Pub Date : 2022-05-18DOI: 10.1177/00108367221090111
I. Sokolić
Transitional justice is premised on participation that allows local publics to construct, critique and have some ownership over the process. The current scholarship assumes that individuals openly express their views of the process, or that they remain silent. The scholarship has neglected a third, significant form of participation: active withholding of views by saying ‘I don’t know’. This article examines such claims to ignorance and argues that they can provide insight into participation. While both qualitative and quantitative researchers of transitional justice have observed a pervasive pattern of high ‘don’t know’ responses, such claims to ignorance have not been studied. This article develops a theoretical framework that shows that ‘don’t know’ responses are a valuable source of information and argues that they are often an expression of a lack of willingness to respond, rather than genuine ignorance. Drawing on an original corpus of data collected through inter-ethnic focus groups and surveys conducted in four former Yugoslav countries, the study demonstrates how claims to ignorance are constructed as novel manifestations of resistance, restraint or disentitlement. These point to a rejection of transitional justice, which needs to be addressed if individuals are to feel like legitimate participants in the process.
{"title":"Claims to ignorance as a form of participation in transitional justice","authors":"I. Sokolić","doi":"10.1177/00108367221090111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221090111","url":null,"abstract":"Transitional justice is premised on participation that allows local publics to construct, critique and have some ownership over the process. The current scholarship assumes that individuals openly express their views of the process, or that they remain silent. The scholarship has neglected a third, significant form of participation: active withholding of views by saying ‘I don’t know’. This article examines such claims to ignorance and argues that they can provide insight into participation. While both qualitative and quantitative researchers of transitional justice have observed a pervasive pattern of high ‘don’t know’ responses, such claims to ignorance have not been studied. This article develops a theoretical framework that shows that ‘don’t know’ responses are a valuable source of information and argues that they are often an expression of a lack of willingness to respond, rather than genuine ignorance. Drawing on an original corpus of data collected through inter-ethnic focus groups and surveys conducted in four former Yugoslav countries, the study demonstrates how claims to ignorance are constructed as novel manifestations of resistance, restraint or disentitlement. These point to a rejection of transitional justice, which needs to be addressed if individuals are to feel like legitimate participants in the process.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":"58 1","pages":"102 - 128"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45917622","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-15DOI: 10.1177/00108367221093151
Jan Teorell
The aim of this article is to explore the establishment of diplomatic representation as a measure of de facto recognition by other state units and to explain its causes in the “long 19th century” (1817–1914) and the post–World War II (WWII) era (1950–2000). Drawing on the Correlates of War diplomatic exchange data, the article explores the underlying drivers of dyadic acts of recognition in two series of logistic regression analyses, one for each time period. The results indicate that, also when taking alternative explanations into account, recognition of other states in the international system was in the 19th century at least based on one general principle: that of recognizing other de facto states. In the post-WWII era, contrary to expectations, this principle was still in effect. De facto statehood can thus be argued to constitute a rather stable norm for recognition in the international system.
{"title":"Rules of recognition? Explaining diplomatic representation since the Congress of Vienna","authors":"Jan Teorell","doi":"10.1177/00108367221093151","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221093151","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to explore the establishment of diplomatic representation as a measure of de facto recognition by other state units and to explain its causes in the “long 19th century” (1817–1914) and the post–World War II (WWII) era (1950–2000). Drawing on the Correlates of War diplomatic exchange data, the article explores the underlying drivers of dyadic acts of recognition in two series of logistic regression analyses, one for each time period. The results indicate that, also when taking alternative explanations into account, recognition of other states in the international system was in the 19th century at least based on one general principle: that of recognizing other de facto states. In the post-WWII era, contrary to expectations, this principle was still in effect. De facto statehood can thus be argued to constitute a rather stable norm for recognition in the international system.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":"58 1","pages":"155 - 174"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45896676","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-08DOI: 10.1177/00108367221093155
Johannes Scherzinger
How has the sentiment around the “responsibility to protect” (R2P) changed over time? Scholars have debated far and wide whether the political norm enjoys widespread discursive acceptance or is on the brink of decline. This article contends that we can use sentiment analysis as an important indicator for norm validity. My analysis provides three crucial insights. First, despite the well-known fear of some scholars, R2P is still frequently invoked in Security Council deliberations on issues of international peace and security. Second, overall levels of affirmative language have remained remarkably stable over time. This finding indicates that R2P is far from being obliterated. Out of 130 states, 4 international organizations (IOs), and 2 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) invoking the norm, 65% maintain a positive net-sentiment. Third, zooming into Libya as a case illustration of a critical juncture, we see some minor tonal shifts from some pivotal member states. Adding the fact that interest constellations within the Permanent Five are heterogeneous concerning the third pillar of R2P, future military interventions, sanctioned under the norm, seem unlikely.
