O Conselho de Estado na monarquia constitucional: uma reflexão preliminar

This article summarises the transformations in the State Council’s functions and membership throughout the Portuguese Constitutional Monarchy, and makes a preliminary attempt to scrutinise the political role played by an institution designed since its inception to advise the monarch. In spite of the parsimony of contemporary sources, and even contradictory empirical evidence, it seems indisputable that in several critical occasions the monarch’s political decisions were influenced by the dominant view in the State Council. Finally, the article presents the collective biography of the 73 individuals appointed to the State Council between 1833 and 1910 – who may be defined as the inner circle of the ruling elite - focusing on basic background features (birthplace, age, education, occupation, noble titles and political experience).

Constructing the National Canon in Ireland and Macedonia: The Function of Folklore in the Plays The Countess Cathleen and The Land of Heart’s Desire by William Butler Yeats, and Proud Flesh and The Black Hole by Goran Stefanovski and Their Role in Strengthening National Identity

Erasmus Mundus Masters “Crossways in European Humanities” June 2011

The role of literature: english textbooks and literature in secondary teaching in Portugal

Trabalho de Projecto apresentado para cumprimento dos requisitos necessários à obtenção do grau de Mestre em Ensino de Inglês

Correlates of intergenerational mobility and political violence

This work project aims at exploring the role of intergenerational immobility in political violence. A cross-country macro-level analysis is done where no significant results are found. Additionally, an individual micro-level analysis is done where intergenerational mobility (measured through a proxy variable) has a negative significant effect in political violence

US fiscal dynamics in political perspective

Given the importance of fiscal balance for ensuring a sustainable fiscal policy, we conduct an empirical examination of fiscal dynamics in the United States in response to unsustainable budget deviations. We concentrate on the role of political factors, namely the Republican - Democrat presidential divide, in determining the fiscal response to budget disequilibria. Making use of an asymmetric cointegration framework, we explore politically motivated fiscal asymmetries in the US, from Eisenhower to Obama. We conclude that political factors such as the government’s political quadrant and the timing of elections are important determinants of the fiscal response to unsustainable budget deviations.

Decisions of technology innovation: the role of indicators

This work presents research conducted to understand the role of indicators in decisions of technology innovation. A gap was detected in the literature of innovation and technology assessment about the use and influence of indicators in this type of decision. It was important to address this gap because indicators are often frequent elements of innovation and technology assessment studies. The research was designed to determine the extent of the use and influence of indicators in decisions of technology innovation, to characterize the role of indicators in these decisions, and to understand how indicators are used in these decisions. The latter involved the test of four possible explanatory factors: the type and phase of decision, and the context and process of construction of evidence. Furthermore, it focused on three Portuguese innovation groups: public researchers, business R&D&I leaders and policymakers. The research used a combination of methods to collect quantitative and qualitative information, such as surveys, case studies and social network analysis. This research concluded that the use of indicators is different from their influence in decisions of technology innovation. In fact, there is a high use of indicators in these decisions, but lower and differentiated differences in their influence in each innovation group. This suggests that political-behavioural methods are also involved in the decisions to different degrees. The main social influences in the decisions came mostly from hierarchies, knowledge-based contacts and users. Furthermore, the research established that indicators played mostly symbolic roles in decisions of policymakers and business R&D&I leaders, although their role with researchers was more differentiated. Indicators were also described as helpful instruments to conduct a reasonable interpretation of data and to balance options in innovation and technology assessments studies, in particular when contextualised, described in detail and with discussion upon the options made. Results suggest that there are four main explanatory factors for the role of indicators in these decisions: First, the type of decision appears to be a factor to consider when explaining the role of indicators. In fact, each type of decision had different influences on the way indicators are used, and each type of decision used different types of indicators. Results for policy-making were particularly different from decisions of acquisition and development of products/technology. Second, the phase of the decision can help to understand the role indicators play in these decisions. Results distinguished between two phases detected in all decisions – before and after the decision – as well as two other phases that can be used to complement the decision process and where indicators can be involved. Third, the context of decision is an important factor to consider when explaining the way indicators are taken into consideration in policy decisions. In fact, the role of indicators can be influenced by the particular context of the decision maker, in which all types of evidence can be selected or downplayed. More importantly, the use of persuasive analytical evidence appears to be related with the dispute existent in the policy context. Fourth and last, the process of construction of evidence is a factor to consider when explaining the way indicators are involved in these decisions. In fact, indicators and other evidence were brought to the decision processes according to their availability and capacity to support the different arguments and interests of the actors and stakeholders. In one case, an indicator lost much persuasion strength with the controversies that it went through during the decision process. Therefore, it can be argued that the use of indicators is high but not very influential; their role is mostly symbolic to policymakers and business decisions, but varies among researchers. The role of indicators in these decisions depends on the type and phase of the decision and the context and process of construction of evidence. The latter two are related to the particular context of each decision maker, the existence of elements of dispute and controversies that influence the way indicators are introduced in the decision-making process.