During the last military dictatorship in Argentina, also called the Proceso de Reorganización Nacional (National Reorganization Process, 1976-1983), General Jorge Rafael Videla and the other members of the leading juntas sought to subdue the extremist violence that had built up over several decades. Yet, the junta used its mandate to persecute “subversive elements” that it saw as threats to its ideal of a Western and Christian society: political opposition, intellectuals, students, religious minorities, and even apolitical citizens. In this brutal repression operation, also referred to as the Guerra Sucia – the Dirty War – the military government abducted, “disappeared,” tortured, and killed an estimated 30,000 people. After a defeat in the Falklands/Malvinas War, the junta was replaced by Raúl Alfonsín’s elected civilian government in 1983, which implemented a series of policies designed to bring truth, justice, and accountability – core to a concept scholars call “transitional justice” – to Argentina. This effort, which included the creation of a truth commission, the prosecution of perpetrators of repression, and the reparation of victims, was essential for the construction of a new, legitimate, and robust democracy. Through transitional justice, the government sought to repair the social ruptures caused by the Dirty War and ensure that the human rights violations would not happen again. While Alfonsin and his successor Carlos Menem facilitated a period of impunity between the late 1980s and the early 1990s, the pursuit of truth, justice, and accountability continues to this day. While the role of domestic dynamics in this process has been studied extensively, this thesis seeks to uncover the role of other valuable players: transnational non-state actors. These organizations, which transcend boundaries to enact change, are crucial in a world governed by international norms. Thus, my thesis investigates the question: How did transnational non-state actors help promote truth, justice, and accountability throughout the Argentine democratization process? By focusing on three types of transnational non-state actors, regional human rights bodies, international non-governmental organizations (INGOs), and philanthropic foundations, this research highlights the mechanisms used by these organizations to promote transitional justice and democracy from abroad – both during and after the National Reorganization Process. To achieve this, I explore archival material and secondary sources, supplemented by a variety of expert interviews. Ultimately, I argue that by elevating the Argentine human rights situation into the global public sphere, supporting domestic activity, and pressuring both the Argentine and foreign governments to uphold international norms, transnational non-state actors effectively fostered truth, justice, accountability, and democracy.
This research is particularly important in the current era of democratic backsliding, in which elected leaders are consolidating power, eliminating protections for rights, and questioning international norms. I argue that by implementing policies to weaken transnational non-state actors, leaders are tacitly eliminating a fundamental democratic safeguard. By strengthening transnational non-state actors from within, it will be possible to counteract this trend and preserve democracy.

cemented. Yet, the boundaries of what's permissible and impermissible may also fluctuate and develop as a result of these catalysts of change. While there is nothing inherently wrong with progress, unchecked evolution may become domineering and furthermore oppressive. The purpose of this thesis is to evaluate Princeton's progress and, furthermore, the institution's current actions. Essentially, it is to evaluate the fairness, wisdom, and overall accurate judgment of their response against the Palestinian protesters. However, this evaluation will not be done by a student, post-doc researcher, or member of the faculty. Rather, the actions of the past will be called to judge the performance of the present. Using Princeton's past interactions with student-led protests, this paper will examine similarities, consistencies, and, importantly, discrepancies between various eras of protests and the most recent War on Gaza protests. As such, this endeavor will be done through the analysis of four specific eras of Princeotnian protests: The Vietnam era, The South African Apartheid era, The Black Lives Matter era, and finally, the War on Gaza era. In each of the eras, there will be three main connecting variables of comparison. Firstly, the demands of the activists. What was the central issue or problem that the group was protesting against? How do the demands of the group illustrate their values and, furthermore, their relationship with the public and Princeton? The next variable of analysis is the form of expression, i.e., Protests, sit-ins, etc. How did the specific student group express their ideas? Were they confrontational and disruptive? Lastly, the final mode of analysis is the university's response. In other words, how did the university interact with the actions of the student group? Did they meet them with hostility or restraint? Were they deaf or receptive to the demands of the student group? Nevertheless, why are these the three main variables of analysis? These variables are important in understanding Princeton's management of the War on Gaza protests. For instance, if throughout the four cases we find a stark similarity of demands and forms of protests; however, the Institutional responses on the War on Gaza was inherently harsher than other cases , this would provide evidence of inconsistencies of management, hypocrisy, and most importantly discrimination. In other words, let us presume the protestors in the BLM or Apartheid era performed eerily similar protests as their War on Gaza counterparts did and, furthermore, had inherently similar demands. Yet, the Princeton administration treated the War on Gaza protesters in a more brash and harsher way. While this is not on-the-dot evidence for straightforward crimes, it would still pose a problematic situation for Princeton. If an analysis such as this were to happen, a deeper understanding of why Princeton veered away from its methodology of the past would need to be performed. Questions revolving around the notion of what made Palestinian protesters different from Vietnam, Apartheid, and Black Lives Matter protesters if their demands and forms of protesting were similar. Nonetheless, in order to get to that train of thought, the following analysis has to be made. In the next four chapters, each respective era will be analyzed based on this methodology.

