Political Science 313

Document Sample
Political Science 313 Powered By Docstoc
					Political Science 313                                                        Spring 2009


Whether you love Harley-Davidsons or hate them, the fact is that this iconic Milwaukee
motorcycle manufacturer continues to exist because other motorcycle firms – and the
U.S. and Japanese governments – came to a negotiated agreement about Harley‟s
survival. This course explores such agreements because, after all, these arrangements
determine much of what we see, hear, have, and do. More specifically, we will examine
some categories of decisions that represent what firms and states want of each other.
Because their goals diverge, neither firms nor states ordinarily get all of what they want.
Nevertheless, the sum of their conjoined activities constitutes the global political
economy and very much shapes our lives.

The Harley example is one of many descriptive cases we will read this semester in order
to gain a sense of what actually transpires in the fairly complicated – and often obscure –
world of bargains struck in the global political economy. And, to make better sense of
the case studies, we will also read and apply conceptual materials that provide
understandings of both negotiating processes and the participants (both states and firms)
involved in those negotiations.

Readings: A large share of the assigned readings are to be purchased and are available at
Underground Textbook Exchange (664 State Street). They are to be found in:

       1) Peter B. Evans, Harold K. Jacobson, and Robert D. Putnam, eds., DOUBLE-

Numerous additional assigned readings are either available at the Reserve Room of the
College Library or found in a supplementary course packet (fate to be determined).

Assignments and Course Grade: Students are expected to be prepared for class
meetings by reading and thinking about the assigned materials in advance. The class
will largely follow a seminar format, featuring discussions more commonly than lectures.

Classroom participation is weighted as 30% of the course grade. Of this 30%, each
student will make one brief presentation weighted as 5%. An additional 5% will be
credited to each student‟s critique of another‟s brief presentation. (That is, each brief
presentation will be followed by a brief critique.) The remaining 20% of the
“participation” will reflect the caliber and frequency of each student‟s general
participation in discussions. Of this remaining 20%, each student begins with the letter
grade F on the first day of class. If you attend class faithfully but rarely participate, this
20% will remain an F grade.

         If you participate only occasionally but in ways that indicate a lack of
          preparation, you will receive a D or C on this portion of the course grade;

         If you participate only occasionally but in ways that indicate preparation, you
          will receive a grade of BC on this portion of the course grade.

In other words, B, AB, and A grades are reserved exclusively for those who are regular
and prepared participants in classroom discussions.

Papers will constitute the remaining70% of the course grade. Students will write three
papers during the semester. The first paper, to be scheduled by each student, is an
outline of one of the case studies on file in the Reserve Room or the course packet in
which a conceptual interpretation is to be developed. This paper will be about 5-6 pages
in length (double-spaced typescript). A class handout will describe this assignment in
greater detail. This first paper is to be submitted in polished form on the day the case is
scheduled for classroom discussion (see Schedule below). The student responsible for
the written analysis of this case will also present that analysis in the classroom on that
same day (this is the 5% presentation described in the preceding paragraph.) Each
presentation will immediately be followed by another student‟s formal critique, and then
the first student will respond to other students‟ questions and comments that follow. The
first paper will receive an ungraded critique and will be due in revised form two weeks
after the initial submission and presentation date.

The second paper, due as a polished product in week 8, is a fresh case study of
bargaining in the global economy. A class handout will describe this assignment in
greater detail. This paper should be about 15 pages in length.

       In anticipation of both the second and third papers, we will hold a special class
        session at Memorial Library (date to be determined). An Academic Librarian for
        the Social Sciences will instruct us on effective research techniques for these
        assignments. You will not want to miss this special session! The second paper
        will likewise receive an ungraded critique. The revised version of this paper is
        due in week 10.

The third paper is a fresh case study of a firm or industry. In this paper, you will focus
on the range of public policy issues that confront this firm/industry. A class handout will
describe this assignment in greater detail. Due in final form at the end of the semester,
this third paper should again be about 15 pages in length and will be presented in class in
weeks 13, 14, or 15.

You will see in the following course schedule that the first and second assigned papers
are to be submitted in complete, polished form fully two weeks before they are due in
final form. The third paper, however, is to be submitted just once. Note that all due dates
are inflexible. Late papers will be penalized one-half letter grade for each day late (e.g., a
B would become a BC, etc.) Each initial submission is to be written with the sort of
clarity and completeness that you would normally associate with a final version. Your
best effort on this will allow for a constructive critique and that, in turn, should enable
you to engage in a more self-confident and satisfying revision. All students in this
course receive “Communications B” credit.

Writing Fellows: Our class this semester is especially fortunate to have the assistance of
two Writing Fellows. Josh Hamborg and Kristina Lau are upper division
undergraduates who will work with me to assist you in developing writing skills
commensurate with your critical thinking abilities. In particular, it is they who will offer
critiques of your first and second papers. The Writing Fellows do not assign grades to
the papers; I will grade the final submissions after you have met with your Writing
Fellow to review his or her comments and after you have proceeded with the revisions.

