Politics and the Life Sciences (Polit Life Sci)
Politics and the Life Sciences is an interdisciplinary peer-reviewed journal with a global audience. PLS is owned and published by the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences, the APLS. The PLS topic range is exceptionally broad. Recent issues have addressed chemical and biological terrorism, the evolution of group formation and ritualistic deception, the neuroscience of intolerance and violence, the genetics controversy in criminology, feminism and the evolutionary sciences, adolescent sexuality in public policy, pregnancy and substance-abuse policy, assisted reproduction, germ-line gene therapy, physician-assisted suicide, biotechnology regulation, population policy, and the political economy of global environmental degradation and stewardship. Typical contributors include political scientists, life scientists, bioethicists, clinicians, health-policy scholars, physical anthropologists, moral and evolutionary philosophers, international security experts, jurists, and ecological economists. PLS is printed and mailed just twice a year, March and September, but accepted papers are published online immediately after finishing the review-and-revision process and prepress routine. They are thus available for subscribers, for the press, for the general public in some cases, and for inclusion in electronic databases well before appearing in hard copy.
Current impact factor: 0.00
Impact Factor Rankings
|Website||Politics and the Life Sciences website|
|Other titles||Politics and the life sciences, PLS|
|Material type||Periodical, Internet resource|
|Document type||Journal / Magazine / Newspaper, Internet Resource|
- Author cannot archive a pre-print version
- Author cannot archive a post-print version
- Authors retain copyright
- Publisher's version/PDF and Authors versions cannot be used in any open access repository
- Individual requests may be considered
Publications in this journal
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In search of a better understanding of inequalities in citizen political engagement, scholars have begun addressing the relationship between personal health and patterns of political behavior. This study focuses on the impact of personal health on various forms of political participation. The analysis contributes to existing knowledge by examining a number of different participation forms beyond just voting. Using European Social Survey data from 2012/2013 for Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden ($N=8,060$), self-reported turnout and six alternative modes of political engagement were modeled as dependent variables. Contrary to expectations, poor health did not depress participation across all forms. As assumed by the increased activism hypothesis, all else equal, people with poor health were more active than their healthy counterparts in direct contacts with power holders and demonstrations. The results reveal a “reversed health gap” by showing that people with health problems are in fact more politically active than what previous research, which has focused on voting, has suggested. Although the magnitude of the gap should not be overdramatized, our results stress the importance of distinguishing between different forms of participation when analyzing the impact of health on political engagement. Nevertheless, the findings show that poor health can stimulate people into political engagement rather than depressing activity. This finding holds when the effects of several sociodemographic and motivational factors are controlled for.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Editor's note In this plenary talk given at the annual meeting of the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences at Texas Tech University last October, Professor Sophal Ear, then of the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, discussed his research on the political economy of emerging infectious disease (EID) surveillance programs. His talk reviews lessons learned for U.S. military medical research laboratories collaborating with developing countries and is comprised of three case studies: Cambodia (U.S. Naval Area Medical Research Unit 2 or NAMRU-2), Indonesia (also NAMRU-2 in the context of H5N1 or Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza), (1) and Mexico (that country's handling of A/H1N1 or Swine Flu in 2009). (2) Professor Ear's research provides policymakers with tools for improving the effectiveness of new or existing EID surveillance programs. His work also offers host countries the opportunity to incorporate ideas, provide opinions, and debate the management of political and economic constraints facing their programs. In this analysis, constraints are found for each case study and general recommendations are given for improving global emerging infectious disease surveillance across political, economic, and cultural dimensions.
Article: A catastrophe of caring?
Article: Predisposed: Liberals, Conservatives, and the Biology of Political Differences John R. Hibbing , Kevin B. Smith , John R. Alford , Predisposed: Liberals, Conservatives, and the Biology of Political Differences . New York : Routledge , 2014 , 304 pages, ISBN: 978-0415535878 . Hardcover $21.00
Article: The World of Biology and Politics: Organization and Research Areas, Research in Biopolitics, Vol. II Steven Peterson and Albert Somit , eds., The World of Biology and Politics: Organization and Research Areas, Research in Biopolitics, Vol. II . Bingley, UK : Emerald , 2013 , 231 pages, ISBN: 978-1781907283 . Hardcover $114.95
Article: Federalism and bioethics[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Abstract The absence of comprehensive federal oversight of human biotechnologies in the United States continues to stimulate academic discourse on the relative merits of European-style regulatory agencies as compared to the current, decentralized approach. Many American bioethicists support the latter, maintaining that the key features of federalism-policy experimentation and moral pluralism-allows for the efficient regulation of these complex and contentious issues. This paper examines state-level regulation of oocyte donation to assess claims regarding the superiority of this decentralized regulatory approach. Further, this paper introduces an additional element to this examination of state law, which concerns the degree to which the health and safety of key participants is addressed at the state level. This inquiry assesses one facet of fertility medicine and biomedical research law, oocyte donation, an analysis that can be used to inform the broader discourse regarding the regulation of human biotechnologies and bioethical issues by the states.
Article: In memoriam: Elinor Ostrom
Article: Jim Schubert
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.