{"title":"Unbowed, unbent, unbroken? Examining the validity of the responsibility to protect","authors":"Johannes Scherzinger","doi":"10.1177/00108367221093155","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221093155","url":null,"abstract":"How has the sentiment around the “responsibility to protect” (R2P) changed over time? Scholars have debated far and wide whether the political norm enjoys widespread discursive acceptance or is on the brink of decline. This article contends that we can use sentiment analysis as an important indicator for norm validity. My analysis provides three crucial insights. First, despite the well-known fear of some scholars, R2P is still frequently invoked in Security Council deliberations on issues of international peace and security. Second, overall levels of affirmative language have remained remarkably stable over time. This finding indicates that R2P is far from being obliterated. Out of 130 states, 4 international organizations (IOs), and 2 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) invoking the norm, 65% maintain a positive net-sentiment. Third, zooming into Libya as a case illustration of a critical juncture, we see some minor tonal shifts from some pivotal member states. Adding the fact that interest constellations within the Permanent Five are heterogeneous concerning the third pillar of R2P, future military interventions, sanctioned under the norm, seem unlikely.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":"58 1","pages":"81 - 101"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47431041","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-18DOI: 10.1177/00108367221084561
Kath Wright
Engagement with the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda by military actors has caused concern among some of its civil society advocates. For example, NATO has adopted the WPS agenda as an increasingly visible part of its self-narrative. Yet what had distinguished NATO’s engagement with WPS from many other actors is that it came without civil society involvement. The establishment of a Civil Society Advisory Panel (CSAP) on WPS in 2014 is therefore highly significant for both NATO and the WPS agenda. Despite this, the efficacy of such consultation is not clear-cut nor its potential to mitigate militarised understandings of WPS and support transformative engagement with the agenda, particularly given the wariness of some civil society to engage with NATO. Drawing on interviews with civil society, this article interrogates their perceptions of NATO in order to understand the potential of such engagements to support transformative understandings of WPS and more broadly the efficacy of civil society engagement with military institutions. In so doing, it examines how such consultation adds to our understanding of NATO as an institution of international hegemonic masculinity.
{"title":"Challenging civil society perceptions of NATO: Engaging the Women, Peace and Security agenda","authors":"Kath Wright","doi":"10.1177/00108367221084561","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221084561","url":null,"abstract":"Engagement with the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda by military actors has caused concern among some of its civil society advocates. For example, NATO has adopted the WPS agenda as an increasingly visible part of its self-narrative. Yet what had distinguished NATO’s engagement with WPS from many other actors is that it came without civil society involvement. The establishment of a Civil Society Advisory Panel (CSAP) on WPS in 2014 is therefore highly significant for both NATO and the WPS agenda. Despite this, the efficacy of such consultation is not clear-cut nor its potential to mitigate militarised understandings of WPS and support transformative engagement with the agenda, particularly given the wariness of some civil society to engage with NATO. Drawing on interviews with civil society, this article interrogates their perceptions of NATO in order to understand the potential of such engagements to support transformative understandings of WPS and more broadly the efficacy of civil society engagement with military institutions. In so doing, it examines how such consultation adds to our understanding of NATO as an institution of international hegemonic masculinity.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":"58 1","pages":"61 - 80"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47824276","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-10DOI: 10.1177/00108367221077638
Nathanael Eschmann, Desirée Nilsson
Extensive research has been conducted in the field of peacebuilding concerning the role of civil society in peace negotiations. However, although research has stressed the importance of coordination among civil society groups, we have limited knowledge concerning the impact civil society coordination can have on the content of a peace agreement. This article addresses this gap by examining how the extent of coordination among civil society groups during peace negotiations influences the reflectiveness of a peace agreement in regard to civil society viewpoints. We argue that a high extent of coordination, where civil society actors coordinate tasks and spearhead viewpoints together, can help facilitate peace agreements that are more reflective of civil society group views. Based on a comparative analysis of Guatemala and El Salvador, the findings show that whereas coordination between different civil society groups was quite extensive in both peace processes, civil society viewpoints were inscribed into the peace agreement to a larger extent in the Guatemalan case. We identify two factors that contribute in shaping how coordination influences the content of peace accords: symmetrical transfer of information, and openness from the negotiation parties to consider suggestions from civil society.
