Mitigating climate change requires countries to provide a global public good. This means that the domestic cleavages underlying mass attitudes toward international climate policy are a central determinant of its provision. We argue that the industry-specific costs of emission abatement and internalized social norms help explain support for climate policy. To evaluate our predictions we develop novel measures of industry-specific interests by cross-referencing individuals' sectors of employment and objective industry-level pollution data and employ quasi-behavioral measures of social norms in combination with both correlational and conjoint-experimental data. We find that individuals working in pollutive industries are 7 percentage points less likely to support climate cooperation than individuals employed in cleaner sectors. Our results also suggest that reciprocal and altruistic individuals are about 10 percentage points more supportive of global climate policy. These findings indicate that both interests and norms function as complementary explanations that improve our understanding of individual policy preferences.

Focusing on Eastern and Central Europe before WWII, this collection explores various genres of “ethnoliterature” across temporal, geographical, and ideological borders as sites of Jewish identity formation and dissemination. Challenging the assumption of cultural uniformity among Ashkenazi Jews, the contributors consider how ethnographic literature defines Jews and Jewishness, the political context of Jewish ethnography, and the question of audience, readers, and listeners. With contributions from leading scholars and an appendix of translated historical ethnographies, this volume presents vivid case studies across linguistic and disciplinary divides, revealing a rich textual history that throws the complexity and diversity of a people into sharp relief.

What explains the sharp divide among European publics over the Grexit? We explore this question using original surveys from four of the largest European economies. We contend that differences in citizens' own economic interests, as well as the often-mentioned chasm between supporters of mainstream and extremist parties, provide little insight into the public divide over the Grexit. Instead, we show that the key factor is the split between the left and right. We then develop and test a set of theoretical explanations for this cleavage. We find that the left-right divide over the Grexit is not driven by differences in attitudes on redistribution, levels of empathy, or general EU support. Instead, we find that the primary mechanism is that left and right voters have different expectations about the impact of a Grexit on the European economy as a whole. These expectations largely reflect differences in core beliefs about the promise of a free-market approach.

Multiplicative interaction models are widely used in social science to test whether the relationship between an outcome and an independent variable changes with a moderating variable. Current empirical practice overlooks two important problems. First, these models assume a linear interaction effect that changes at a constant rate with the moderator. Second, reliably estimating the conditional effects of the independent variable at all values of the moderator requires sufficient common support. Replicating nearly 50 interaction effects from 22 recent publications in five top political science journals, we find that these core assumptions fail in a majority of cases, suggesting that a large portion of findings across all subfields based on interaction models are modeling artifacts or are at best highly model dependent. We propose simple diagnostics to assess the validity of these assumptions and offer flexible estimation strategies that allow for nonlinear interaction effects and safeguard against excessive extrapolation.

Genocide occurs in every time period and on every continent. Using the 1948 U.N. definition of genocide as its departure point, this book examines the main episodes in the history of genocide from the beginning of human history to the present. Norman M. Naimark lucidly shows that genocide both changes over time, depending on the character of major historical periods, and remains the same in many of its murderous dynamics. He examines cases of genocide as distinct episodes of mass violence, but also in historical connection with earlier episodes.

Unlike much of the literature in genocide studies, Naimark argues that genocide can also involve the elimination of targeted social and political groups, providing an insightful analysis of communist and anti-communist genocide. He pays special attention to settler (sometimes colonial) genocide as a subject of major concern, illuminating how deeply the elimination of indigenous peoples, especially in Africa, South America, and North America, influenced recent historical developments. At the same time, the "classic" cases of genocide in the twentieth Century - the Armenian Genocide, the Holocaust, Rwanda, and Bosnia -- are discussed, together with recent episodes in Darfur and Congo.

What type of asylum regime do European citizens support? Based on a survey experiment involving 18,000 citizens across fifteen European countries, we examine public support for alternative mechanisms for allocating asylum seekers across Europe. We provide novel evidence showing that public preferences on this issue are driven largely by adherence to the Aristotelian norm of proportional equality, which tends to override consequentialist considerations. Specifically, we find that a large majority supports a proportional allocation regime, whereby asylum seekers would be allocated proportional to each country’s capacity, over the current status quo policy under the Dublin Regulation. This majority support is weakened but persists even when citizens are made aware that moving to proportional allocation would increase the number of asylum seekers allocated to their own country. These findings suggest citizens care not only about the consequences of international policy but also about the inherent fairness of its institutional design, and they present a potential pathway toward reform of the European asylum system that would be agreeable at both the international and domestic level.