1,introduction (about 500~700 words)

2，literature Review (about1500 words）,

3，Theory （about 2000 words)

4,Research Design (about1000 words)

5,Evidence/TESTs (about2000 words)

6,result (about1000 words)

7，conclusion(about 1000 words)

Department of Political Science / School of Public Policy – Dissertation Feedback Form

Dissertation Title: Have China’s Accessions to the WTO Facilitated Mutual Exchange with the West?

Excellent Very good Satisfactory Needs more work Needs much more work
Structure and organisation X
Quality and breadth of literature review X
Clarity and appropriateness of research design X
Appropriateness and accuracy of methods X
Appropriateness and accuracy of analysis X
Extent of research work completed X
Overall insight and originality X
Adequacy of bibliographic information and accuracy references X
Spelling, grammar and presentation X

Comments:
This dissertation begins with an interesting attempt to analytically reconcile theories of revisionist powers with the democratic/capitalist peace, focusing on the case of China, whose official and unofficial mouthpieces have been trumpeting the idea of a ‘peaceful rise’ for a number of years. Unfortunately, the project quickly falls short of its promise. Citations are nearly completely absent, and completely absent from the literature review, and only one paper is included in the list of work cited. This makes it difficult to ascertain exactly where the author seeks to add to existing bodies of research. Much of the literature review is described in vague terms, without application to the case at hand; in the instance of the description of the capitalist peace, there is a lack of demonstration of fundamental understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of the entire body of research. The theory section reads like a bit more of the same. ‘Mutual exchange’ is never really defined – it operationalizes as trade and FDI – and the theoretical relevance of these economic linkages for their socio-political implications is left unexamined. The analysis section is very weak, as the research design behind selection of the qualitative cases is left unexplained, and both read as if the sole source was a contemporary newspaper column. More thorough qualitative evidence would provide the rationale behind the case selection and a description and explanation of the various actors’ positions on China’s IGO accession. The quantitative evidence is similarly incomplete, with some simple regressions proposed but not reported, and no interpretation of the pages of tables and figures presented. Ultimately, the rationale for mixed methods, repeated four times, is left unfulfilled. The results/conclusions/policy implications do not follow from the analysis. Organizationally and compositionally, this could have used another draft, as subsections are not linked to each other in any meaningful way, so the reader is left wondering how pieces fit together. Full sections themselves are not clearly linked, as the analysis doesn’t fit with the theory, which doesn’t relate strongly to the literature review, etc. A fair portion of the writing is repetitive (see the comment above about the mixed-method paragraph being repeated four times over a few pages), and many statements are overly vague and unsubstantiated.

Indicative Grade: 45
Signature/Date: MP 8 Sept 2014