Geoengineering has been roughly defined as “the intentional manipulation of planetary systems at a global scale” (Keith 2000; Schelling 1996). This definition is neither as precise nor as informative as some would like. Nevertheless, we can fix ideas by focusing on the most prominent current proposal, which is to inject sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere to deflect incoming radiation and so cool the Earth's surface. This is a paradigm case: if anything counts as geoengineering, stratospheric sulfate injection (hereafter SSI) does.

Political science, like many disciplines, has a “leaky-pipeline” problem. Women are more likely to leave the profession than men. Those who stay are promoted at lower rates. Recent work has pointed toward a likely culprit: women are less likely to submit work to journals. Why? One answer is that women do not believe their work will be published. This article asks whether women systematically study different topics than men and whether these topics may be less likely to appear in top political science journals. To answer this question, we analyzed the content of dissertation abstracts. We found evidence that some topics are indeed gendered. We also found differences in the representation of “women’s” and “men’s” topics in the pages of the top journals. This suggests that research agendas may indeed be gendered and that variation in research topic might be to blame for the submission gap.

Gender differences in political behavior are a source of ongoing interest for political pundits, campaign advisors, and students of American politics. In a closely divided nation, even small shifts in the political choices of men and women can have significant electoral consequences. In politics, the gender gap refers to male-female differences in party identification and voting behavior. As a practical matter, the contemporary gender gap (with women more aligned with the Democratic Party) emerged in 1964 with the election of Lyndon B. Johnson. The gender divide has grown incrementally over time, hitting a contemporary high of 14 percentage points in 1996 (see Figure 1). Since then, the size of the political difference between men and women has declined somewhat; the 2004 gender gap in party identification and voting fell to 9.5 and 7 points, respectively. The 2004 vote gap was half of what it was at its apex in 1996, and while one hesitates to make too much of a single point on this larger time series, a sustained contraction of the gender gap could pose rather dire circumstances for the Democratic Party, or, conversely, great fortune for the Republicans.

Women's parliamentary representation in the 27 long-established but “unfinished democracies” (Haavio-Mannila et al. 1985) of the world varies between 2.3% in Japan's lower house to 39.0% in unicameral Finland. Women state legislators in the United States range from 4% in Kentucky to 39% in Washington in the lower house. Women are 11% of the members of the U.S. House of Representatives. The causes of this variation are primarily the electoral arrangements by which legislators are chosen and, secondarily, the political, economic, and social context.

Favorable societal conditions will not substitute for unfavorable electoral systems for women to reach their optimal representation in parliament and local legislatures. But unfavorable contextual conditions—including cultural biases and discriminatory practices—can be overcome to a great extent by alternate electoral systems. Electoral arrangements are not neutral; they are the means used to exclude or include groups. The arrangements are amenable to change faster than social biases and other barriers to women's election opportunity and fair representation.

Democracy falls short when women of whatever color or ethnic group cannot cast an effective vote to elect representatives of their choice or to enact laws they believe are critically needed. When there are higher proportions of women in parliament, for example, more laws are enacted that benefit children (Lijphart 1991).

The number of African American and Hispanic mayors of American cities has grown steadily since 1967, the year that Cleveland elected Carl Stokes the first minority mayor of a major American city.Throughout this paper, we use the term “minority” to refer to African Americans and Hispanics. In doing so, we do not assume that African American and Hispanic voters have the same preferences, nor do we intend to minimize the significant diversity within each of these groups. Rather, we group Hispanics and African Americans together because of the relative disadvantage members of both communities have experienced in comparison to whites in the United States. Over the past three decades, cities in all parts of the country have elected black and Hispanic mayors, including the five largest: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, and Philadelphia. As the new century begins, almost one-third (25/76) of major American cities have minority mayors. The election of minority mayors is a clear sign of political progress by minorities since passage of the civil rights acts of the 1960s.

A simulation of the foreign policy decision-making process, asdescribed in this article, can assist an instructor in linkingstudents' abstract understanding of complex political events,circumstances, and decision making to the real-world interplay ofthe multiple factors involved in decision making. It is this type ofactive learning that helps bring a student's abstract understandinginto the concrete world. Instead of being passive learners relyingon an instructor's knowledge, students are active participants inthe learning process.

Given the large number of cases and considerable institutional and contextual variation across and within local governments, one might assume that the study of local elections is an area already well harvested by political scientists. The truth, however, is that this area of inquiry is relatively unexplored. In fact, to say that a field of study on local elections exists would be a bit of an overstatement. Not only is the literature rather small and not particularly cohesive, but the data collection and methods of analysis are also somewhat primitive, particularly compared to research on state and federal elections. While, on the one hand, this lack of subfield development means that there are many unanswered and even unexplored questions, on the other hand, it means that the possibilities for future research are practically limitless.

Despite mediocre approval ratings and below average economic growth, George W. Bush has a good chance of winning a second term in the White House according to the time-forchange forecasting model.

The current method for selecting presidential nominees by the twomajor parties went into place mostly in 1972 and certainly by 1976,after Buckely v. Valeo. It was the naturalculmination of reform efforts over the history of the republic inthat, while prior reforms consistently invoked greater openness anddemocratic governance as rationales for their adoption, this methodactually empowered voters as the central figures in determining whowould be nominated (see Aldrich 1987). This fact became fully evident almost at once.The selection via primaries of senator George McGovern in 1972 andgovernor Jimmy Carter in 1976 as the Democratic presidentialnominees arguably not only would not have happened, they would nothave even come close to winning nomination without successful appealto the voting public.

From the establishment of the United States Postal Service and the invention of the telegram, to the introduction of C-SPAN and the explosion of the Internet, the development of new communication technologies has always affected the functioning of Congress. Not surprisingly, recent innovations such as e-mail and social networking have spurred Congress to alter the way it operates as an institution, and rethink the manner in which it engages the public. In this brief examination, I discuss recent changes in congressional behavior and practices due to technological innovation, specifically the proliferation of social networking Web sites. Then, I cautiously predict future trends in the use of social networking and related technologies as they become more integrated in congressional offices and increase the capacity for more robust internal and constituent communications over time.

The 2012 presidential campaign takes place at a time of deep political division inthe United States. Democrats and Republicans differ sharply over Barack Obama'sperformance in office as well as a wide range of issues ranging from governmentspending and health care to immigration and gay marriage. These divisions areshaping the strategies of the candidates and the outlook for November. Overwhelmingmajorities of Democrats and Republicans, including overwhelming majorities ofindependents who lean toward a party, can be expected to support their own party'snominee. As a result, the outcome will depend on which party does a better job ofmobilizing its supporters and appealing to a small group of swing voters in 10 or 12battleground states.

In the previous decade, the literature on “relational approach” has burgeoned in the social sciences. Recently, a “relational turn” in political science was called for in a symposium in this journal (McClurg and Young, 2011). The participants perceived a promising path for such a “turn” by introducing social network analysis (SNA) into political science. This call is informed by a conviction that the central concept of political science— that is, power—is relational. Considering this viewpoint, this article argues that there are two different understandings of the connection between the qualifier “relational” and the concept of power, referred to as the “Anglo-American” and the “Continental” perspectives. I contend that symposium participants conceived of the connection from only the Anglo-American perspective and that the Continental understanding would add extra value for political science.