Descripción física : 1 h. ; 32 cm

Descripción física : 1 h. ; 28 cm

Descripción física : 1 h. ; 27 cm

This article examines the existing arguments of the Democratic Peace Theory on why democracies do not fight each other. It aims to summarize the most important aspects of the theory, and to provide adequate counterarguments. First, it explains the general implications of the theory, including its origins and explanations. Second, it explores the related critiques and controversies. Third, it identifies the theory’s practical application. Finally, it offers conclusions on how effective this theory could be during the present days.

Today we live in a globalized world. In this interconnected world, the competition for wealth among states has become a synonym for market share. To ensure access to international markets, governments have resorted to the corporate marketing tool of branding. Country branding, as it is called, creates a series of narratives using a country’s identity. Such narratives encompass a symbolic system which is molded for the unique purpose of creating and promoting a positive image of the country branded. However, to be successful, this tool requires nationals to behave as ambassadors and embody the narratives presented. Thus, the brand indirectly defines the features that a ‘true national’ must have. It is argued that by placing nationals in a position where their membership in the community of the nation is evaluated, country branding can become an alternative method for countering the rhetoric used by terrorist and insurgents for achieving support. The analysis is conducted using constructivism as theoretical background, and the Colombian brand ‘Colombia es Pasión’ as study case. The conclusion achieved is that there are some theoretical and empirical elements that suggest that country branding could be used for counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency, yet further research is encouraged.

This investigation seeks to compare the legal frameworks developed in the 1990-2010 period in Colombia, Peru and Mexico to prevent and tackle informal artisanal/small scale mining. It does so by assessing the impact on the levels of informality of: (i) the incentives provided to miners to operate within legality; and (ii) the mechanisms devised to compensate such miners’ disadvantageous position vis-à-vis large scale mining companies. For such assessment a thorough examination of the countries’ mining codes is carried out. Concurrently, information extracted from semi-structured interviews with experts and triangulated with secondary sources is used to evaluate the codes’ impact on informality. The analysis supports the hypothesis that simple inexpensive mine title acquisition procedures, granting long lasting property rights, as well as guaranteeing technical and financial assistance, are key drivers of formalization. The impact of such incentives is, however, more complex: firstly, as the Mexican case illustrates, the absence of incentives combined with strong police persecution, can reduce informal mining by rendering it an unattractive activity with no prospective of future formalization. Secondly, the Colombian and Peruvian case exemplify how entry barriers also encourage miners to create associations which, in turn, are able to better access information, can comply with formal requirements more easily and can play an important role in influencing policy design. Furthermore, considering the incentives of large scale companies also proved crucial to reduce informality, given that a significant share of mining areas are already under concession. This means that the number of mine titles informal miners could potentially obtain is limited. Therefore, as the Colombian and Peruvian case exemplify, formalizing is to a large degree dependent on the willingness of these companies to voluntarily engage in associative contracts with informal miners. However, so far none of the observed countries has managed to prompt strong alliances between small and large scale miners to fruitfully implement such collaborative models. With regard to the compensation mechanisms, this study supports the hypothesis that granting political voice to small scale miners is of utmost importance to guarantee that differentiated costs, procedures and requirements are contemplated in the law. All in all, such policies have been innocuous and even counterproductive when not accompanied by measures that enhance access to information as well as local bureaucratic competences. In a context of scarce local bureaucratic resources, promissory formalization schemes generate a demand for mine titles that surpasses mining authorities’ capacity and, thereby, potentially incites more informality and social unrest. As observed in Peru, in such cases formalization processes can, paradoxically, induce higher levels of informal mining. In light of these findings, the study recommends the partner institution -Transparency International- to: (i) support the implementation of informational campaigns that explain the benefits of operating in formality and of doing so by means of associating; (ii) encourage policy dialogue spaces in order to prompt mutual monitoring and align the different stakeholders’ incentives; (iii) support capacity building programs targeting local mining authorities; (iv) support monitoring mechanisms in the mine title distribution and contracting processes.

Colombia internal conflict between paramilitary armies and the central government is a topic that has been studied widely from different perspectives, including, but not limited to, studies on forced disappearance, internal displacement, the war on drugs, and the incidence of United States in Colombian internal warfare (Richani, 2013; Acemoglu et al., 2013; Aviléz, 2006; Dube & Naidu, 2015). By contrast, 2005 peace process between Colombian government and illegal paramilitary armies grouped under the umbrella organization named United Self-defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), has not been addressed with the same dedication. The objective of the present research is to analyze the 2005 Colombian peace-settlement through the scope of jus post bellum theory, aiming to see the possible deviations of the peace process from a just war theory moral perspective. According to jus post bellum theorist, a just peace-settlement can help to avoid repetition, while an unjust one can derive into new confrontation (Bell, 2013; Turner Johnson, 2012; Philpott, 2010). By achieving this goal this project intends to provide an ethical reflection on the course of action followed in Colombia to finish war with the self-defense armies, and to enrich Colombian debate about peace policy making in a time when the government is now negotiating a new peace settlement with FARC guerrilla.

This paper reflects on the conceptual approach adopted, in international practice, to the design and implementation of initiatives to promote the rule of law at the national level. It pays particular attention to the understanding, in international practice, of the relationship between the rule of law, democracy, human rights and development. It does so by looking especially at the practice of the UN, and taking into account many empirical and theoretical studies. After first examining the predominant paradigm in the rule of law field adopted by the international community until 2010, and the evolution of international practice thereafter, it concludes that the observance of the rule of law in a given country is determined by political and economic structures, cultural norms, institutions and laws. On this basis, and acknowledging the critical importance of the adopted concepts of rule of law, democracy and human rights, it finds the increasing recognition by the UN of the mutually reinforcing impact of these notions as adequate. This approach allows greater attention to be paid to several socio-economic and political issues that significantly affect the observance of the rule of law in many developing countries, the main recipients of the work of the international community in this field. Based on these findings, it indicates areas for reform.

The neoliberal discourse around development proposed liberalization and market based strategies to increase economic growth and productivity. The retreat of the state gave the market and the private sector a predominant role in trade, investment and industrial and technological upgrade. In this context, the increasing role of Multinational Enterprises (MNEs) in the globalized economy strengthened the focus on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) as an important tool for development, and intensified the competition to attract investments between countries. This paper suggests that rather, than being a magic formula for achieving development or having a general effect –either positive or negative-, FDI’s impact, seen as positive spillovers and effective industrial and technological upgrading, depends on the sector in which investment is being made, level of intervention and direction that the host government is applying, and the absorption capacity of the host economy.

Prescriptive ideas on war have been traditionally focused on the reasons and the means of war. However, contemporary scholars have emphasised the importance of normative judgements about the aftermath of armed conflicts. Although peacetime after war has been mainly guided by notions of corrective justice like retribution and restoration, a distributive approach to justice is currently proposed to redress socio-economic inequalities within highly unequal post-conflict scenarios. From this perspective, a peaceful state of affairs that preserves severe inequalities could not be deemed a just peace. In this regard, Colombian conflict is frequently utilised as an example of the expected role of distribution after war. Then, it seems a relevant question whether reducing socio-economic inequalities through mechanisms of distributive justice must be considered indispensable for a just peace after war. I will argue that distributive justice must be regarded as essential for a just peace within highly unequal post-conflict societies like Colombia. To that end, consequentialist and deontological arguments for post-conflict distribution will be discussed to analyse Colombian case as a scenario in which a just peace must necessarily include notions of distribution.