3.25 Tesis doctorado

Permanent URI for this collection

https://repositorio.uc.cl/handle/11534/22358

Browse

Browsing 3.25 Tesis doctorado by Subject "16 Paz, justicia e instituciones sólidas"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Enforcement, empowerment and entitlement (3E): subnational determinants of armed post-conflict stability
    (2022) Rojas Usma, Didiher; Suárez-Cao, Julieta; Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Instituto de Ciencia Política
    Between 1958 and 2017, Latin American countries experienced a long and intense cycle of insurgent internal armed conflicts for State sovereignty in multiple exceptional war territories. I consider this long period of internal armed conflict as the cycle of integrated armed insurgencies (1985-2017) due to the type of armed insurgent actors and the political objectives contested by the rebels challenging the State. Despite the variation in the strategies and pathways for ending the armed conflict, the long-term cycle of the integrated Latin American internal armed conflicts is over. Nevertheless, the legacies of violence over the States, the former rebels, and the civilian victims in the pre-existing subnational conflict zones still are alive. Likewise, the Latin American’s State capacities for achieving armed post-conflict stabilization, implementing post-conflict policies, and controlling the new post-insurgent risks of armed violence are critical. As a result, a new set of contentious political subnational challenges for achieving a higher internal armed post-conflict stabilization have arrived. Scholars, peace managers, and policymakers have concentrated on national peace and reconciliation processes under the classic Galtung 3R model: Reconstruction, Reconciliation, and Resolution. However, the internal armed conflict is an eminently subnational phenomenon. In this sense, I suggested a turn in the studies of armed post-conflict, from the national scale of Galtung's 3R (1998) to the 3E of subnational legacies of internal armed conflict on post-conflict stabilization. Namely, Enforcement, Empowerment & Entitlement (3E Model). I claim that the Subnational Legacies of the Armed Conflict (SLAC) determines the variation in the Armed Post-conflict Stability levels (APS). Thus, my research attacks one underexplored issue of the armed post-conflict studies. At the same time, it suggests a theoretical and empirical framework for explaining the dynamics of the armed post-conflict stabilization and its causal mechanism. My research employs a mixed-methods strategy combining geo-nested analysis (Harbers & Ingram, 2017) of a medium-n analysis data set (Sundberg & Melander, 2013) and a diverse cases comparison (Gerring, 2007) encompassing the Latin-American IRE from 1957 to 2019. Likewise, I use in-depth case studies (small-n analysis) for the empirical testing of the 3E mechanism, causal process observations, and process tracing techniques for APS levels variation. In that manner, I cover the entire spectrum of post-conflict stabilization (APS) variation as quasi-experimental complete matching techniques and control by design the potential selection bias errors. My findings demonstrate the potential use of the 3E Model as an explanatory mechanism for the variation of subnational post-conflict stability. My findings suggest that the more fulfilled the sequential chaining of the 3E mechanism, the higher the level of post-armed conflict achieved. The preceding was empirically evidenced by comparing diverse APS cases, including The strong APS level achieved by the Ecuadorian northern border Planning Zone 1, the partial APS identified in the Colombian Eastern of Antioquia region, the fragile APS level observed in the Peruvian VRAEM, and, last but not least, the weak APS level of the Colombian southwest region.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Environmental politics in Chile: Institutions, contentious action and inequality
    (2023) Huneeus Valenzuela, Luis Sebastián; Suárez-Cao, Julieta; Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Instituto de Ciencia Política
    Tesis doctoral escrita en formato de tres artículos sobre política medioambiental en Chile. En el primero, se analiza el concepto de “zona de sacrificio” (ZS) y se genera un concepto de "tres niveles", basado en una definición acotada, dimensiones definitorias e indicadores, siguiendo la metodología propuesta por Gary Goertz (Goertz, 2006). En dicho artículo también se elabora una clasificación de ZS y se ilustran las luchas de poder detrás de las ZS con dos casos icónicos de ZS en Chile, el complejo industrial en la bahía de Quintero y una ZS disputada en el norte de Chile. El segundo artículo es un estudio del Sistema de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental (SEIA). Desde su creación, muchos proyectos aprobados por el SEIA han sido impugnados por comunidades organizadas, especialmente en el sector energético. La pregunta que guió ese artículo es si los conflictos socioambientales afectan o no en los tiempos de evaluación y las tasas de aprobación de los proyectos en evaluación, encontrando que los conflictos retrasan los proyectos, pero no los detienen. En el tercer artículo se analiza el conflicto medioambiental que tuvo lugar en Freirina entre 2011 y 2012, cuando una comunidad rural del norte de Chile se rebeló contra Agrosuper, el mayor conglomerado agro-industrial del país. Para explicar este resultado inusual, se prestó atención al rol de las amenazas, los marcos de acción colectiva y el modelo de efecto conjunto de Marco Giugni para comprender los resultados de los movimientos sociales (Giugni, 1998).
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Just and unjust targeting killings in war : a critical analysis of targeted killing within the just war tradiction
    (2022) Lugo Santos, José Manuel; Donoso Moscoso, Alfonso; Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Instituto de Ciencia Política
    This research focuses on two specific areas discussed in political theory: the ethics of war and the ethics of self-defense. The question that motivates this study is deceptively simple. Is it permissible to kill, under the practice of targeted killing (TK), a particular combatant purposefully and intentionally and separately from all other combatants? The current literature seems to suggest that targeting, specific combatants is a legitimate form of killing. I disagree. What the literature fails to notice is that their theories exceedingly rely on the collective identity of the targets. This flaw produces a form of liability that does not inform us of anything particularly relevant about the combatant, besides the fact that he is a member of a collective. And since TK is a individualize form of killing, there should be something specific about the individual other than he is a member of a collective. This deficiency is not without its justification. It is a practical maneuver to confront the realities of war. However, when targeted killing is employed to kill a single combatant, the normative circumstances change. In order to answer the suggested question, I make a two-step approach. First, I examine and argue in favor of a principle of self-defense that I believe to be best suited to justify the use of lethal defensive force. This principle is based on a causality concept of liability. If a person is a cause of an unjustified threat, killing him will be permissible. This principle distinguishes itself from others by rejecting traditional moral concepts such as culpability and responsibility and innocence as irrelevant. Secondly, after an ethical analysis of TK, I test TK with war case scenarios with the proposed principle. The result is that TK is permissible in armed conflict, and under specific conditions, and could also be employed against non-combatants.