{"title":"Better together? Civil society coordination during peace negotiations","authors":"Nathanael Eschmann, Desirée Nilsson","doi":"10.1177/00108367221077638","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221077638","url":null,"abstract":"Extensive research has been conducted in the field of peacebuilding concerning the role of civil society in peace negotiations. However, although research has stressed the importance of coordination among civil society groups, we have limited knowledge concerning the impact civil society coordination can have on the content of a peace agreement. This article addresses this gap by examining how the extent of coordination among civil society groups during peace negotiations influences the reflectiveness of a peace agreement in regard to civil society viewpoints. We argue that a high extent of coordination, where civil society actors coordinate tasks and spearhead viewpoints together, can help facilitate peace agreements that are more reflective of civil society group views. Based on a comparative analysis of Guatemala and El Salvador, the findings show that whereas coordination between different civil society groups was quite extensive in both peace processes, civil society viewpoints were inscribed into the peace agreement to a larger extent in the Guatemalan case. We identify two factors that contribute in shaping how coordination influences the content of peace accords: symmetrical transfer of information, and openness from the negotiation parties to consider suggestions from civil society.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":"58 1","pages":"42 - 60"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41720646","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-25DOI: 10.1177/00108367221077639
H. Tuominen
Finland promoted a value-based agenda as the President of the European Union (EU) Council in 2019. The focus was especially on the defence of the rule of law principle. A role as a strong value promoter departs from the pragmatic and cautious tradition of Finnish EU policy. In this article, I will ask why Finland chose to promote values, and what kind of political debate preceded its Presidency term. Second, I will look at the actual promotion of the common values during the Presidency. Third, I will provide some evaluations of the success of Finland’s value-based approach. The analysis draws from comprehensive documentary sources related to Finnish EU policy and her Presidency term, and from 33 semi-structured research interviews among the key Finnish politicians, civil servants and civil society organization representatives in 2020. The article shows that values were thoroughly debated before the term and their relevance increased as the Presidency approached. Finland also succeeded in promoting several values, especially by linking them to practical questions. The article argues that evaluating the success of Finland’s approach is more contentious, which may be tackled several ways.
{"title":"In defence of common values: The Finnish EU Council Presidency 2019","authors":"H. Tuominen","doi":"10.1177/00108367221077639","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221077639","url":null,"abstract":"Finland promoted a value-based agenda as the President of the European Union (EU) Council in 2019. The focus was especially on the defence of the rule of law principle. A role as a strong value promoter departs from the pragmatic and cautious tradition of Finnish EU policy. In this article, I will ask why Finland chose to promote values, and what kind of political debate preceded its Presidency term. Second, I will look at the actual promotion of the common values during the Presidency. Third, I will provide some evaluations of the success of Finland’s value-based approach. The analysis draws from comprehensive documentary sources related to Finnish EU policy and her Presidency term, and from 33 semi-structured research interviews among the key Finnish politicians, civil servants and civil society organization representatives in 2020. The article shows that values were thoroughly debated before the term and their relevance increased as the Presidency approached. Finland also succeeded in promoting several values, especially by linking them to practical questions. The article argues that evaluating the success of Finland’s approach is more contentious, which may be tackled several ways.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":"58 1","pages":"23 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46922916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-05DOI: 10.1177/00108367211068877
Kristoffer Lidén
Aiming at analysing all major security risks to a country, comprehensive National Risk Assessments (NRAs) can be used as a foundation for national security policies. Doing so manifests a modernist dream of securing societies through the anticipatory governance of risks. Yet, this dream resembles a nightmare of undemocratic state control in the name of security. Based on a critique of the politics of NRAs, this article offers a theoretical framework for evaluating their scientific and political credentials. Drawing on political theory of technocratic expert rule, ethical criteria of epistemic reliability and political representation are introduced to the debate. These criteria are then applied to an analysis of the NRAs of Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Iceland. I argue that although these NRAs are convincing correctives to the risk perceptions of politicians and civil society, they are insufficiently reliable and representative for defining the scope and priorities of national security policies at large.