It‟s worth noting two additional facts about your Writing Fellows. First, they have been
chosen in a campus-wide selection process to assist other students in drafting papers.
They‟re given extensive training for an entire semester on how to offer constructive
criticism in the writing process. Second, they are NOT expected to have any special
expertise in the subjects of the courses in which they work. Instead, their role is to offer
intelligent lay readings of the drafts they critique; they‟re not supposed to evaluate the
content of your papers. So, if you have doubts about the substance of your papers, please
consult with me about that.

The course grade will be determined as follows:

               classroom participation         = 30%
               paper #1                        = 15
               paper #2                        = 25
               paper #3                        = 30

My Expectation: I expect each of you to conduct yourself with integrity, and I have
some simple advice for any of you who may want to rely on short-cuts to cheat your way
through this class: Don’t do it! It is a disgrace and is grossly unfair to your fellow
students. Cheating includes, among other things (1) plagiarism and (2) turning in work in
your name that is not your own. If you need more information about the nature of
misconduct and university disciplinary procedures, refer to the Academic Misconduct
Guide for Students. It‟s located on the Dean of Students web page at

Contact Information:
Neil Richardson                                          Josh Hamborg
201E North Hall                                          hamborg@wisc.edu
office hours Wednesdays, 9:30 – 11:30
263-2019                                                 Kristina Lau
neilrich@polisci.wisc.edu                                kmlau@wisc.edu

Course Schedule

1/20          Introduction
1/22          States, Firms, Competition, and Change

1/27, 1/29    Negotiation and Bargaining
2/3, 2/5,      Putnam, “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of
2/10             Two-Level Games,” pp. 431-468 in Evans et al.
               “Beer Brawls: GATT „Settles‟ the Market Access Dispute Between
                 U.S. and Canadian Brewers,” Reserve Room/II
               Moravcsik, “Introduction: Integrating International and Domestic
                 Theories of International Bargaining,” ch. 1 in Evans et al.

2/12, 2/17    Symmetrical Interstate Bargaining
               “The Beef Hormone Trade Dispute,” Reserve Room/I
               Milner, “The Interaction of Domestic and International Politics: The
                 Anglo-American Oil Negotiations and the International Civil
                 Aviation Negotiations, 1943-1947,” ch. 7 in Evans et al.
               “Bailing Out USAir: The Politics of Balancing Domestic and Foreign
                 Economic Interests,” Reserve Room/II
               “Banana Wars: Challenges to the European Union‟s Banana Regime,”
                 Course Packet

2/19, 2/24    Asymmetrical Bargaining Power
               “The Mexican Debt Crisis, 1982,” Reserve Room/I
               Kahler, “Bargaining with the IMF: Two-Level Strategies and
                 Developing Countries,” ch. 12 in Evans et al.
               “Brazilian Informatics and the United States: Defending Infant Industry
                 Versus Opening Foreign Markets,” Reserve Room/I
               “The Panama Canal Negotiations,” Reserve Room/II
2/26, 3/3    Market Access
3/5           Odell, “International Threats and Internal Politics: Brazil, the European
                Community and the United States, 1985-1987,” ch. 8 in Evans et al.
              “Textiles and the Multi-Fiber Arrangement,” Reserve Room/I
              “Protection for the Machine Tool Industry: Domestic and International
                Negotiations for Voluntary Restraint Agreements,” Reserve Room/I
              “U.S. Negotiations of Voluntary Restraint Agreements in Steel, 1984,”
                Reserve Room/II

Paper #2 Due 3/10 (Tuesday)

3/10, 3/12   Environmental and Cultural Standards
              “The Ivory Trade,” Reserve Room/I
              “The Turbot War: Canada, Spain, and the Conflict over the North
                Atlantic Fishery,” Reserve Room/II
              “The Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement and the Cultural
                Industries,” Reserve Room/II

3/17, 3/19: SPRING BREAK

3/24, 3/26   U.S.-Japan Relationships (I)
              “Revving Up for Relief: Harley-Davidson at the ITC,” Reserve Room/I
              “Standing Up for Steel,” Course Packet
              “The Reagan Administration, the Auto Producers, and the 1981
                 Agreement with Japan,” Reserve Room/I
              “Restraining Trade to Invoke Investment: MITI and the Japanese Auto
                 Producers,” Reserve Room/II

Revised Paper #2 Due 3/31 (Tuesday)

3/31, 4/2    U.S-Japan Relationships (II)
              “Taking Toshiba Public,” Reserve Room/I
              “The U.S.-Japanese Semiconductor Problem,” Reserve Room/I
              “The Marlboro Man and Japanese Import Policy Toward Cigarettes,”
                 Reserve Room/II

4/7, 4/9     U.S.-Japan Relationships (III)
              “The U.S.-Japanese FSX Fighter Agreement,” Reserve Room/I
              “Snapshot: Kodak v. Fuji,” Course Packet

4/14, 4/16   Prenegotiation (I)
              Zartman, “Prenegotiation: Phases and Functions,” Reserve Room/
                Separate & e-Reserve
              Tomlin, “The Stages of Prenegotiation: The Decision to Negotiate North
                American Free Trade,” Reserve Room/Separate and e-Reserve
              Winham, “The Prenegotiation Phase of the Uruguay Round,” Reserve
                Room/Separate and e-Reserve

4/21, 4/23   Student Reports

428, 4/30    Student Reports

5/5, 5/7     Student Reports

Paper #3 Due 5/12 (Tuesday)