When are borders justified? Who has a right to control them? Where should they be drawn? Today people think of borders as an island's shores. Just as beaches delimit a castaway's realm, so borders define the edges of a territory, occupied by a unified people, to whom the land legitimately belongs. Hence a territory is legitimate only if it belongs to a people unified by a civic identity. Sadly, this Desert Island Model of territorial politics forces us to choose. If we want territories, then we can either have democratic legitimacy, or inclusion of different civic identities-but not both. The resulting politics creates mass xenophobia, migrant-bashing, hoarding of natural resources, and border walls. To escape all this, On Borders presents an alternative model. Drawing on an intellectual tradition concerned with how land and climate shape institutions, it argues that we should not see territories as pieces of property owned by identity groups. Instead, we should see them as watersheds: as interconnected systems where institutions, people, the biota, and the land together create overlapping civic duties and relations, what the book calls place-specific duties. This Watershed Model argues that borders are justified when they allow us to fulfill those duties; that border-control rights spring from internationally-agreed conventions-not from internal legitimacy; that borders should be governed cooperatively by the neighboring states and the states system; and that border redrawing should be done with environmental conservation in mind. The book explores how this model undoes the exclusionary politics of desert islands.

Populist forces are becoming increasingly relevant across the world, and studies on populism have entered the mainstream of the political science discipline. However, so far no book has synthesized the ongoing debate on how to study the populist phenomenon. This handbook provides state of the art research and scholarship on populism, and lays out, not only the cumulated knowledge on populism, but also the ongoing discussions and research gaps on this topic. The Oxford Handbook of Populism is divided into four sections. The first presents the main conceptual approaches on populism and points out how the phenomenon in question can be empirically analyzed. The second focuses on populist forces across the world and includes chapters on Africa, Australia and New Zealand, Central and Eastern Europe, East Asia, India, Latin America, the Post-Soviet States, the United States, and Western Europe. The third reflects on the interaction between populism and various relevant issues both from a scholarly and political point of view. Amongst other issues, chapters analyze the relationship between populism and fascism, foreign policy, gender, nationalism, political parties, religion, social movements and technocracy. Finally, the fourth part includes some of the most recent normative debates on populism, including chapters on populism and cosmopolitanism, constitutionalism, hegemony, the history of popular sovereignty, the idea of the people, and socialism. The handbook features contributions from leading experts in the field, and is indispensible, positioning the study of populism in political science.

Populist forces are becoming increasingly relevant across the world, and studies on populism have entered the mainstream of the political science discipline. However, so far no book has synthesized the ongoing debate on how to study the populist phenomenon. This handbook provides state of the art research and scholarship on populism, and lays out, not only the cumulated knowledge on populism, but also the ongoing discussions and research gaps on this topic. IThe Oxford Handbook of Populism is divided into four sections. The first presents the main conceptual approaches on populism and points out how the phenomenon in question can be empirically analyzed. The second focuses on populist forces across the world and includes chapters on Africa, Australia and New Zealand, Central and Eastern Europe, East Asia, India, Latin America, the Post-Soviet States, the United States, and Western Europe. The third reflects on the interaction between populism and various relevant issues both from a scholarly and political point of view. Amongst other issues, chapters analyze the relationship between populism and fascism, foreign policy, gender, nationalism, political parties, religion, social movements and technocracy. Finally, the fourth part includes some of the most recent normative debates on populism, including chapters on populism and cosmopolitanism, constitutionalism, hegemony, the history of popular sovereignty, the idea of the people, and socialism. The handbook features contributions from leading experts in the field, and is indispensible, positioning the study of populism in political science.

When are borders justified? Who has a right to control them? Where should they be drawn? Today people think of borders as an island's shores. Just as beaches delimit a castaway's realm, so borders define the edges of a territory, occupied by a unified people, to whom the land legitimately belongs. Hence a territory is legitimate only if it belongs to a people unified by a civic identity. Sadly, this Desert Island Model of territorial politics forces us to choose. If we want territories, then we can either have democratic legitimacy, or inclusion of different civic identities-but not both. The resulting politics creates mass xenophobia, migrant-bashing, hoarding of natural resources, and border walls. To escape all this, On Borders presents an alternative model. Drawing on an intellectual tradition concerned with how land and climate shape institutions, it argues that we should not see territories as pieces of property owned by identity groups. Instead, we should see them as watersheds: as interconnected systems where institutions, people, the biota, and the land together create overlapping civic duties and relations, what the book calls place-specific duties. This Watershed Model argues that borders are justified when they allow us to fulfill those duties; that border-control rights spring from internationally-agreed conventions-not from internal legitimacy; that borders should be governed cooperatively by the neighboring states and the states system; and that border redrawing should be done with environmental conservation in mind. The book explores how this model undoes the exclusionary politics of desert islands.

Democracy is usually conceived as based on self-rule or rule by the people, and it is this which is taken to ground the legitimacy of the democratic form of government. But who constitutes the people? Democratic political theory has a potentially fatal weakness at its core unless it can answer this question satisfactorily. In The Time of Popular Sovereignty, Paulina Ochoa Espejo examines the problems the concept of the people raises for liberal democratic theory, constitutional theory, and critical theory. She argues that to solve these problems, the people cannot be conceived as simply a collection of individuals. Rather, the people should be seen as a series of events, an ongoing process unfolding in time. She then offers a new theory of democratic peoplehood, laying the foundations for a new theory of democratic legitimacy.