Previous research and policy debates regarding the topic of static images generated by artificial intelligence platforms have explored the effects of photorealistic AI-generated media on public perceptions of the truth and the potential of these images to escalate online disinformation, particularly during elections in the United States. While this research is crucial to understanding the consequences of convincing AI-generated images and media online, the current quality of AI-generated images that everyday social media users create or interact with is often far from realistic. These low-quality images lack the critical aesthetic details often found in higher-quality AI-generated images. Yet, low-quality AI-generated images frequently receive high levels of engagement through likes, comments, or shares on social media platforms, such as Meta’s Facebook and Instagram or the platform X (formerly known as Twitter). Considering the contentious nature of creating low-quality AI-generated images in spite of increasing integration of generative artificial intelligence into online platforms, this type of media exists as a complex yet under-researched form of digital creation. This study collects survey data to address this gap in current research on artificial intelligence, emphasizing the role of low-quality AI-generated images. The objective is to assess how users perceive the motivations behind the creation of these images as well as their engagement patterns with these images based on the following attributes: believability, accuracy, informativeness, humor, and deception. Findings generally support increased negative perceptions towards low-quality, AI-generated images while high- quality, AI-generated images are generally found to be perceived as more believable, accurate, and informative. Advanced age and partisan affiliation also have significant effects on perceptions and engagement intentions with AI-generated media. Informed by these results, social media platforms should support the use of more labels across all AI-generated media. Furthermore, policymakers should pursue legislation that can enforce this method of moderation, protecting the rights of users, platforms, and creators in the process.

Green extractivism, a term attributed to Uruguayan social ecologist Eduardo Gudynas, refers to a process that reproduces and reifies existing material inequalities through the exploitation, dispossession and neocolonialism by development projects categorized as “green” or “sustainable.” The framework refers to a wide encompassing array of industries including hydroelectric power, critical materials, agriculture, and infrastructure. This framework is consolidated by Alexander Dunlap to describe an evolved form of capital accumulation designed to accommodate new political ideologies and priorities associated with global anthropogenic climate change. Existing legal frameworks in Latin America and the Global South, namely the International Labor Organization Convention no. 169, and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), normatively empower Indigenous Peoples (IP) to exert their land and resource rights in the face of green extractivist projects through the process of prior consultation, or consulta previa, and Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). This paper employs a mixed-method approach to a case study of Guatemalan consultation procedures and their relationship to the emerging green extractive model. Using quantitative data in the form of a compiled dataset of hydroelectric projects on Indigenous territory in Guatemala, and a comparative analysis of mining and hydroelectric projects in Guatemala, I find that hydroelectric mega-projects are subject to less intense scrutiny in the consultation process than other extractive industries in Guatemala, specifically mining, firmly placing them within the extractive model. Furthermore, I recommend that the principles of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent should be regarded as the dominant framework, beyond “soft law,” to inform consultation proceedings with Indigenous Peoples ahead of extractive projects.

