Abstract: Improving regional environmental performance is crucial for strengthening environmental governance. Polycentric governance theory, which emphasizes the interaction of multiple actors—including market, government, and society—within rule-based constraints, provides an essential framework for understanding the mechanisms that shape environmental performance in complex institutional contexts. This paper, set within the context of China’s environmental governance, applies polycentric governance theory to develop a three-dimensional analytical framework of "economic pressure–government attention–social supervision." Using panel data from 30 Chinese provinces between 2015 and 2023, the study employs dynamic Qualitative Comparative Analysis (dynamic QCA) to examine the asymmetric impacts of various governance factors on regional environmental performance and their dynamic evolutionary mechanisms. The study finds that: (1) no single factor is necessary for either high or low environmental performance; (2) six configurational paths for achieving high environmental performance are identified, categorized into three types: "industry structure-driven," "multi-dimensional collaboration-driven," and "economic output–social media opinion dual-driven"; (3) these paths remain relatively stable over time but exhibit periodic fluctuations, with a clear evolution point around 2021; (4) these pathways show significant spatial differentiation. This study uncovers the multi-dimensional driving mechanisms behind improvements in regional environmental performance, offering both theoretical insights and practical guidance for local governments to develop differentiated environmental governance strategies tailored to regional contexts.

Abstract: This paper presents Scheme T, a presidential framework. It originates from the author's quest for partisan continuity, whereby a mid-term presidential vacancy is filled by a successor from the same political party as the incumbent, unless a new popular election is held. While the American system fails to guarantee this due to rigid election timing, the Turkish framework offers synchronized terms and flexible scheduling; however, the current Turkish constitution suffers from “plebiscitary succession” and “violation of election synchronization”. Scheme T builds upon the Turkish framework by introducing a vice-presidential office with dual-path confirmation and mandating that double vacancy or any renewal initiative triggers a full general election, thereby eliminating standalone presidential elections. It also proposes PLAR (Popular Legislative Automatic Runoff), a novel single-round electoral method for simultaneous presidential and legislative elections that achieves fairness comparable to two-round absolute-majority systems with greater efficiency. In contrast to the current Turkish system, Scheme T removes the Assembly's direct renewal authority and introduces instead a Westminster-style no-confidence mechanism with a three-fifths threshold, restricted to the final two years of the five-year presidential term. This guarantees the president three years of secure tenure while adding confidence-based accountability. By integrating the strengths of Turkish, Westminster, and American paradigms, Scheme T combines strong executive stability with carefully calibrated democratic control, offering an elegant and innovative blueprint for building resilient and responsive presidential governments.

Abstract: The field of international relations faces significant research gaps as traditional frameworks struggle to address emerging challenges in the twenty-first century. This research paper presents a comprehensive qualitative analysis of four priority research domains that require urgent scholarly attention: artificial intelligence governance and global power dynamics, climate security and interstate conflict, digital sovereignty in the Global South, and non-state actors in hybrid warfare. Through systematic literature review and thematic analysis, this study identifies critical theoretical and empirical gaps in existing scholarships while proposing frameworks for addressing these deficiencies. The research employs a qualitative methodology incorporating document analysis, comparative case studies, and interpretive analysis of policy documents and academic literature. Findings reveal that traditional international relations theories, including realism, liberalism, and constructivism, require significant adaptation to address the multidimensional challenges posed by technological transformation, environmental change, and evolving security paradigms.The analysis identifies cross-domain interconnections among the four research areas, revealing that artificial intelligence governance intersects with hybrid warfare through autonomous weapons systems and cyber operations, while climate security connects with digital sovereignty through questions of environmental data governance and monitoring infrastructure. The paper concludes with evidence-based recommendations for future research agendas, emphasizing interdisciplinary collaboration, methodological innovation, and policy-relevant scholarship. This analysis contributes to the ongoing discourse on advancing international relations scholarship in an era of unprecedented global complexity and interconnection.

