Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper examines discriminatory membership
in the European Union from a game-theoretical perspective. The
main argument states that discriminatory membership serves as an
instrument to enhance collaboration in international organizations
with heterogenous member states. EU members impose discriminatory
measures on new members to redistribute enlargement gains from new
members to particularly negatively affected old members as to
render EU expansion pareto-efficient. Hence, discriminatory
membership oftentimes serves as an alternative to non-enlargement.
The empirical findings of a probit analysis on the EU accession
negotiations and outcomes support this theoretical claim.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper explores ways extending the institutional theory of organizations by focusing on the power dynamics that render discriminatory neighborhood schools uncontestable in the city of Cleveland. Neighborhood schools significantly contribute to the maintenance of educational deprivation of poor, minority urban children who live in an ecology that suffers from a chronic lack of economic, social, and cultural capital. The city of Cleveland has suffered from years of segregation followed by isolation, which puts both students and their neighborhood schools at a disadvantage. Yet, neighborhood schools remain uncontested due to the ways in which the affluent has circumscribed the wants and preferences of the poor. Given its focus on the legitimacy (i.e., ‘taken-for-grantedness') of organizational forms, institutional theory can examine the power dynamics that maintain the legitimacy of the neighborhood school. It can do this by (1) adopting a view of power that treats the absence of manifest conflict as a sign of politics, and (2) adopting a social class level of analysis.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Social hierarchy is ubiquitous in almost every human society. According to social dominance theory (Sidanius & Pratto, 1994, 1999), legitimizing ideologies such as zero-sum competition and meritocracy beliefs contribute to the support of social hierarchy. Extending from the theory, we examined how support of general group dominance predicted sexist ideologies and discriminatory policy beliefs toward lesbians and gay men. Two types of discriminatory beliefs were examined: Derogatory and caring yet discriminatory beliefs. We argue that social dominance orientation is more conceptually consistent with derogatory discriminatory beliefs, such as hostile sexism or derogatory policy beliefs toward lesbians and gay men. Interpersonal hierarchy established through familial relationships was hypothesized to be more in lines with caring and discriminatory beliefs, such as benevolent sexism or caring yet discriminatory policy beliefs toward lesbians and gay men. Moreover, we argued that support of general closeness would be associated with caring yet discriminatory beliefs, not with derogatory ones. Our results largely supported our hypotheses.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The People's Republic of China has been the number one target of antidumping actions filed by the U.S. Commerce Department on behalf of various domestic industries. This paper examines U.S. antidumping (AD) actions against China from 1980 to 2004. Specifically, it addresses both the conditions under which U.S. industries apply for protection from regulatory authorities against China and the likelihood of their obtaining an affirmative ruling from the International Trade Commission. While our statistical analysis of U.S. antidumping actions against China affirms the importance of standard political economy explanations of U.S. antidumping decision-making, it also emphasizes how industries characterized by high levels of intra-industry trade has tended to generate more AD actions against China. In addition, the paper assesses the impact of China's membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO) on the pattern of initiation and imposition of AD actions by the United States against that country, postulating that China's WTO membership may not have had the effect of deterring U.S. protectionism via the antidumping instrument as the designation of China as a non-market economy under the WTO has led U.S. AD authorities to apply more stringent criteria in dealing with AD case against that country. This counter-intuitive finding suggests that under certain circumstances, the legal framework of the WTO can facilitate trade protectionism.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Tort damages aim to restore plaintiffs to their original position absent the defendant’s tort. Claimants are not to benefit from their victimization. To ensure consistency with restitutio in intergrum, courts require a correlation between plaintiff’s loss and amount of compensation. In the personal injury context, compensation is warranted only for the difference in plaintiff’s life attributable to the defendant’s tort. The paper will point to some of the discriminatory assumptions embedded in the application of this seemingly neutral principle and the effects on marginalized plaintiffs. Specifically, factors that inform determination of compensation for impaired working capacity such as race, gender, socio-economic and family status reinforce the marginalization of plaintiffs from vulnerable groups. Yet, factors favourable to these groups such as high participation rate in the waged labour force because of unfavourable economic conditions, even if at a lower income level; the increasing trend of women being the main or major breadwinners in many families; and the steady increase in the number of stay-home dads are routinely ignored in determining the socio-economic prospects of plaintiffs absent the injury. The assessment of damages for personal injury becomes a site for reinforcing the marginalization of individuals and groups facing discrimination and makes it cheaper to victimise such people while exacerbating their vulnerabilities. The paper will also address unfairness to family members who provide care following tortious injury because of the practice of limiting in-trust awards to services exceeding what the person would normally provide for the victim.