Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: In this qualitative study of the conceptualizations of ambition based on the narratives of feminists, I explicate interview data in order to identify the tensions in and also the similar constructions of ambition that exist in the interview data of second- and third-wave feminists. Feminism is defined as “a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression” (hooks, 2000, p. viii). Feminists, then, are men and women who identify themselves with the goals and values of feminism. These feminists provide the framework for an alternative discourse of ambition that enriches the dominant discourse found in the United States. As a communication scholar, I focus specifically on the narratives used by the feminists to construct their own definitions of ambition in an effort to compare them to the dominant discourse in society about this phenomenon. In addition, this study seeks to enhance the work/life balance literature in the discipline of communication by considering the relationship between an individual’s definition of ambition and the influence of this definition into an individual’s decisions about work/life balance. This study adds to the current debate about how ambition is, and how ambition should be, defined in the United States.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: “Clusters” and “learning regions” are high on most national agendas for creating economic growth and helping disadvantaged regions catch up. The role of the public sector is often that of an “anima-teur”, supporting “innovation systems” by arranging favorable institutions and other background conditions. In Sweden new regional partnerships were set up to coordinate policies and make the welfare state more supportive of the needs of businesses, inspired by the European union structural funds. To some extent these policies go against the Swedish tradition of a unified welfare state op-erating independently of business interests. Furthermore, the aim is that the partnerships should be “learning systems”, i.e. that they should guide and control their activities through an elaborate set of evaluations, creating a system of “self-regulation” for economic growth.

The paper is based on a study of how far the partnerships have implemented the new policy. Its em-phasis is on describing and explaining differences among the regions. The evaluations that have been commissioned by the 21 regional partnerships give evidence of how well the partnerships function and where tensions reside. The most creative and challenging evaluations have been com-missioned in regions where regional actors have agendas of their own, i.e. where the national policy of “devolution” fits with regional ambitions. Only one regional partnership has attempted to keep track of economic indicators and use these to adapt their strategies.

The study is relevant from several perspectives, e.g. the reform of the welfare state, adoption of EU-policies by member states, implementation of new governance structures, the working of a weak network structure partly in conflict with strong national policy sectors (such as the national labor market board, AMS). It also brings out the contradictions in the national policy, simultaneously wanting “devolution” and still maintaining central control. The regions differ in the level of consen-sus that has developed and the ways that “policy entrepreneurs” can help such consensus develop. Yet, it is doubtful whether even the strongly cooperating regions will make an impact on clusters or innovation systems.

Clusters are supposed to develop as a kind of “learning regions”. The question here is if networks of public and private actors can be a “learning government” to support learning among businesses. Since networks are traditionally seen as a weak form of governance, the expectation of a learning capability seems particularily demanding, especially in a country with few traditions of government being involved with – or even subordinate to – the needs of business.

Publication Type: Proceeding

Publication Type: Proceeding

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Women continue to remain seriously underrepresented in the U.S. Congress. Many theories have been advanced to explain why more women do not run for political office including discriminatory treatment by party elites, the gender gap in political ambition and the tendency of potential female candidates to evaluate their qualifications to run for office less favorably than men. Based on the results of a survey of 394 potential candidates in 27 open seat U.S. House districts during the 2006 election this paper examines the impact of sex in the candidate emergence process. The key findings of this study indicate that women were no less likely to be encouraged or discouraged by political party leaders to run for the House. However, women were less likely to believe they were qualified to run for and serve in the U.S. House and expressed less interest in serving in Congress. Ultimately, women were less likely to consider running for the House than men. However, women who evaluated themselves as very qualified were actually more likely to run.