The peer review process of publication has limitations, which are discussed. The influence of the pharmaceutical industry can be beneficial and harmful, both of which are examined.

The Introduction outlines the main premise of the book: the mass closure of public schools has serious consequences for American democracy. It begins with one mother’s – Ms. Leanne Woods’ – fight to save Steel Elementary School in Philadelphia. Using the example of Steel elementary, it argues that citizens learn about politics through the institutions they interact with the most, and that for many Americans, schools are those institutions. Accordingly, when schools close en masse, these blunt policy instruments play a significant role in shaping citizens’ – specifically African Americans and Latinx – relationship with government, politics, and political participation. And yet, despite the direct consequences of these policies on the lives of these Americans, the connection between educational policy experiences and democracy remain understudied in political science. In the impending chapters, Closed for Democracy takes on this investigation and demonstrates how affected citizens come to win policy battles to save schools but lose their faith in government.

Extreme weather events and catastrophic disasters have led to the widespread damage and destruction of homes and communities, and have produced large levels of involuntary displacement. Globally, the numbers of displaced persons are expected to grow due to the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, increased population exposure, and vulnerability to natural hazards. Several sociolegal complexities and dilemmas arise in addressing the needs of displaced populations and disaster survivors for which policy, governance, and legal solutions are not clearly defined. In this chapter, we draw on theories of social constructionism and contend that social constructions of displaced populations can affect the adoption, design, and implementation of laws and policies that apply to disaster survivors and displaced populations. Specifically, we examine how the perceptions, framing, and characterization of target groups of displaced populations such as school-aged children, homeless and highly mobile families, and long-time residents who have precarious forms of immigration status, can influence governance issues that may arise during post-disaster recovery both within affected and host communities. The findings suggest that despite formal expectations of equal legal treatment, positive and negative social constructions of target populations can lead to benefits and losses for those affected and displaced by disaster.

This chapter concludes by addressing how this book’s analysis reconsiders sovereign power in IR and speculates on a structural model of responsibility that takes hybrid sovereignty seriously.

This chapter introduces the main argument of this book that global sovereign power is constituted by public/private hybridity in Lived Sovereignty, while sovereign authority is recognized as indivisibly public in Idealized Sovereignty. Public/private hybridity takes on different characteristics of contractual, institutional, and shadow forms based on the formalization and publicization of relations. In relation to hybrid sovereignty, the lived realities of different types of public/private hybridity are in tension with the idealized imperatives of determining what is public versus private.

This chapter theorizes that sovereignty is the interplay of two contrasting modalities. In Idealized Sovereignty, sovereign authority is represented exclusively in “the state” per the doctrine of indivisibility developed by early modern theorists and reified in IR theory. In Lived Sovereignty, achieving sovereign competence involves divisible practices of state and nonstate actors in a variety of social relations. We would do a disservice to sovereignty’s complexity if only one of the two modes persevered in analyses of sovereignty. Instead, the chapter intervenes in major IR debates to argue that sovereignty should be hybridized. This overarching framework guides the ideal-types of public/private hybridity developed in the next chapter and the empirical analyses in the remainder of this book, where hybrid sovereignty is necessary to build a global empire, go to war, regulate global markets, and protect rights.

This chapter develops the analytical dynamics of public/private hybridity in Lived Sovereignty. It first situates public/private hybridity in the global governance literature and then introduces three ideal-types. Contractual hybridity features formal and publicized performances where sovereign power is negotiated in public/private contractual exchanges. Institutional hybridity features informal and partly publicized performances where sovereign power is negotiated through public/private institutional linkages. Shadow hybridity features nonformalized and nonpublicized performances where sovereign power is negotiated in public/private shadowy bargains. Finally, the chapter presents a Weberian-inspired research design to show off the three ideal-types in the empirics that follow.

This chapter examines the influence of Kuhn's SSR on the sociology of science. I analyze Kuhn's influenced on the sociology of science before and after the development of the Strong Programme.

Whereas Isaiah Berlin argued that positive liberty is not a theory of liberty at all, and that negative liberty is the only true conception of liberty, Dorothy Roberts argues that positive liberty is the only true conception of liberty, and that negative liberty is not a theory of liberty at all but rather a theory of power and privilege. This essay takes up that contrast with specific reference to disability. One could argue that disability takes a negative liberty view, because disabled persons are constrained by physical, legal, and attitudinal barriers from doing many things they want. But this requires a positive liberty gesture of expanding what we mean by “barriers,” such as seeing stairs as a barrier rather than a natural part of building architecture for which nobody is responsible. But this essay carries the positive liberty argument further, drawing on feminist insights about the social construction of desire and subjectivity, to argue that positive liberty is important to a full understanding of freedom for disabled persons.

This chapter recapitulates the book’s main theoretical and empirical findings. By unpacking the interaction between rights on the books and rights in practice, we can gain a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the evolving meanings of rights and claims-making options in Korea. We find that although the types of rights claims are diversifying and opportunities and resources for rights claiming have improved, obtaining rights protection and catalyzing social change remains challenging. We then generalize our findings on rights-based mobilization in Korea and beyond, categorizing them into lessons on (1) understanding rights in action, (2) rights as plural and fluid in meaning, and (3) rights hierarchies privileging certain groups over others. We conclude with thoughts on the future and challenges of rights claiming in Korea.

An analysis of the nature of modern “actors” or actorhood. Offers direct arguments about how the modern (European, now global) cultural system constructs the modern actor as an authorized agent for various interests. Seeing modern actorhood in this way helps greatly in explaining a number of otherwise anomalous or little analyzed features of modern individuals, organizations, and states.

Presents the main arguments of sociological neoinstitutionalism in the areas of organizations, states, and identities. Illustrates the arguments with empirical research conducted through the year 2000.