Abstract: Citizens and policy makers look to economists ’ expertise, particularly when paradoxical evolutions take place and the best-informed expectations turn out to be erroneous. The problem is that economic theory has prospered by adopting a methodological standpoint based on the assumption that economic regularities and mechanisms are static. This article deals with the search for relevant tools in order to analyze epochal economic problems. Could previous methods and concepts be retooled or should new ones be sought? How should we use the lessons of economic history? Three contemporary challenges are used in order to test the relevance of alternative strategies: the restructuring of Russia after 1990, the launching of the euro, and the “New Economy.” 1 INTRODUCTION: A PARADOX AT THE HEART OF ECONOMICS When economies are prospering, economic growth is strong and stable, and full employment is assured, the respect accorded to economists sometimes grows while the role they play in the economy diminishes. At such times, their role is simply to make the sources of this prosperity comprehensible. Several theories to explain prosperity may coexist, but in general a

Paper for panel on

Liberal scholars in the international relations discipline argue that peace among nations would be the consequence of three complementary influences. First, republican constitutions eliminate autocratic caprice in waging war. Second, “an understanding of the legitimate rights of all citizens and of all republics comes into play ” with the spread of democracy. This creates a moral foundation for the liberal peace, upon which eventually an edifice of international law can be built. Lastly, economic interdependence reinforces constitutional constraints and liberal norms by creating transnational ties that encourage accommodation rather than conflict. Thus material incentives add their force to law and morality. This paper is an analysis of how change in the level of economic interdependence in a subsystem influences international conflicts within it. The research comparatively analyzes empirical data from two subsystems, OECD and ASEAN. This research is distinctive in that (1) it simultaneously examines the Kantian peace theory’s three “legs”, democracy, inter-governmental organizations and free trade, (2) it provides an aggregated, group-level analysis of economic interdependence, and (3) it differentiates international conflicts between lower intensity conflict and militarized interstate disputes.

I would like to thank Renee Monson for helpful comments and discussions about gendered interests, the nature of the relationship between gender relations and welfare states, and the feminization of poverty. Thanks to Kathrina Zippel for general research assistance on this project, and for providing a summary of the literature on gender and the welfare state in Germany, including many works written in German. Also thanks to the members of the Research network on Gender, State and Society, subscribers to H-State, H-Women, and Socpol-1, and contributors to Social Politics who supplied copies of their work and made suggestions for material to be included. IRP publications (discussion papers, special reports, and the newsletter Focus) are now available electronically. The IRP Web Site can be accessed at the following address:

Abstract – Why do employees have rights to representation within corporate boards in some countries, but not in others? Board-level codetermination is widely considered a distinctive feature of coordinated or nonliberal models of capitalism. Existing literature stresses three sets of explanations for codetermination rooted in corporate governance, union strength and political systems. The paper compares data from 22 OECD countries using the QCA method (Qualitative Comparative Analysis) and fuzzy sets approach to explore necessary and sufficient conditions for board-level codetermination. The results show two central pathways toward codetermination both rooted primarily in union coordination and consensual political systems, but with divergent implications for corporate governance systems in Scandinavia and Germany.

This paper evaluates the effects of the use of Product Lifecycle Management and its three sub-systems- Organizational Memory, Project and Resource Management and Cooperative Work systems- on three components of knowledge integration in New Product Development: knowledge transfer, translation and transformation. A second aim of this paper is to explicate and discuss the use of the crisp set version of Qualitative Comparative Analysis to explain the three components of knowledge integration. It does so in an international inter-organizational context of a moderately turbulent industry. In addition to the PLM sub-systems, this configurational analysis focuses on the level of supplier relationships as characterized by two conditions: the boundary spanner participation and supplier integration. Results show that different types of sub-systems impact various types of knowledge integration, and that the level of supplier relationship conditions is important to ensure knowledge translation and transformation.