This thesis critically examines Singapore’s human capital development model, which has been internationally lauded for its education system, workforce policies, and emphasis on meritocracy. Built on the premise that success should be determined by talent and effort rather than background, Singapore’s meritocratic framework has fueled its economic ascent and cultivated a globally competitive labor force. However, beneath this narrative lies a paradox: while intended to promote equity and upward mobility, the meritocratic ideals underpinning Singapore’s policies often reinforce existing inequalities. Through a qualitative policy and discourse analysis, this study investigates the contradictions within Singapore’s approach to education and workforce development—focusing on key policies such as the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE), bilingual education, and the SkillsFuture initiative. It interrogates the state’s evolving rhetoric around fairness and opportunity, revealing how structural barriers related to class, race, and access to resources continue to stratify success. The thesis argues that although the Singaporean government has introduced reforms aimed at mitigating these disparities, these efforts tend to preserve, rather than fundamentally transform, the meritocratic system. By unpacking how policy intent, implementation, and public discourse intersect, this study contributes to broader debates on the limits of meritocracy, the complexities of equity in state-led development, and the global relevance of Singapore’s model. Ultimately, it calls for a more inclusive and reflexive approach to human capital policy—one that balances the pursuit of efficiency with a deeper commitment to social justice.

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024 and the ascent of an interim government led by former Hay’At Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) leaders, Syria’s future is marked by uncertainty, factionalism, and external pressures. While Syria must be granted the autonomy to determine its own future, stability and reconstruction will be near impossible without the involvement of foreign actors. In exploring the rapidly evolving dynamics of Syria’s political transition, this thesis asks: how has international engagement evolved in a post-Assad Syria, and how will it impact the success of the new state? Analysis focuses on the strategic objectives of key international actors—the United States, the European Union, Turkey, Israel, Iran, Russia, and the Arab Gulf States—and evaluates how their competing interests will impact Syria’s fragile transition. It is increasingly evident that Western engagement in Syria is decreasing due to domestic turmoil, shifting global dynamics, and competing crises such as the wars in Ukraine and Gaza; meanwhile, Gulf countries see Syria as the linchpin of a shifting geopolitical landscape in the Middle East and have both the interest and resources available to heavily invest in its reconstruction and stabilization. Through a qualitative analysis of policy documents, NGO reports, and interviews with Syrian humanitarian organizations, this thesis argues that while Gulf States and Turkey will fill the vacuum of Western disengagement, caused by waning bandwidth and lack of interest in nation-building diplomacy, the West will maintain the most significant influence, whether positive or negative, in paving the way for a successful Syrian transition to an inclusive, rights-respecting system of democratic governance.

This thesis explores three explanations for the breakdown of 21st-century American nuclear strategy, ultimately arguing that China’s emergence as a nuclear superpower drives this collapse. China’s economic, technological, and military prowess uniquely position it as a strategic partner to Russia, an alliance that poses unprecedented challenges to US nuclear weapons policy. This thesis uses a process-tracing-inspired methodology to analyze three key American diplomatic tools: the NPT, the New START, and the US-China 123 Agreement. It finds that geopolitical tensions undermine the effectiveness of nuclear agreements, as international actors often exploit weak provisions and face minimal accountability. Accordingly, 21st-century American nuclear weapons strategy must reckon with the deepening interdependence between geopolitical rivalry and nuclear arms control, particularly concerning the US-China atomic relationship. This thesis concludes by providing policy recommendations that emphasize (1) treating China as a central nuclear actor, (2) strengthening enforcement mechanisms, and (3) prioritizing multilateral diplomacy.

