The International Human Rights Policies of New Democracies: Brazil and Chile in Comparative Perspective

Since the beginning of the 1990s, the majority of Latin American states have attempted to incorporate in some way or another human rights concern into their respective foreign policies, highlighting a history of human rights abuses and the return of democratic political rule as a trigger for galvanizing a commitment to assist in preventing such violations in other countries. Yet, while human rights have come to play a non-trivial role in the contemporary foreign policy of many Latin American states, there is great diversity in the ways and the extent to which they go about incorporating human rights concerns into their foreign policies. Explaining the diversity of human rights foreign policies of new Latin American democracies is at the heat of this project. The main research questions are the following: Why do new democracies incorporate human rights into their foreign policies? And what explains the different international human rights policies of new democracies? To answer these questions, this research compares the human rights foreign policies of Chile and Brazil for over two decades starting from their respective transitions to democracy. The study argues that states commitment to international human rights is the result of the intersection of domestic and international influences. At the international level, the search for international legitimacy and the desire for recognition and credibility affected the adoption of international human rights in both cases but with different degrees of impact. International values and pressures by themselves, while necessary, are an insufficient condition for human rights initiatives perceived to have not insubstantial political, economic or strategic costs. New democracies will be more or less likely to actively include human rights in their international policies depending on the following four domestic conditions: political leadership legitimizing the inclusion of human rights into a state's policies, civil society groups connected to international human rights advocacy networks with a capacity to influencing the foreign policy decisions of their government, and the Foreign Ministry's attitudes towards international human rights and the degree of influence it exercises over the outcome of the foreign policy process.

A Review of the Petition Process for the Endangered Species Act

The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) is an exceptionally powerful law which requires the involvement of many stake holders, including government and non-government professionals. This project reviewed the requirements of the ESA and the expectations of the USFWS and referenced them to the actions taken by the petitioner in the preparation of the petition for the black-tailed prairie dog. The study has shown the knowledge required by the petitioner to submit an effective petition and also the importance of communicating this knowledge so that the federal agencies may make sound decisions when deciding to protect a species and its habitat. This research can be used as a preliminary reference for beginning the process for future petitions.

CERCLA: A Case Study of Local Government Involvement in the Decision-Making Process in Colorado

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 strengthen roles of the community in the CERCLA process. Many layers of bureaucracy and the complexity of regulations make the implementation and enforcement of environmental policy a burdensome process. Local government, the public and private corporations have a critical role in the CERCLA decision-making process by implementing a comprehensive public participation process. This paper examines a case study in which a local Colorado health department implemented a successful public participation process in order to positively affect the remediation decision-making process.

A Proposed Environmental Policy for the Evaluation of State Funded Projects for use by the Utah Department of Transportation

Utah lacks a NEPA-equivalent environmental law for state funded projects. UDOT policies provide guidance on complying with NEPA but not on environmental reviews of state funded transportation projects. These projects are either not evaluated for impacts or are evaluated without a formal process, resulting in inconsistent and inadequate consideration of resources and project alternatives, with limited public involvement. This capstone provides a standard policy for UDOT. The policy incorporates elements from other state DOT polices and is based on federal NEPA, CEQ regulations, FHWA technical guidance, and existing UDOT procedures. Implementation will ensure consideration of project impacts to resources, analysis of project alternatives, encourage meaningful public involvement, and improve interagency coordination.

Policy Changes to the Federal and State Management of Subsistence Hunting and Fishing in Alaska

Subsistence in Alaska is currently being impacted by naturally occurring factors such as global warming, species migration shifts, and the declination of fishery and wildlife populations. Not only are external factors pressuring the debate, management strategies from the dual management operation appear to have failed. The current national focus has been centered on federal policy changes regarding subsistence. This project extends the federal subsistence review process into the state management of subsistence and provides practical solutions for enhancing both policy programs.