Abstract: Journalism plays a structurally indispensable yet under-theorized role in democratic governance. This article situates journalism within a recalibrated constitutional architecture in which the Quarta Politica—conceptualized as an Ombudsman Council—constitutes a fourth power alongside the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, endowed with distinct coercive authority oriented toward systemic correction and participatory accountability. Within this framework, journalism is not a separate power but a constitutionally protected function that secures the informational conditions upon which all four powers depend. By producing, verifying, and disseminating public information, journalism sustains accountability, enables informed participation, and facilitates collective judgment. The article reconceptualizes democracy as dependent on three interrelated dimensions: the distribution of coercive authority, the institutionalization of participatory oversight, and the integrity of the informational environment. It demonstrates that journalism performs a non-substitutable role as an early-warning and accountability-generating mechanism. Under conditions of digital transformation, platform dominance, and media fragility, these informational foundations are increasingly at risk. The article therefore advances a calibrated framework for the constitutional protection of journalism—grounded in independence, sustainability, and accountability—embedded within the Quarta Politica. A comparative perspective, including Global South contexts, underscores the generalizability of this approach across diverse democratic settings.

Abstract: Amid the accelerating geopolitical transformations reshaping international order in the first quarter of the twenty-first century, bilateral strategic partnerships (BSPs) have emerged as a pivotal diplomatic instrument and an indispensable mechanism for interstate cooperation. Despite their proliferating deployment in diplomatic discourse, BSPs remain conceptually undertheorized, with significant lacunae in the systematic comparative analysis of their structural foundations, multidimensional functions, and resilience under shifting geopolitical conditions. This study addresses these gaps by pursuing three interrelated objectives: (1) constructing a rigorous conceptual framework that distinguishes BSPs from cognate forms of international cooperation, (2) identifying and analyzing the core dimensions and enabling conditions that underpin successful partnerships, and (3) evaluating leading contemporary models through structured comparative case analysis.Employing a qualitative multi-case research design grounded in thematic analysis and structured focused comparison, the study examines four paradigmatic BSPs—Franco-German, U.S.–Japan, Sino-Russian, and Saudi–U.S.—drawing on policy documents, treaty texts, institutional records, and peer-reviewed scholarship from 2015 to 2025. Findings reveal that BSP durability is contingent upon four interdependent pillars: value-interest alignment, structural economic complementarity, sustained political leadership, and robust institutional architecture. The study further identifies a typological spectrum ranging from deeply institutionalized, norm-convergent partnerships to strategically expedient, structurally fragile alignments. The paper concludes that BSPs constitute not merely bilateral instruments but systemic building blocks for a more stable and polycentric international order, while cautioning against the inflationary and ceremonial deployment of the concept.

Abstract: Despite significant government intervention, the incidence of technology transfer in the United States of America is still less than desired. There appears to be policy options to address this problem, but policymakers have not pursued them. One conjecture is that notions of what are politically legitimate actions are restraining policymakers from pursuing certain kinds of technology transfer policies. This paper presents the results of an examination of two questions. First, how have the current conceptualizations of political legitimacy potentially contributed to the lack of public policies that directly mitigate circumstances that hinder the transfer of technologies from universities and federal laboratories to the private sector? And second, what alternative conceptualization of political legitimacy can potentially encourage lawmakers to pursue such public policies? The primary conclusions are that the concept of political legitimacy has been reified on a normative basis and does not align with the behaviors of constituents. Moreover, current conceptualizations are potentially restraining policymakers in several ways that curb their willingness to pursue certain kinds of technology transfer policies. The paper presents an alternative conceptualization of political legitimacy that might enable policymakers to pursue a more diverse array of public policies that will more directly address factors that curtail technology transfer.