This thesis investigates the impact of content moderation changes on X (formerly Twitter) following Elon Musk’s acquisition, focusing on whether the loosening of moderation policies and the introduction of monetization incentives have influenced the prevalence of hate speech and politically charged discourse. Central to this analysis is the question of how shifts in content regulation on a major social media platform intersect with democratic values and the principle of open public discourse. Drawing from theoretical foundations like the “marketplace of ideas” and the implications of algorithmic curation, the study examines the tension between free expression and the potential manipulation of online dialogue. The case of Musk’s acquisition offers a unique lens through which to study the dynamics of digital speech regulation. After taking control of X, Musk implemented sweeping changes, including reinstating previously banned accounts, introducing a monetized verification system, and dismantling long-standing transparency initiatives. These actions, justified under the banner of “free speech,” have significantly altered both the structure and substance of discourse on the platform. This thesis specifically examines the interactions surrounding four previously banned accounts, Donald Trump, Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Babylon Bee, and James Lindsay, analyzing changes in sentiment and toxicity pre- and post-reinstatement. Using sentiment analysis with RoBERTa and toxicity scoring with Google Perspective API, the study assesses whether users engaging with these reinstated accounts exhibit shifts in negativity or toxicity following Musk’s policy changes. The results indicate that while some users displayed increased negativity or toxicity, the findings varied across user characteristics such as verification status, political orientation, and follower count. Ultimately, although some changes in toxicity and sentiment after Musk’s acquisition of Twitter were statistically significant, they were not meaningful in a real-world sense. Beyond the empirical findings, the thesis discusses the broader implications of Musk’s control over X, highlighting the risks posed by the consolidation of algorithmic control within a single individual. As X transitions from a space of open public discourse to one shaped by opaque moderation practices and monetization incentives, the potential for algorithmic favoritism and the erosion of genuine democratic debate becomes apparent. The thesis also includes an analysis of existing transparency initiatives, a review of prominent case law, and considers legal theory put forth by leading legal scholars. After contextualizing the issue within this broader framework, the thesis proposes an amendment to existing legislation aimed at enhancing transparency in platform governance, carefully designed to avoid First Amendment infringements and address compliance challenges observed in previous transparency initiatives. Major themes addressed in this thesis include content moderation, algorithmic curation, free speech, hate speech, monetization incentives, political polarization, and the implications of private control over public discourse

The expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) significantly changed the landscape of health care policy in the United States. We address two central research questions: (1) Does Medicaid expansion help individuals access the care they need? (2) Does increased access to care lead to improved health outcomes? This thesis examines the effect of Medicaid expansion on health outcomes, focusing on three key dimensions: affordability of healthcare, healthcare utilization, and self-reported health. We pay particular attention to the population of individuals who newly qualify for Medicaid after their state adopted and implemented Medicaid expansion, hypothesizing that these individuals will see improved outcomes in their affordability of healthcare, utilization of preventive services (checkups), and their self-reported health. To conduct our analysis, we utilize a difference-in-differences (DiD) framework, where we compare changes in health outcomes between the years 2013, before Medicaid expansion, and 2017, three years after expansion, across individuals residing in states that adopted Medicaid expansion during that period and those in states that did not. Data from our analysis was derived from the nationally conducted Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey, which we utilize to categorize and assess individuals based on their Medicaid eligibility status. Our results find that, for individuals who became newly eligible for Medicaid after their state adopted expansion, for individuals who became newly eligible for Medicaid under expansion, Medicaid expansion significantly reduced the likelihood of reporting financial difficulties concerning healthcare and significantly improved the likelihood of reporting a recent checkup and reporting better self-reported health. These findings suggest that Medicaid expansion has been effective in improving the health outcomes of affected individuals, and that a rollback in expansion may lead to a reversion in these benefits. From a policy perspective, we argue against federal funding cuts to Medicaid, highlighting the economic benefits provided by Medicaid via job creation and GDP growth. We suggest introducing state-level tax increases as a viable alternative method to maintain Medicaid coverage while accommodating for the reductions in federal expenditure.

