The succession of mostly nonviolent revolutions that replaced Eastern European communist governments in 1989 and the lack of any action by the Soviet Union to stop these changes transformed the international political system. Since these changes were not driven by changes in relative capabilities, they did not follow the postulates of neorealist theory. Rather, the revolutions of 1989 changed the rules governing superpower conflict and, thereby, the norms underpinning the international system. This constructivist perspective systematically links domestic and international structures with political practice and shows that international systems consist of ensembles of social institutions. These institutions change in response not only to shifting distributions of capabilities but also to redefinition of actors' identities as well as changes in state-society relations. Transformations of the international system occur when political practices change and therefore fail to reproduce the familiar international “structures.”
Selective migration policies are proliferating worldwide as governments try to attract scientists, highly skilled engineers, medical professionals and information technology professionals. Selective migration policies can be grouped into three ideal-typical models: the Canadian "human capital" model based on state selection of permanent immigrants using a point system; the Australian "neo-corporatist" model based on state selection using a point system with extensive business and labour participation; and the market-oriented, demand-driven model based primarily on employer selection of migrants, as practised by the US. After providing an overview of each model, the article compares the three models in terms of policy outcomes as measured by various metrics and then explains how Canadian, Australian, and US governments have recently adopted policies from one another and deviated from their respective selective migration policy models.
SignificanceWe provide a randomized test of policy interventions that address barriers to naturalization for low-income immigrants. We find that offering fee vouchers doubles the naturalization application rate among low-income immigrants, but nudges often used by service providers did not increase applications among fee waiver-eligible immigrants below the poverty level. Our results help guide policy efforts to address the problem of low naturalization rates. The current high fees prevent a considerable share of low-income immigrants who desire to become Americans from submitting their applications. Lowering the fees should therefore increase naturalization rates and generate long-run benefits for new Americans and their communities. However, the poorest immigrants face deeper challenges to naturalization that are not easily overcome with the low-cost nudges we tested.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.