Mediating science-intensive policy disputes

Public policy disputes involving complex scientific issues usually entail conflicts not only over those scientific issues, but also over the distribution of gains and losses. The presence of scientific or technical dimensions to a dispute should not be allowed to mask underlying distributional considerations. On the other hand, science-intensive disputes require special attention. Merely resolving distributional conflicts without incorporating the best scientific judgment will produce unwise and potentially dangerous results. The usual adversarial approach that characterizes the handling of such disputes by agencies and courts is less than ideal for creating an understanding of scientific evidence or the resolution of scientific differences. A process of mediation, already applied in a number of significant cases, offers strong promise as a superior approach.     

People’s Mediation Committees: Bargaining Between Hospitals and Patients

The Chinese government is cautious when it comes to managing bottom-up compensation claims as many collective actions are triggered by failing to address such monetary requests. Thus, the government has delegated the responsibility of dispute resolution and compensation distribution to a bargaining channel called People’s Mediation Committees and its agents, the mediators. However, little systematic evidence exists to explain the rationale for compensation distribution led by the government or the regime’s strategic objectives in pursuing compensation distribution to settle social disputes, especially those disputes between citizens and the government or its agents. Using medical dispute data as a proxy, this article examines the processes and outcomes of mediation in compensation distribution. It finds that People’s Mediation Committees have effectively institutionalized the compensation distribution process, but the outcomes may still be influenced by patients’ tactics and the bargaining power held by hospitals.

     

香港土地审裁处司法活动综述及启示

拆迁问题归根结底是利益问题,政府、开发商、被拆迁者三方进行着激烈的利益博弈。有利益就有纠纷,恶性、惨痛的拆迁纠纷时见报道,且愈演愈烈。拆迁该如何实现和谐？拆迁难题的解决可能需要系统性的改革,而土地纠纷的解决却有一个最基本的理念,即需要中立、独立、没有偏私的机构和人员以公平、公正、专业和高透明度的方式来解决纠纷,让利益的博弈回归到法律框架之下。香港土地审裁处解决土地纠纷的成功经验值得借鉴。     

Policy Conflict Framework

This essay introduces a Policy Conflict Framework to guide and organize theoretical, practical, and empirical research to fill the vacuum that surrounds policy conflicts. The framework centers on a conceptual definition of an episode of policy conflict that distinguishes between cognitive and behavioral characteristics. The cognitive characteristics of a policy conflict episode include divergence in policy positions among two or more actors, perceived threats from opponents’ policy positions, and unwillingness to compromise. These cognitive characteristics manifest in a range of behavioral characteristics (e.g., framing contests, lobbying, building networks). Episodes of policy conflicts are shaped by a policy setting, which consists of different levels of action where conflicts may emerge (political, policy subsystem and policy action situations), interpersonal and intrapersonal policy actor attributes, events, and the policy issue. In turn, the outputs and outcomes of policy conflicts produce feedback effects that shape the policy setting. This essay ends with an agenda for advancing studies of policy conflicts, both methodologically and theoretically.     

The Importance of Subjective Data for Public Agency Performance Evaluation

Evaluating public agency performance has typically been based on objective measurements. However, some researchers contend that evaluation is not complete without considering client perceptions of agency performance. This study supports combining subjective client perceptions with objective data in the evaluation process. Survey results and internal performance data are examined for a state agency charged with investigating citizen disputes with utility companies. Regression analyses show that the factors that most influence the client’s satisfaction with agency performance are the client’s perception of how long it took to resolve the dispute, based on survey results, and whether the case was decided in the client’s favor, from the agency’s internal records. The “real” resolution time recorded in the agency’s information system was not significant. These results indicate that subjective data provide valuable information for evaluating agency performance.     