This thesis explores the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on rhino poaching in Kenya, Zimbabwe, South Africa, and Namibia. Using both regression analysis, along with country-specific case studies, the study examines what lessons can be learned from this pandemic. When the COVID-19 pandemic began, poaching rates plummeted with strict lockdowns severely limiting poachers' abilities to kill and transport rhino horns. However, as the lockdown restrictions loosened, wildlife trafficking networks quickly rebounded and caused poaching rates to increase in multiple countries. The regression analysis showed that economic and governance variables alone do not fully explain changes in poaching, pointing to the importance of enforcement capacity, transparency, and local dynamics. Through case studies and interviews, this thesis identifies the policies that proved most effective during the COVID-19 pandemic and uses those lessons to develop a targeted set of regional and international policy recommendations. These include the creation of a multilateral enforcement body, expanded public-private collaboration, community-based conservation incentives, and increased international pressure on consumer countries. This original research demonstrates that rhino poaching is a multifaceted problem that will require long-term, coordinated, and proactive solutions to reduce poaching, disrupt trafficking networks, and ensure the survival of the endangered African rhino populations.

This thesis offers an analysis of whether political prediction markets should continue to be legal to use in the United States. Through interviews with experts on prediction markets, research of the history of prediction markets, and analysis of a sample of PredictIt traders and their associated trading activity, I evaluate whether political prediction markets pose risks to their users and the general public—and if they exist, if they can be effectively mitigated. Additionally, I examine whether the assumptions that have been made by observers about the demographics of the users of political prediction markets and how they engage with them are accurate. I find that the greatest risks that political prediction markets pose are market manipulation and sabotage or insider trading relating to events linked to individual decisions, misfortune, or loss of life. Additionally, I find that users PredictIt users are unrepresentative of the citizen voting age population from a demographic standpoint, but reflect their partisan preferences well. When pairing data on PredictIt traders with the bets they conduct, I find that traders tend to bet on their preferred political party more than the opposing party to a statistically significant degree. This thesis uses this analysis of the risks and their means of mitigation, informed by an improved understanding of the demographics, political engagement, and betting behavior of the user base of PredictIt and potentially similar markets, to recommend that position limits be imposed on traders to prevent market manipulation and that a class of “meme and misfortune” event contracts be barred from sale on these markets. Additionally, I conclude that traders tend to bet on what they want to happen rather than what they think will happen and that the bulk of activity on these markets is carried out by a small group of active users. I use these conclusions and recommendations to determine that political prediction markets should continue to be legal for use in the United States through the implementation of these recommendations to mitigate the risks they pose. This thesis contributes to the literature surrounding political prediction markets by offering a novel analysis of the detailed characteristics and trading activity of the user base of a political prediction market and synthesizing a thorough review of these markets’ rise to prominence in the 2024 presidential election.

Politics in the United States has long been characterized by its bipartisan structure wherein voters are often subject to a binary decision between the conservative Republican party and the liberal Democrat party. Though most Americans find themselves in support of a more centrist policy preference, Democrat and Republican elites are diverging ideologically. This divergence has roots dating back several decades and its impact is growing presently. The political landscape of the American government has been the subject of severe scrutiny in the media and become a focal point of online discourse on social media platforms. Consequently, political elites have resorted to Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook to establish their presence online and interact with the public on an unprecedented scale. This study seeks to examine how tweets by United States Senators holding office between 2013 and 2021 impacted polarization levels along this same timeline. Using a psycholinguistic analysis quantifying the underlying tone and subject matter of every tweet from all senators utilizing this platform, a regression analysis was conducted to determine whether or not there is a statistically significant relationship between the language used in tweets and their capacity to incite polarization. Across all explanatory variables and both political parties, it was discovered that tweets with a negative underlying tone, no matter the subject, incite more polarization than positive tweets. In response to these findings, policy recommendations are made to help mitigate the polarizing consequences of tweets from political elites in hopes of fostering a more inclusive environment characterized by meaningful online discourse.