{"title":"A better foundation for national security? The ethics of national risk assessments in the Nordic region","authors":"Kristoffer Lidén","doi":"10.1177/00108367211068877","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367211068877","url":null,"abstract":"Aiming at analysing all major security risks to a country, comprehensive National Risk Assessments (NRAs) can be used as a foundation for national security policies. Doing so manifests a modernist dream of securing societies through the anticipatory governance of risks. Yet, this dream resembles a nightmare of undemocratic state control in the name of security. Based on a critique of the politics of NRAs, this article offers a theoretical framework for evaluating their scientific and political credentials. Drawing on political theory of technocratic expert rule, ethical criteria of epistemic reliability and political representation are introduced to the debate. These criteria are then applied to an analysis of the NRAs of Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Iceland. I argue that although these NRAs are convincing correctives to the risk perceptions of politicians and civil society, they are insufficiently reliable and representative for defining the scope and priorities of national security policies at large.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":"58 1","pages":"3 - 22"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45123311","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-28DOI: 10.1177/00108367211068876
P. Albrecht, Maya Mynster Christensen
While divided cities are characterized by spatially cemented segregation and polarized divisions, the trembling city is organized around transient and transformative borders. We conceptualize this notion of urban space to capture Freetown’s war-peace transition in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Ex-combatants settled on the city margins, bringing with them spatial strategies from war-fighting into the city by recreating a system of bases. The Sierra Leone Police (SLP) re-emerged with external support, seeking to compartmentalize and fixate Freetown through a combination of force and negotiation. We use borders and bordering to understand policing as attempts by both ex-combatants and the SLP to border in as well as out; defensively against external interference and offensively to make territorial claims. By extension, it is tensions in these practices between attempts to defend and harden borders, and at the same time, expand and soften them that trigger a tremble. The city tremble was a reminder of the possibility of war that Freetown very easily could return to. It also became a more general and inconspicuous condition of the city as an inhabited space, where multiple and often incompatible and conflictual spatial logics, strategies, and practices of policing clashed, overlapped and co-existed uneasily.
{"title":"Trembling city: Policing Freetown’s war-peace transition","authors":"P. Albrecht, Maya Mynster Christensen","doi":"10.1177/00108367211068876","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367211068876","url":null,"abstract":"While divided cities are characterized by spatially cemented segregation and polarized divisions, the trembling city is organized around transient and transformative borders. We conceptualize this notion of urban space to capture Freetown’s war-peace transition in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Ex-combatants settled on the city margins, bringing with them spatial strategies from war-fighting into the city by recreating a system of bases. The Sierra Leone Police (SLP) re-emerged with external support, seeking to compartmentalize and fixate Freetown through a combination of force and negotiation. We use borders and bordering to understand policing as attempts by both ex-combatants and the SLP to border in as well as out; defensively against external interference and offensively to make territorial claims. By extension, it is tensions in these practices between attempts to defend and harden borders, and at the same time, expand and soften them that trigger a tremble. The city tremble was a reminder of the possibility of war that Freetown very easily could return to. It also became a more general and inconspicuous condition of the city as an inhabited space, where multiple and often incompatible and conflictual spatial logics, strategies, and practices of policing clashed, overlapped and co-existed uneasily.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":"57 1","pages":"478 - 495"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43028013","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-18DOI: 10.1177/00108367211036916
D. Panke, Gurur Polat, Franziska Hohlstein
The performance of individual international organizations (IOs) has received considerable scholarly attention, not in the least because their importance for global governance. This paper adds to this body of work by adopting genuine comparative lenses. Based on a novel survey, it assesses the attributed performance of 49 IOs over two important dimensions: problem-solving effectiveness and legitimacy of outputs. This reveals variation between IOs with respect to both components. We derive hypotheses from international cooperation and IO design. The quantitative analysis reveals that except deliberative diplomatic practices many factors increasing attributed legitimacy differ from the ones increasing the attributed problem-solving effectiveness. Most notably, autonomous secretariats increase the problem-solving effectiveness attributed to IOs. Legitimacy attributions increase when IOs are regional instead of global in nature and when non-state actors have access to IO decision-making.
{"title":"Who performs better? A comparative analysis of problem-solving effectiveness and legitimacy attributions to international organizations","authors":"D. Panke, Gurur Polat, Franziska Hohlstein","doi":"10.1177/00108367211036916","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367211036916","url":null,"abstract":"The performance of individual international organizations (IOs) has received considerable scholarly attention, not in the least because their importance for global governance. This paper adds to this body of work by adopting genuine comparative lenses. Based on a novel survey, it assesses the attributed performance of 49 IOs over two important dimensions: problem-solving effectiveness and legitimacy of outputs. This reveals variation between IOs with respect to both components. We derive hypotheses from international cooperation and IO design. The quantitative analysis reveals that except deliberative diplomatic practices many factors increasing attributed legitimacy differ from the ones increasing the attributed problem-solving effectiveness. Most notably, autonomous secretariats increase the problem-solving effectiveness attributed to IOs. Legitimacy attributions increase when IOs are regional instead of global in nature and when non-state actors have access to IO decision-making.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":"57 1","pages":"433 - 456"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42597063","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：