Identity, difference, and the dilemmas of inter-Korean relations: Insights from northern defectors and the German precedent

Questions of identity have become increasingly central to the study of foreign policy and security, particularly in constructivist debates. But very few of the resulting insights have been applied to the Korean situation, where discussions about security and inter-Korean relations remain dominated by strategic and geopolitical issues. The main task of this article is to address this shortcoming by examining the experience of North Korean defectors in South Korea and the precedent of German unification. Both of these domains of inquiry reveal that identity differences between North and South persist far beyond the ideological and political structures that created them in the first place. Born out of death, fear, and longing for revenge, these identity patterns lie at the heart of Korea's security dilemmas. Unless taken seriously by scholars and decision makers, the respective tensions between identity and difference will continue to cause major political problems. (Key words: Inter-Korean relations, North Korean defectors, German unification)

Identity and pathogenicity of Fusarium spp. Isolated from wheat fields in Queensland and northern New South Wales

To establish the identity of Fusarium species associated with head blight (FHB) and crown rot (CR) of wheat, samples were collected from wheat paddocks with different cropping history in southern Queensland and northern New South Wales during 2001. CR was more widespread but FHB was only evident in northern NSW and often occurred with CR in the same paddock. Twenty different Fusarium spp. were identified from monoconidial isolates originating from different plant parts by using morphology and species-specific PCR assays. Fusarium pseudograminearum constituted 48% of all isolates and was more frequently obtained from the crown, whereas Fusarium graminearum made up 28% of all isolates and came mostly from the head. All 17 Fusarium species tested caused FHB and all 10 tested caused CR in plant infection assays, with significant (P < 0.001) difference in aggressiveness among species and among isolates within species for both diseases. Overall, isolates from stubble and crown were more aggressive for CR, whereas isolates from the flag leaf node were more aggressive for FHB. Isolates that were highly aggressive in causing CR were those originating from paddocks with wheat following wheat, whereas those from fields with wheat following maize or sorghum were highly aggressive for FHB. Although 20% of isolates caused severe to highly severe FHB and CR, there was no significant (P < 0.32) correlation between aggressiveness for FHB and CR. Given the ability of F. graminearum to colonise crowns in the field and to cause severe CR in bioassays, it is unclear why this pathogen is not more widely distributed in Australia.

Social identity and diversity in organizations

In this paper, a social identity perspective on the management of diversity in organizations is outlined. The perspective is well-placed to offer considerable insight in this area, given that it explicates the processes through which group memberships impact on people's attitudes and behaviour both within and between groups that are operative in the workplace. According to this perspective, relative group status and the perceived permeability of intergroup boundaries are key factors that need to be considered in any efforts to understand intergroup relations in the workplace. After a brief overview of the social identity perspective, the paper discusses: i) the role that group status and perceived permeability play in determining the nature of intergroup relations in the workplace, and 2) the type of interventions that can be derived from a social identity perspective in an effort to improve intergroup relations in the workplace.

Reactions to positive deviance: Social identity and attribution dimensions

This research examines whether evaluations of positive deviates (i.e. high achieving group members) are influenced by the attributions they make for their performance. We argue that ingroup positive deviates who make group attributions help enhance the ingroup's image and thus attract favorable evaluations. In Experiment 1, ingroup positive deviates who made group attributions were generally evaluated more favorably than ingroup positive deviates who made individual attributions. There was also evidence that the positive deviates' attribution style influenced group and self-evaluations. Evaluations of outgroup positive deviates were not influenced by their attribution style. In Experiment 2, an ingroup positive deviate who was successful and attributed that success to the group was upgraded relative to an ingroup positive deviate who made individual attributions. Group evaluations were also higher when the positive deviate made group attributions. This pattern did not emerge when the positive deviate failed. The results are discussed from a social identity perspective.