This study examines the bi-directional relationship between electoral expectations and market behavior, challenging conventional unidirectional frameworks in election forecasting. Traditional electoral prediction models, heavily reliant on economic indicators and polling data, have demonstrated significant limitations in recent U.S. presidential elections. This research introduces two methodological innovations: the integration of comprehensive betting market data with traditional variables, and the development of "Party Portfolios" that track market sectors demonstrating systematic sensitivity to electoral expectations. Using high-frequency data analysis and Granger causality testing, the study reveals complex patterns of information flow across multiple channels. Betting markets demonstrate stronger predictive power for economic indicators than vice versa, while sector-specific market behavior serves as a leading indicator for electoral developments. The mid-cycle period (60-20 days before elections) emerges as a critical window when Party Portfolios exhibit their strongest predictive power. During this phase, sophisticated investors express electoral expectations through sector allocation decisions, creating potential market opportunities. These findings have significant implications for investors, campaign strategists, and policymakers, suggesting that integrated approaches incorporating both political and financial metrics yield more accurate forecasts than isolated methodologies. The research advances our understanding of how democratic processes interact with economic systems, demonstrating that markets not only respond to political developments but also discover and express political information in ways traditional metrics may miss.

This thesis takes a qualitative approach to investigating contemporary outer space governance and the need to balance innovation with the rise in space militarization. The outer space landscape is constantly changing. From the beginning of the Space Race to present day dynamics, the private sector has grown tremendously in its role as a leading force in space technology and innovation.

The guiding question of this thesis is how can the United States effectively promote innovation while also deterring the onset of space militarization between nations. Through historical context examining early teachings of Galileo, the Space Race, and the first lunar landing, this thesis is framed to dissect the ways in which early space dynamics have impacted contemporary space exploration.

This thesis also examines the different militarizing factors shaping outer space dynamics such as celestial appropriation, space debris, anti-satellite weaponry, and multilateral governance gaps. By dissecting two case studies regarding cybersecurity and their relation to outer space infrastructure, seven policy recommendations were formed to suggest various ways outer space governance can be altered to fit the evolving celestial landscape.

In addition, this thesis also engages with the ethics and legality behind space exploration. As technology continues to evolve, the use of artificial intelligence in outer space rises leading to both exciting innovations and ethical concerns. Space mining and biosecurity risks also tie into the ethics and legality behind outer space exploration and future missions.

As the private sector continues to grow in outer space exploration, there will be a rise in space militarization, but also a boom in technological and infrastructural innovations. As the leading country in space endeavors, the United States is primed to lead international cooperation in perpetuating peaceful exploration of outer space and promoting a unified celestial governance framework.

Employing the gravity model of international trade, this thesis explores the effect of BRICS membership on bilateral trade flows between the coalition’s five original members. We first investigate the average impact of BRICS on trade. We find that BRICS increased intra-bloc trade by approximately 27 percent between 2009-2023. Next, we assess the effect of BRICS across time. Although BRICS does not appear to have a statistically significant effect on trade flows during its first decade-plus of existence, our results show that, between 2020-2023, BRICS is associated with a 37 percent increase in internal trade. We then examine trade between Russia and BRICS under different sanctions regimes. After Western countries and their allies imposed a crippling barrage of sanctions against Russia for invading Ukraine in 2022, we find that Russia traded around 57 percent more with their BRICS partners. At the same time, we find that Russian trade with the sanctioning countries decreased by around 37 percent. We interpret this to mean that Russia is using BRICS membership to alleviate the effects of Western trade sanctions. Ultimately, our findings suggest that BRICS should be perceived as a transregional economic alliance, rather than as a global governance organization.

