Course catalogue

There is an abundance of unstructured data around us. Working with text is key, not just to measure discussions and opinions on social media or in product reviews, but also to gain insights into concepts important to the study of politics such as ideological positions or policy sentiments. The vast amount of textual data that one frequently needs to process and the messy form that it often comes in poses special challenges to researchers. This course introduces students to computational tools and methods that enable them to treat text as data. We will touch upon core theoretical concepts, but the main goal is to give you hands-on experience in using R to collect, load, prepare and analyze text data.

This seminar provides training in basic negotiation skills and techniques. It combines theoretical input with practical exercises to achieve this. The aim is to prepare participants for negotiations in their future work environments. Our methodology relies on active learning and a participant-centred approach. We combine theoretical and analytical tools with practical exercises, teamwork, group discussions and feedback. The first part of the seminar introduces basic negotiation concepts (such as interest-based negotiation) and enables participants to test and improve their skills in various bilateral scenarios. The second part introduces the specifics of multilateral negotiations involving more than two parties. 

Russia nuclear threats accompanying its war of aggression against Ukraine have underscored that nuclear weapons remain a defining feature of global politics. All nuclear-armed states are investing in new warheads or delivery systems (or both), and more states may seek to acquire nuclear weapons in the future. Concurrently, key arms control agreements from the past have unraveled or are under severe pressure. This occurs at a time when great-power tensions are increasing, and the development of new technologies may challenge previous assumptions about strategic stability.

The course begins with a general overview of the impact that the invention of nuclear weapons has had on international politics. We will then revisit key debates in the theoretical literature on nuclear weapons and discuss the historical evolution of nuclear strategies. The final part of the course will address contemporary and future nuclear challenges (and the corresponding policy debates) and consider whether the world is indeed entering a new (and more dangerous) nuclear age, as well as the implications of such a development.

From videos of rights violations, to satellite images of environmental degradation, to eyewitness accounts disseminated on social media, human rights practitioners have access to more data today than ever before. Modern technology - and the enhanced access it provides to information about abuse - has revolutionised both human rights reporting and documentation, as well as the pursuit of legal accountability and future policy. 

However, open source methods for information gathering and dissemination, have also created significant challenges for researchers and analysists as the capture and dissemination of content is often haphazard. For it to be of use for policy, advocacy and accountability, it must be discovered, verified, and authenticated.

This course will discuss the history, ethics, methods and best practices associated with open source research and how it can be incorporated into documentation and investigation processes for human rights advocacy and accountability.

By the end of the course students taking the course will: 

1. Understand how to start, conduct and publish open source investigations 

2. Be able to conduct verification on content source from the social web 

3. Be able to consider the ethical and wellbeing challenges associated with open source investigations 

4. Be familiar with the online tools needed to conduct open source investigations 

5. Develop the mindset associated with open source investigations 

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed different degrees of vulnerability and resilience of government and public administration across many nations. We have good reasons to acknowledge that public and private governance and organisational structures under stress reveal latent fault-lines and weaknesses that otherwise would have remained undetected. Successful crisis management, however, rests on early warning and sufficient levels of preparedness known in the literature as high reliability requirements. The question how and why these requirements are frequently not fulfilled even under relatively favorable conditions is obviously relevant when it comes to learning and prevention. This course addresses that very question through instructing students in making in-depth inquiries into complex cases of ill-fated policies and organisations based on causal process tracing and a chosen theoretical framework. The subject is the analysis of organisational failure and public policy disasters from a variety of perspectives in an attempt to enable students to assess the risks of failure and to contribute to appropriate risk reduction and crisis management strategies. The Empirical Cases to be analysed fall into three different categories, (I) Socio-technical Systems, (II) International Organisation and Security Agencies and (III) Civil Administration. (I) The Gulf of Mexico oil spill of 2010 / The Fukushima Accident of 2011 / The Federal Aviation Administration's Aircraft (FAA) Certification Process and the case of Boeing 737Max. (II) The collapse of the UN mission and the subsequent genocide in Rwanda 1994 / The inability of the international community to protect the UN “safe area” Srebrenica during the Bosnian war in 1995 / The failure of US security services prior to 9/11 to analyse the terrorist threat and to prevent the attack of September 11, 2001. (III) The Break-Down of Disaster Relief in the Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina 2005 / The Hillsborough Disaster 1989 / The Fire at Grenfell Tower in London 2017.

