West Virginia University to receive $132K for Ukraine crisis study |

West Virginia University to receive $132K for Ukraine crisis study

The Associated Press

MORGANTOWN, W.Va. — A West Virginia University scholar said the 2014 Ukrainian crisis and lessons learned from that country’s parliamentary elections in October could hold meaning for the United States.

The National Science Foundation announced this month that WVU political science professor Erik Herron would receive an award in the amount of $ 132,670. The award will fund a study about how government organizations manage crisis situations during election cycles. His areas of expertise are Russian and East European studies.

A former program director for the NSF, Herron said the situation in Ukraine could influence foreign policy.

“The crisis in the Ukraine is probably the most significant crisis in Europe since the end of the Cold War,” he said.

The award will begin Monday. Herron’s research will address the ability of Ukraine to “act as a unified state” because of a major conflict.

“To the extent, that it’s unable to act as a unified state and provide services in democratic elections, it becomes increasingly unstable. And instability in that region is threatening to security in Europe and the U.S.”

He said studying Ukraine can give insights about governments in crisis situations can rebuild as functional societies.

“Hopefully, we can help policymakers make better decisions about how to improve practices in parts of the world where U.S. security interests are at stake,” Herron said.

“I think the U.S. could benefit from having expertise from abroad and recommendations about how we could improve our own election processes. No election process is perfect.”

His study, titled “Democratic State Capacity and Organizational Adaptation in Crisis Conditions,” will use data collected from teams based in the United States and Ukraine.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.