science section is calling for individual papers and panel proposals that question this thesis by analyzing how various forms of inequality are reproduced and extended through intersecting networks of domestic governmental policies and programs, international treaties, and the decisions of transnational or supranational organizations. Papers or panels that explore how different forms of oppression, domination, and exploitation are created, reproduced, or extended through the inequalities generated by the existing policies of globalization are particularly welcome. To the extent that existing globalization is an unfinished policy, or merely one policy option among others, it is still subject to political intervention and, therefore, paper and panel proposals should also exemplify the intellectual practice of new political science as an academic movement committed to advancing progressive political development. The section is interested in papers or panel proposals that not only critically challenge the dominant ideological categories of the political science discipline, but that challenge the politics legitimated by those ideological categories.

Division 43—International History and Politics

Stuart Kaufman, University of Delaware, skaufman@udel.edu

The International History and Politics (IHAP) division encourages all paper, panel, roundtable, and poster-session proposals that lie at the intersection of history and international politics. The conference theme of categories and global inequalities offers a fertile field for historical analysis–of the international sources and nature of categories and identities, of the international sources and consequences of global inequalities, and of the intersection between them. IHAP especially encourages proposals on such themes. At the same time, IHAP also welcomes proposals on other issues of international history and politics. As a division with an explicitly interdisciplinary theme, IHAP encourages proposals involving interdisciplinary collaboration with historians and historically-minded scholars from all disciplines. The field is wide open but proposals that offer a clear and focused theoretical or empirical question will be favored.

Division 44—Comparative Democratization

Nancy Bermeo, Oxford University, nancy.bermeo@politics.ox.ac.uk

This year's section welcomes papers which make novel contributions to the longstanding debates about the causes and nature of democratic and non-democratic regime change. In keeping with the theme of the 2008 meetings, the section is especially interested in papers relating the subject of democratization to catergories and inequality. Ideally these papers might, 1)challenge our past focus on the democratization of states and focus on new categories of government, including, the democratization of civic associations, international organizations, universities and local and regional governments 2) investigate how movements promoting regime change negotiate and renegotiate social categories 3)ask how different categories of local, national and international institutions affect the outcome of democratization and, most importantly, 4) how democratization and other forms of regime change affect inequalities of various sorts. When and how are those with fewest resources empowered by democracy? When are their lives left largely unaffected? Papers in any of these broad areas and indeed any innovative work that crosses the boundaries that have constrained us in the past will be most welcome.

Division 45—Human Rights

Lilian A. Barria, Georgetown University, lab84@georgetown.edu

Steven D. Roper, Georgetown University sdr39@georgetown.edu

This year's theme exploring global inequalities is particularly relevant to the study of human rights. The challenges of social justice are fundamental to some of the most important debates within the discipline concerning the nature of sovereignty, cooperation and identity. The study of global inequalities requires an examination of individual and group rights and responsibilities within the state and also how these rights and responsibilities are expressed at the international level. We welcome submissions which explore the diverse nature of human rights as well as state and international responses to these rights. We encourage submissions which consider the sources and the consequences of inequalities from various methodological approaches which draw upon the interdisciplinary nature of human rights.

Division 47—Sexuality and Politics

Angelia Wilson, University of Manchester (Interim Chair), angelia.r.wilson@manchester.ac.uk

APSA Annual Conference 2008 will see the first panels dedicated to the new Sexuality and Politics section. While papers in this field have long been a part of the APSA program, the Sexuality & Politics Section brings together scholars producing cutting edge political science research. The theme for APSA Conference 2008 “Categories and the Politics of Global Inequalities” resonates with the field of sexuality and politics offering, for example, a unique opportunity to those working in the area of categories constructed around sexuality and sexual desire. In addition, the global focus invites research exploring the socio-political basis for a sexualize economy, for example: international sex-trade or the impact of internet freedoms on traditional cultures in developing countries or exporting U.S. sexual morality. The Sexuality and Politics section looks forward to receiving paper proposals in related areas of research.

(Note: The Chair for Division 47 will be voted on at the inaugural business meeting during the 2007 Annual Meeting)

Future APSA Conferences

Participation Rules

When submitting panel and individual paper proposals, keep in mind the five participation rules developed by the APSA Council.

Proposal Submission Process

All proposals submitted through the 2008 Annual Meeting Call For Papers system will be acknowledged immediately upon receipt and tracked by an ID number. Notification of acceptance and rejection will be sent electronically in February 2008. Please pay special attention to the submission instructions below.