You will be assigned to one of five teams tasked with representing your country´s interest in the unfolding security crisis. The Policy Game is structured into four different phases. In each phase, new information about the unfolding scenario is given to the participants, presenting unique challenges to each team in each phase. The class will learn how to react in high-stakes security policy situations and unveil challenges to the European security architecture in the years ahead. The class will conclude with a session on career paths in foreign and security policy. Participants will be asked to contribute actively to the course with their own expertise and opinions to create a conducive learning atmosphere.

Geopolitical tensions have transformed international trade. What was once a domain of mutual gain is now a primary battleground for global power. Tariffs, sanctions, and export controls are no longer just policy tools; they are instruments of strategic competition. The United States, China, Russia, and the European Union are all navigating a new reality where supply chains are weaponized and markets are arenas for influence. This two-day workshop confronts the core dilemma facing today's leaders: Can international trade still be governed cooperatively, or will it inevitably fragment into rival economic blocs?The first day provides the analytical framework to understand the "geoeconomic turn”. Students will learn how trade, technology, and finance have become central instruments of statecraft. We will analyze the logic of economic coercion and explore recent, high-profile cases of strategic decoupling, from semiconductor restrictions to energy sanctions.

Participants will then assess the evolving strategies of major powers. These strategies include U.S. economic containment of China, European debates on strategic autonomy, and Russia’s search for alternative trade corridors. Finally, we confront the growing governance gap between the rules-based trade order and the new reality of coercive interdependence. We will debate institutions can adapt or are destined to erode. 

The second day is a high-stakes crisis simulation. Participants will be immersed in trade negotiations under intense political pressure. Acting as senior advisors to major powers and regional blocs, participants will navigate real-time intelligence, media scrutiny, and complex diplomatic maneuvering. The exercise requires participants to develop a coordinated response strategy that balances national economic security, alliance cohesion, and global stability.

Learning Goals:

Develop an advanced understanding of the interplay between trade policy, geopolitics, and economic coercion.

Analyse the strategic behaviour of major powers in a fragmented global trading order. 

Engage in debates on how to preserve multilateralism and open markets under rising rivalry. 

Practise negotiation, coalition-building, and inter-institutional coordination under time pressure. 

Produce a coherent crisis-management policy package and action memo transferable to future trade and economic governance challenges. 

Accelerated warming has vaulted the Arctic from distant periphery to strategic front line: melting ice opens new sea‑lanes and mineral deposits, redraws boundaries, and intensifies competition among Russia, a NATO‑enlarged Europe, a more assertive China, and a United States that may again pivot under a new presidency. Throughout this two‑day workshop, students will grapple with a core dilemma: whether climate‑driven transformation of the High North can be governed peacefully or will slide into confrontation.

Day 1 equips participants with the necessary theoretical and conceptual lens to unpack the climate-security nexus, tracing how rapid environmental change operates as a threat‑multiplier that alters shipping economics, heightens sovereignty claims, and disrupts fragile ecosystems. Then, we analyze the shifting geopolitics that follow Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Sino‑Russian cooperation, and evolving U.S. Arctic policy, assessing how these dynamics constrain or enable EU leadership. Finally, we confront a widening governance gap: the Arctic Council’s calls for alternative legal, diplomatic, and indigenous‑led arrangements capable of mediating conflict while safeguarding local communities and the environment.

A live crisis simulation on Day 2 immerses students in high‑stakes negotiations, real‑time intelligence „injects“ and escalating media pressure, culminating in a collective response strategy that must reconcile security, sustainability, and equity.

Learning goals:

Develop an advanced understanding of Arctic climate‑security linkages and EU policy instruments.

Analyse complex dynamics in the Arctic climate-security nexus, including environmental change, geopolitical rivalry, and evolving governance arrangements.

Engage in debates about the current and future challenges of the Arctic.

Practise stakeholder mapping, coalition‑building, and cross‑cultural negotiation under time pressure.

Produce a coordinated crisis‑management policy package and action memo transferable to future climate‑security challenges.

