A methodological framework for studying policy coherence for development

The purpose of this article is to develop a methodological framework for analyzing Policy Coherence for Development (PCD). With this goal, we analyze different views of PCD in order to establish a comprehensive approach of Coherence adapted to globalization process. In this context, the article proposes a methodological framework based on four dimensions of analysis in CPD. In each dimen-sion, we set the areas and actors to investigate and we put forward research questions that could be use as a guide for a comprehensive approach to study PCD.

Exile or emigrant? Female ex-prisoners who left Ireland 1850-1921

In the popular mind, the concept of 'emigration' usually refers to people voluntarily leaving one country to go to another in search of a new and better life. It presupposes some degree of choice, although it is accepted that for many emigrants, such as those who left Ireland during the nineteenth century, there were few incentives to stay at home. Current scholarship on voluntary and forced movements of people demonstrates that the distinction between the categories of 'voluntary emigrant' and 'forced exile' is often blurred. Orm Overland's study of refugee communities in the United States highlights the fact that, although the differences between the 'emigrant' and the 'exile' may be clear in extreme cases, this is not always true, as there may be 'pressing political or economic reasons behind a decision to emigrate'. Migration scholars Jan Lucassen and Leo Lucassen also question the adequacy of conceptual models of migration based on what Lindsay Proudfoot and Dianne Hall refer to as the 'straightforward binarism between free and unfree emigration'. The questions raised by these scholars are very relevant to the study of Irish people who left their country during the second half of the nineteenth century immediately after they had been discharged from prison or from Dundrum. Their stories are discussed here against a background of substantial scholarship on emigration from Ireland and on the criminal justice system within Ireland. According to David Fitzpatrick, at least eight million men, women and children emigrated from Ireland between 1801 and 1921. This large-scale movement of people was generally characterised by the voluntary emigration of individuals who funded their own passages. However, it also included schemes of assisted emigration, funded variously by governments, landlords, the poor law authorities, earlier emigrants, and philanthropists. In addition, it included people who were transported from Ireland by means of the criminal justice system a practice that had originated in the seventeenth century. What is less well known is that after the end of transportation from Ireland to eastern Australia in 1853, to Bermuda in 1863 and to Western Australia in 1868, Irish convicts continued to be channelled towards emigration by being offered early release if they agreed to leave Ireland. These people, and especially the women among them, are the subject of this article.

'Ideological content and institutional frameworks: Unionist identities in Northern Ireland and Scotland'

This article examines the complex interactions between British national identity and the territorial identities of Northern Ireland and Scotland. We argue that the current literature on national identities in Britain misunderstands the nature of British identities in Northern Ireland and Scotland. Indeed, much of this literature wrongly defines Unionists in both of these areas. By examining the content of British national identity, a comparison of Scotland and Northern Ireland reveals that Unionism finds political significance through an ideological project committed to the Union. However, we also have to account for the differences in the Unionist ideology of Scotland and Northern Ireland. We argue that the institutional framework in which these identities and ideologies are exercised explains this variation. Overall, we argue that the debate on nationalism in the United Kingdom has not adequately shown how the integrative functions of British national identity can co-exist with the separatist nature of territorial national identity.