Lessons Learned from Two Decades of Alternative Dispute Resolution Programs and Processes at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Mediation, facilitation, and other alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques are being used in federal agencies, state and local governments, private-sector organizations, and among private citizens in an effort to prevent and resolve disputes in a timely, cost-effective, and less adversarial manner. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), one of the pioneers in the application of ADR processes and techniques to public policy disputes, recently announced that it plans to in-crease the use of ADR techniques and practices across all agency programs. This article reports the results of a four-part evaluation of the use of ADR in enforcement actions at the EPA during the last two decades. Funded by the Hewlett Foundation, this effort utilized in-depth telephone interviews, government statistics, and archival records. The four groups interviewed were EPA's alternative dispute resolution specialists, potentially responsible parties (defendants) to EPA enforcement lawsuits, mediators and facilitators to EPA cases, and agency enforcement attorneys who had participated in agency enforcement ADR processes. Concluding that there are generally high levels of satisfaction with the EPA's enforcement ADR program, this article examines the sources of obstacles and assistance to ADR efforts at the EPA, suggests ways in which the EPA might improve its ADR programs, and draws lessons from the EPA's experiences that may be helpful to other public programs or organizations.     

The Institutionalization of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Federal Government

This article uses resource dependence and institutional theory to examine the implementation of the Administrative Dispute Resolution Acts of 1990 and 1996. The insights from these theories are employed to explain the diffusion of and variation in the application of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to different programmatic areas. Although agencies have generally complied with the direct requirements of the acts, their intent has not been fully realized. Several factors have complicated the implementation of the ADR Acts, prompting agencies to take different strategic approaches to the application of ADR in programmatic areas. In general, agencies have acquiesced to the use of ADR in employment disputes, compromised on ADR use in contracting and procurement disputes, and avoided ADR use in civil enforcement disputes. Finally, this article evaluates progress toward impact evaluations of the ADR Acts and suggests directions for future research.     

Bringing Law to the Table: Legal Claims,Focal Points,and the Settlement of Territorial Disputes Since 1945

In this article, we argue that international law can help state leaders reach a settlement in territorial disputes by suggesting a focal point for negotiations. International law is more likely to serve as a focal point when the legal principles relevant to the dispute are clear and well established and when one of the states in the dispute has a stronger legal claim to disputed territory. When these two conditions are present, we expect the state with a legal advantage to push for and receive favorable terms of settlement. In our analysis of all negotiated settlements in territorial disputes from 1945 to 2000, we find strong support for the importance of international law in influencing the terms of settlements. States with a strong legal advantage are more likely to secure favorable terms, whereas states lacking a strong legal claim are more likely to receive unfavorable terms.     

Framing Contests and Policy Conflicts over Gas Pipelines

This paper compares and contrasts high‐conflict policy debates over the siting of three natural gas pipeline projects at different decision stages of the siting process. This paper draws on over 600 newspaper articles spanning 3 years, analyzed through Discourse Network Analysis. Drawing from the Advocacy Coalition Framework and Policy Conflict framework, this paper finds that actor framing of opposing policy beliefs involves more indirect than direct confrontations, with statements in the media waxing and waning over time. Opponents of the pipelines more often explicitly argue against pipelines, while also using a broad range of conceptual arguments, whereas proponents more often couch their arguments around the economic benefits of pipelines and use fewer conceptual frames overall. We also find evidence that opposing coalitions use similar framing across different decision contexts. This paper concludes with a commentary on the status and contributions of this paper to the study of policy conflicts and next steps in advancing similar research agendas.     

DISPUTING AND REGULATORY POLICY: THE EXAMPLE OF A STATE PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY

The literature on policy making has largely ignored the formulation and implementation of policy when governmental agencies process citizen disputes. In this essay we provide an initial exploration of the dimensions of agency policy making and policy implementation during dispute processing. Using a case study of dispute processing by a state public utilities regulatory agency, it appears that dispute processing contributes to evolutionary policy formulation and implementation by providing a context for the incremental adjustment and legitimation of continuing policies, by sponsoring negotiations leading to the serial adaption of existing policies to new circumstances, and by screening disputes and sharpening the issues in disputes so they are amenable to policy development through agency adjudicatory procedures. The findings of the case study suggest that processing of citizen complaints flowing into the "bottom" of an agency is potentially as important as the politics of the rule making and licensing procedural contexts in the conduct of regulatory policy.     