Abstract: This paper proposes Scheme M, a new presidential design that evolves the American model by introducing flexibility in election timing while preserving executive stability. Its flexible elements draw inspiration from the post-2017 Turkish presidential system, where variable terms are enabled by early general elections. However, unlike Türkiye—where the Assembly can also trigger early presidential elections, creating perceived insecurity—Scheme M removes this reciprocal power, assigning sole responsibility to the president to identify, assess, and resolve executive-legislative deadlocks. The scheme adapts the established American practice of midterm elections by adding contingent, flexible-timing elements: the mechanism is triggered exclusively by presidential decree, limited to once per five-year term and only within the first three years. It keeps the president's fixed term secure while allowing strategic timing—or avoidance—of midterm legislative elections to refresh or realign parliament at low personal cost. Additional safeguards include a mixed SMDP-PR electoral system to prevent chronic presidential majorities, parliamentary confirmation for the vice-presidential nominee, narrowly defined decree powers, and robust term limits. The scheme has two variants: Scheme FM and Scheme VM. Scheme FM features fixed-time general elections, enhancing predictability, cost efficiency, and campaign depth. Scheme VM introduces variable terms, ensuring near-certain same-party succession, empowering a lame-duck president to renew both branches—avoiding paralysis or premature resignation—and allowing strategic general election timing akin to Westminster practices. Scheme M therefore offers a viable blueprint for stable yet responsive presidential governance.

Abstract: When tightly-knit communities suddenly show electoral volatility, does it signal weakening group identity, or does it reveal something deeper? This question matters wherever centralized authority structures shape bloc voting. Conventional wisdom interprets such shifts as boundary erosion. This paper presents evidence for the opposite.Drawing on an extreme-case design, I exploit a natural experiment — Israel’s 2019–2022 political deadlock — to track voter transitions within ultra-Orthodox communities, where ethnically distinct subgroups maintain near-total political separation despite shared religious practice. Using ecological inference on ballot-box data from five population centers across six elections (2019–2022), I find exceptionally high baseline party loyalty (90–95%), a dramatic disruption during the March 2020 – March 2021 transition when switching surged to 12–19%, and a swift return to high loyalty within 13 months — though the shifted voters remained with their new parties.The synchronized switch of voting loyalty across geographically dispersed cities, occurring without residential mobility, is consistent with elite-mediated bloc realignment rather than emerging voter independence. Paradoxically, the capacity for mass switching may reflect stronger, not weaker, institutional control.These findings challenge how scholars of party–voter linkages interpret electoral volatility in identity-based voting blocs: apparent instability may reflect disciplined coordination, and what looks like boundary erosion may actually reveal institutional strength operating through collective action.

Abstract: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and algorithmic decision-making into international relations represents a significant evolution that current theoretical frameworks have not fully accommodated. Established International Relations (IR) paradigms—realism, liberalism, and constructivism—typically conceptualize technology as a tool for statecraft rather than as an influential factor actively shaping the decision-making environment. This paper asserts that such a conceptual omission is increasingly untenable. Utilizing an integrative analysis spanning IR theory, AI ethics, security studies, and political economy, this work examines three principal aspects of "algorithmic diplomacy": (1) the ways in which algorithmic bias within systems operated by international organizations perpetuates structural inequalities between North and South; (2) the impact of AI incorporation into nuclear command and control systems on the logic of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) and crisis management timelines; and (3) the emergence of computational power imbalances in trade and climate negotiations as a novel form of diplomatic influence. The conclusion presents an initial framework for machine-mediated international relations and emphasizes the necessity for normative and governance responses at both national and multilateral levels.

