000			01350nam a22001577a 4500
999			_c516478 _d516478
008			210226b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aZyla, Benjamin _925608
245			_aEclecticism and the future of the Burden-sharing research programme: Why Trump is wrong
260			_aInternational Political Science Review
300			_a41(4), Sep, 2020: p.507-521
520			_aSince the birth of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Europeans and the Americans have disagreed about who should share how much of the collective security burden. The input side of alliance burden sharing – that is, how many troops a member state contributes to the alliance – has been the privileged variable, both at the political as well as the academic levels. Other output variables (e.g. numbers of troops deployed to a particular mission) are highly contested. This article offers an analytically eclecticist framework for studying Atlantic burden sharing that allows combining variables on the input and output sides of the alliance burden sharing debate with those that consider it a social practice. – Reproduced
650			_aCollective action, Post-positivism, Institutionalism, International organizations, Burden sharing _922995
773			_aInternational Political Science Review
906			_aINTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
942			_cAR