Abstract: This study looks into the algorithmic biases embedded deep in AI moderation systems regarding their impact on the Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) region focusing on Arab and Palestinian digital rights. It analyzes how prominent platforms like Meta, Twitter (X), Google, and YouTube employ systems that excessively moderate Arabic and Palestinian voices which leads to economic and informational inequality. Drawing on research from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, 7amleh, and Safiya Noble, the study stresses the lack of accountability in the governance frameworks concerning AI. It also analyzes the EU's regulatory approach in the AI Act, as well as the fragmented American version of the approach, and pinpointed many overlaps and contradictions, as well as gaps. In reaction to those gaps, the paper proposes active social responsibility policies on ethics of government investment, biases in governance datasets, transparency, independent audits, international cooperative governance frameworks, diversity policies, and ethical structural biases. The aim is to strengthen the proposition advocating for a responsive and comprehensive global AI governance system that provides fairness, accountability, and equity for those disproportionately affected by policies biased towards digital moderation.

Sponsorship plays a crucial role in shaping the visibility, financial security, and professional opportunities of elite athletes. Athletes with disabilities, however, continue to face significant disparities in securing sponsorship deals. Despite legal frameworks such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) advancing principles of inclusion, these laws do not dictate corporate behavior in sponsorship decisions. This thesis examines the intersection of disability law, economic decision-making, and media narratives to understand the structural drivers of sponsorship opportunities for disabled athletes. Drawing on insights from institutional theory and behavioral economics, this research argues that while laws such as the ADA and UNCRPD establish foundational principles of equity, inclusion, and non-discrimination, they are not sufficient to counteract ingrained biases or achieve parity in the private sponsorship market. Media, as a parallel institution to law, constructs and perpetuates narratives which frame disabled athletes through a reductive lens. Consumers are naturally inclined to interpret the world through familiar narratives, and mass media has long shaped ableist perspectives as the dominant, most intelligible framework. As a result, sponsors align with these ingrained viewpoints, selecting athletes and structuring sponsorships in ways that reinforce consumer expectations rather than challenge them. By analyzing the interplay between legal protections, economic incentives, and cultural perceptions, this thesis highlights the persistent challenges faced by disabled athletes and proposes policy, industry, and individual-level reforms to promote greater equity. Findings ultimately indicate that achieving meaningful progress requires a multi-faceted approach—one which largely exists beyond the scope of legislative intervention. By fostering sponsorship equity, society does more than merely correct a market inefficiency—it contributes to a broader societal shift toward inclusion, visibility, and recognition of disabled athletes as integral to the global sports landscape.

Microfinance institutions (MFIs) operate at the intersection of financial sustainability and social impact, aiming to provide underserved populations, particularly women, with access to credit. While women are often considered more reliable borrowers, existing research has not definitively established whether lending to women enhances MFI profitability. This study examines whether MFIs can achieve financial stability while maintaining their mission of empowering women. Using a dataset of almost 3,000 MFIs in developing countries from MIX Market, we analyze how gender-targeted lending influences MFI financial performance across three profitability measures. Our regression models incorporate key control variables, including institutional size, loan quality, and institution type, to isolate the effects of lending to women. Additionally, we assess whether supplemental non-financial services, such as female loan officers and microenterprise education, amplify the financial impact of gender-targeted lending, by addressing the unique challenges that women face in developing countries. Our results indicate that while targeting women does not significantly affect overall profitability, a higher percentage of female borrowers is associated with lower delinquency rates- a distinction not observed when measuring gross loan allocation to women. Additionally, we find that female loan officers reinforce these positive repayment effects and, among profitable institutions, enhance profitability. However, our analysis also reveals surprising inefficiencies in enterprise training services, which, contrary to expectations, appear to yield minimal or even negative effects. Our findings contribute to the broader discussion on the viability of social impact finance, shedding light on whether prioritizing women as borrowers strengthens or strains MFI financial sustainability.