Abstract: This paper proposes mengolah, a culturally embedded Indonesian term describing informal grassroots lobbying and political brokerage, as a decolonial methodology and medium of political communication for understanding youth political participation in Indonesia. Grounded in the everyday practices of Indonesian political culture, mengolah represents a distinct form of political engagement that operates through personal networks, informal negotiation, and relational trust rather than formal institutional channels. This study explicitly positions mengolah not as an inherently corrupt practice but as a legitimate cultural medium through which citizens engage with democratic processes, functioning analogously to constituent services and political networking in Western democracies while reflecting Indonesian values of kebersamaan (togetherness) and gotong royong (mutual cooperation). Drawing on data from the 2024 Indonesian general elections, where youth voters comprised 56% of the electorate, this study examines how mengolah functions as both a grassroots political methodology and a structured pathway for political mobility. Skilled practitioners of mengolah (pengolah) typically progress from grassroots volunteers to organizational leaders in organisasi masyarakat (mass organizations) and eventually to formal party cadres or elected officials. This trajectory demonstrates that mengolah serves as political apprenticeship, a medium for cultivating democratic capacities and connecting informal community leadership with institutional politics. Through analysis of social media data, electoral brokerage patterns, and youth political behavior, this study contributes to the project of decolonizing political science by centering indigenous Indonesian political practices as legitimate, functional, and epistemologically significant objects of scholarly inquiry.

Abstract: Bhimbor Deori (1903-1947) remains a pivotal yet insufficiently explored figure in the history of India's struggle for independence and the political evolution of Assam. A multifaceted individual-lawyer, tribal rights advocate, parliamentarian, and nationalist leader, Deori played a crucial role in mobilising the plain tribal communities of Assam and was instrumental in countering colonial and Muslim League efforts to incorporate the province into the proposed state of Pakistan. This review synthesises the available biographical, historical, and political information to construct a comprehensive profile of the Deori. It critically examines his early life and the discriminatory incident that catalysed his public career, his foundational role in institutionalising tribal politics through the Assam Backwards Plains Tribal League, his tenure as a Legislative Councillor and Minister, and his strategic collaboration with Gopinath Bordoloi. This article analyses a significant duality in his legacy: his simultaneous advocacy for Indigenous self-determination and his unwavering commitment to a unified Indian nation. It also interrogates the ideological tensions between his advocacy for tribal "homelands" and his Indian nationalism. Finally, this article identifies significant gaps in the existing scholarship, which relies heavily on commemorative sources, and proposes concrete avenues for future archival and critical research to fully integrate Jananeta Bhimbor Deori into the broader historiography of modern South Asia.

Abstract: This paper develops the institutional implications of the Noble Person Test, a framework for evaluating justice proposed in [Shuhao Z., Beyond the Veil of Ignorance: The Noble Person Test as a Framework for Justice]. The Noble Per- son Test evaluates institutional arrangements by asking whether a hypothetical agent—default self-interested, intellectually honest, and persuadable under strict conditions—would accept the arrangement from every position within it. This pa- per argues that the test is best operationalised not as individual thought experiment but as structured adversarial debate: a red team representing those bearing the costs of an arrangement defaults to refusal, while a blue team representing those proposing the arrangement bears the burden of proving necessity and the absence of less costly alternatives. The paper derives four structural features that just insti- tutions must possess, examines the relationship between the Noble Person Test and democratic governance, applies the framework to three domains of legal and pol- icy controversy, and proposes concrete institutional mechanisms for implementing adversarial review. The paper draws on existing practices in military red-teaming, intelligence analysis, and judicial adversarial procedure to argue that the proposed mechanism is not utopian but an extension of proven institutional designs.

Abstract: This paper consolidates our previous work and articulates Scheme C, a constitutional architecture designed to resolve deadlocks and instability in fragmented democracies by synthesising previous findings into a self-contained theoretical framework. The scheme's centrepiece is a game-based investiture rule that guarantees the appointment of a prime minister through a strategic nomination process, eliminating the risk of investiture-related collapse. Central to this system is also a bifurcated confidence structure -- assigning the prime minister either type I (majority) or type II (minority) status -- managed by a dynamic no-confidence mechanism. Stability is reinforced by a synchronised electoral rhythm and a Westminster-style dissolution mechanism that protects cohesive assemblies while resulting in contingent, quasi-midterm elections. To ensure continuity, a novel hybrid caretaker office bridges Westminster and Presidential traditions by automatically converting a departing prime minister into a tenure-secured, though authority-attenuated, caretaker. This "converted" logic is balanced by a presidential-style "acting" appointment mode for vacancies, ensuring administrative resilience throughout the electoral cycle. Ultimately, Scheme C provides a resilient architecture that ensures unyielding governmental functionality and rigorous legislative oversight regardless of the underlying electoral system or party landscape.