This two-day workshop offers a fast-paced, immersive simulation of EU crisis response at the highest political level. Participants take on the roles of national and EU decision-makers to manage a fictional international security crisis, navigating institutional dynamics, negotiation strategies, and real-time developments.

The exercise mirrors actual EU crisis mechanisms, particularly within the framework of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), including coordination between the European External Action Service (EEAS), the Political and Security Committee (PSC), and the Council. Students will practice drafting political declarations, coordinating among Member States, and responding to unpredictable third-party actions, media pressure, and intelligence updates.

The workshop emphasizes teamwork, political communication, and strategic decision-making under pressure. A short lecture at the beginning will outline key EU crisis response instruments and negotiation structures. The rest of the workshop is hands-on, with dynamic scenario progression and tailored feedback.

Learning Objectives:

Understand the EU institutional architecture for international crisis response

Develop negotiation, coordination, and rapid decision-making skills

Apply political analysis in a simulated high-stakes environment

Gain insight into the interplay between national interests and collective EU action

This Policy Sprint aims to support South Africa’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs in developing a forward looking engagement strategy with the European Union; one of its most important trading partners. Building on the diplomatic momentum from two key 2025 milestones, South Africa’s G20 Presidency and the African Union-European Union Summit in November 2025, the Sprint will guide four teams through developing detailed scenarios, identifying priority cooperation areas, mapping critical stakeholders, and designing targeted EU lobbying campaigns. This comprehensive process will enable a strategic reassessment and redefinition of cooperation frameworks from 2026 onward, positioning South Africa for sustained strategic partnerships on the global stage.Learning Goals: By participating in this sprint, students will:Develop skills in strategic policy analysis and scenario planning within an international cooperation context.Build capabilities in stakeholder mapping and engagement strategy formulation.Gain practical experience in designing lobbying campaigns targeting complex EU institutional frameworks. Understand the interplay between national development goals, global governance, and multilateral diplomacy.

This course will:

Familiarize students with analysis and methods of geo-strategic decision-making, convey knowledge of principles and procedures of EU foreign policy in the IPR, and equip students with skills to analyse and formulate policy advice.

During the course, students will engage in intensive group work, presentations and discussions, culminating in the production of joint recommendations to strengthen the EU policy on the Indo-Pacific Region.

Objectives

Students will be required to:  

Perform an intra-regional analysis of the situation in the IPR, focusing on Japan, China, India, the US, ASEAN and the EU.

Formulate an overview of the long-term EU strategic agenda (e.g. climate, Global Gateway) and identify strategic EU interests relevant to the IPR. 

Map out the political, economic and environmental interest of the states of the main players in the IPR and the structure of their mutual relationships.

On the basis of the above, identify priority policy areas for the EU and identify shortcomings in the existing EU policies towards the IPR. 

Compile concrete recommendations in the form of a policy briefing note. 

Policy communication under pressure. Engaging publics for transformative climate agendas.

In the context of war, a cost-of-living crisis and migration movements, climate change seems to have dropped in salience on people lists of priorities in most polls conducted in Europe. Many leading politicians of the centre-right and centre-left across the continent have reacted by either scaling back climate action or deemphasising it rhetorically at least. But is this really necessary? Should politicians be worried about voters abandoning them because they engage strongly with the climate crisis? Could it even be counter-productive to de-emphasise now?

In this policy sprint, we will critically engage with the cautious approach taken by so many political leaders across many EU countries. There is extensive evidence suggesting that people demand for government action and clear communication has not diminished at all. Stepping back from action or discussions of it may therefore not result in people stopping to think about it, but instead enable far-right actors to dominate the space and change discourses. However, people have real concerns about how the response to the climate crisis may affect their lives and to what extent they are able to shape the transition. Proactive communication thus needs to be able to understand those concerns and develop communication strategies that account for them.

In this workshop, we will work on the design of research strategies that would enable us to develop such understandings both regarding public input- and output-legitimacy concerns. We will critically examine existing public attitudes work and propose improved and alternative agendas. Using real-life examples and case studies provided by the instructor, students will gain a deep understanding of how public attitudes work is used (well and poorly) in political decision making and how meaningful approaches can be developed.