Abstract: Conventional frameworks for assessing national competitive advantage assume that original scientific discovery is the highest-order determinant of national power. This paper challenges that assumption. It proposes the Capability Hierarchy Thesis: de- ployment capacity—the ability to translate ideas into physical reality at speed and scale through rapid iterative cycles—is not parallel to discovery capacity but hier- archically superior, fully subsuming it. This subsumption is complete because the conditions producing theoretical breakthroughs—large educated populations, qual- ity universities, institutional incentives for risk-taking—are themselves deployable. The paper reframes the relationship between imitation and innovation through the concept of principled imitation: independently deriving the principles underly- ing an observed solution and reimplementing based on that understanding. This process requires the same capabilities as original innovation, differing only in in- formation conditions. A nation that imitates rapidly demonstrates deep scientific comprehension; when no external solution exists, the same capabilities produce orig- inal innovation automatically. Drawing on the theoretical foundations of The Entropy Frontier (Shuhao Zhong, [2026]), which redefines national wealth as accumulated human capital, physical systems, and institutional knowledge, this paper develops three contributions: the Capability Hierarchy framework, the National Iteration Capacity Index (NICI), and the Imitation-Innovation Continuum Model. Applied to the U.S.-China com- petition, the framework yields conclusions diverging significantly from conventional assessments.

Abstract: Global environmental governance has expanded significantly, yet it remains politically inadequate to address planetary crises in the Anthropocene. Despite the proliferation of multilateral environmental agreements, governance arrangements continue to suffer from fragmentation, weak authority, limited accountability, and a sovereignty-bound logic that constrains collective action. This article critically examines these limitations through an assessment of polycentric and Nested Systemic Governance approaches. While nested governance can reduce fragmentation and enhance participation, it remains dependent on voluntarism and lacks the political authority and democratic anchoring required for durable coordination. Drawing on debates in environmental politics and global governance, the article advances a longer-term institutional perspective that conceptualises a gradual evolution toward a federative framework combining multilevel participation with enforceable authority and democratic legitimacy.

Abstract: The allocation of European Union (EU) funds for security and defense is central to solidarity among Member States. Yet, as geopolitical instability and hybrid threats continue to grow in the EU, concerns have emerged about whether the current distribution of EU funding adequately reflects the varying degrees of exposure among states. Taking this problematic in consideration, this article draws on the findings from the UDebDS project, which examines how funds are currently allocated and whether the states facing the highest security risks are receiving commensurate support. To achieve our goals we used a multidisciplinary, data-driven approach. That approach included the development of a comprehensive dataset and a set of measurable risk indicators (MRIs), capable of capturing vulnerabilities and deficits. Based on the MRIs, our research proposed an alternative model to support a more balanced and responsive EU funding. By doing so, we expect to inform ongoing policy discussion around equity and the future of shared defense investments in the Union. Further steps should build on the refinement of our model through sensitivity testing and a simulation-based studies to examine how alternative allocation models can influence the EU defense posture.

Abstract:

Traditional paradigms of nation-building and state-building have dominated political theory and international policy for decades, yet their explanatory and prescriptive power remains limited in postcolonial and conflict-affected contexts. Recurrent instability, institutional fragility, and governance failure are often interpreted as operational deficiencies, yet this article contends that the root cause is primarily epistemological. Existing frameworks fragment political life into discrete domains—institutions, identity, legitimacy—while remaining anchored in Westphalian assumptions that fail to capture the dynamic, adaptive nature of political communities. This article introduces Nationesis, a novel transdisciplinary science dedicated to the study of nations as living, adaptive systems whose persistence depends on regenerative processes rather than mere stabilization. Nationesis integrates insights from political theory, comparative constitutionalism, postcolonial scholarship, and systems science to provide a unified analytical framework encompassing institutions, collective meaning, historical memory, leadership intelligence, and legitimacy. Using the Democratic Republic of the Congo as a paradigmatic case of systemic complexity, the article demonstrates why conventional paradigms systematically misread patterns of persistence, fragility, and renewal. The study concludes that the future of political order relies not on institutional replication alone but on a community’s capacity to regenerate meaning, legitimacy, and collective coherence under systemic strain. Nationesis thus offers a transformative lens for political theory, global constitutionalism, and the science of sustainable political communities.

Abstract: Traditional paradigms of nation-building and state-building have dominated political theory and international policy for decades, yet their explanatory and prescriptive power remains limited in postcolonial and conflict-affected contexts. Recurrent instability, institutional fragility, and governance failure are often interpreted as operational deficiencies, yet this article contends that the root cause is primarily epistemological. Existing frameworks fragment political life into discrete domains—institutions, identity, legitimacy—while remaining anchored in Westphalian assumptions that fail to capture the dynamic, adaptive nature of political communities.This article introduces Nationology, a novel transdisciplinary science dedicated to the study of nations as living, adaptive systems whose persistence depends on regenerative processes rather than mere stabilization. Nationology integrates insights from political theory, comparative constitutionalism, postcolonial scholarship, and systems science to provide a unified analytical framework encompassing institutions, collective meaning, historical memory, leadership intelligence, and legitimacy. Using the Democratic Republic of the Congo as a paradigmatic case of systemic complexity, the article demonstrates why conventional paradigms systematically misread patterns of persistence, fragility, and renewal.The study concludes that the future of political order relies not on institutional replication alone but on a community’s capacity to regenerate meaning, legitimacy, and collective coherence under systemic strain. Nationology thus offers a transformative lens for political theory, global constitutionalism, and the science of sustainable political communities.

Abstract: This study explores how psychological traits such as internal locus of control and cognitive flexibility relate to well-being and political orientation among young Finnish adults. Drawing on data from 136 participants, we examined how value alignment, perceived ideological distance, and openness to diverse groups intersect with political identity. Contrary to common assumptions, more conservative participants showed greater openness to differing political views, lower value distance, and higher internal control. These traits, in turn, were positively associated with subjective well-being. Regression models confirmed internal locus of control and cognitive flexibility as key predictors of well-being, while political orientation was linked to both openness and perceived distance from ideological outgroups. These findings challenge simplistic associations between political orientation and rigidity, suggesting that ideological openness and psychological resilience may align differently across generational or cultural contexts. Rather than mapping cleanly onto left–right divisions, political identity appears embedded within broader patterns of agency, tolerance, and psychological strength.

Abstract: This article proposes a transformative framework for understanding nations not merely as political communities, but as emergent, intelligence-generating systems. Drawing on Nationesis, complexity theory, cognitive systems science, and political philosophy, it argues that the durability, legitimacy, and innovation capacity of nations depend on the interplay of cognitive, symbolic, and structural layers of collective intelligence. The article introduces national cognition as the meta-structure through which societies process information, resolve conflicts, generate social knowledge, and adapt to systemic crises. Using comparative insights from Japan, South Africa, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, it demonstrates that nations with higher capacities for distributed cognition, narrative coherence, and symbolic integration are more resilient under extreme stress. By integrating theory, empirical evidence, and policy applications, this study establishes Nationesis as a predictive and normative science capable of guiding research and governance in postcolonial, fragile, and globally interconnected polities.