中德社会保障争议处理制度比较研究

中德两国在历史发展过程中逐步形成了各自独特的社会争议处理制度和模式。德国社会法院作为专门审理社会保障争议的特殊行政法院，体现了法律保护的缜密性和司法的高度专业性，适应了社会保障争议多，内容纷繁复杂，技术性、专业性强的现实需要。中国社会保障争议处理法律制度则处于形成发展阶段，因争议种类、主体不同而设置了不同的解决争议的机构，采用了不同的法律制度、程序和处理原则。本文以两国现行社会争议处理法律规定作为比较标准，按照社会争议处理的程序，分别从社会争议的范围界定、行政处理程序和制度、法院处理程序和制度三方面进行了比较研究，为中国社会保障争议处理制度提供借鉴和启示。     

Addressing Workers’ Freedom of Association and its Dispute Resolution in the Context of the Shari’ah

Freedom of association for trade union has been generally accepted as part of basic human rights in Islam. Freedom of association, which include the right to join and participate in trade union activities, can be susceptible to disputes between employers and employees as well as trade unions. Islam provides freedom of association in labour relations and also mechanisms to settle disputes pertaining to such freedom. Conciliation (sulh) and arbitration (tahkim) are both used methods in the inception of Islam, which have similarities with the modern sense. We shall discuss in this article the right to dispute resolution between employers and trade unions in the context of freedom of association in labour relations as based on Shari’ah law and using modern legal systems of Islamic countries such as Iran, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia as examples.     

On Political Brands: A Systematic Review of the Literature

The usage of the word brand crops up more frequently in politics. Specifically, in the study of political marketing, a burgeoning set of research has encircled various cases and conceptions. However, the brand concept seeks to harbor a variety of political events, just like a sponge soaking up different kinds of meaning in different kinds of surroundings. This tendency makes it hard to accumulate knowledge because demarcations between various brand perspectives in many cases are implicit, which can impede the clarity and precision in our studies. Against this backdrop, we identify a gap in the political brand literature: a study conducting an overall conceptual inquiry. As such, it is first argued that we need a thorough analysis of the foundation of the political brand concept to uncover the presuppositions underlying the different usages of the concept. Second, we carry out a systematic review of the brand literature on voters and parties. Third, on this ground, we propose a minimal definition and six subclassifications to the political brand concept. Finally, we illustrate the applicability of this conceptual groundwork in order to advance cumulative research in the field.     

The Unmet Potential of Interdisciplinary Research: Political Psychological Approaches to Voting and Public Opinion

Since its founding, political science has embraced interdisciplinary research. Yet there exist few, if any, systematic assessments of the success of these endeavors. We assess what is often seen as a paradigm of interdisciplinary collaboration: political psychological research on voting and public opinion. Surprisingly, we find little evidence of true interdisciplinary work; instead, we uncover misused concepts and scant evidence of conceptual or disciplinary integration. We conclude with suggestions for how to improve interdisciplinary research on voting and public opinion, and more generally.     

Policy Sciences: The State of the Discipline

This overview surveys the conceptual and practical development of the policy sciences as an independent field of academic studies. It outlines the conditions that led to the emergence of this field and its expansion over the years. In addition, the article portrays the range of substantive topics and methodologies of the policy sciences. Finally, it presents the logic that guided the structure of this symposium.     

Populism versus Democracy

This article provides a comparative conceptual analysis of the logic of populism and the logic of (constitutional) democracy. Populism is defined as a thin-centered ideology which advocates the sovereign rule of the people as a homogeneous body. The logic of this ideology is further developed in reference to the work of Carl Schmitt and is shown to generate all the characteristics typically ascribed to populism. The logic of democracy is analyzed on the basis of the work of Claude Lefort and defined as a regime in which the locus of power remains an empty place. This analysis replaces the widespread model of constitutional democracy as a paradoxical combination of a constitutional and a democratic pillar. This two-pillar model fails to appreciate the internal coherence and some of the main features of the (constitutional) democratic logic. Thereby, the two-pillar approach gives rise to an understanding of populism as continuous with the democratic promise of constitutional democracy. In contrast, our analysis explains populism as the closure of the empty place of democracy. This highlights the antagonistic discontinuity between the logic of populism and the logic of democracy.     

Managing Value Conflict in Public Policy

Policy issues are often characterized by conflicting values. Conventionally, students of public policy have conceptualized government's response to value conflicts as a matter of "balancing" competing goals, or striking trade-offs among values. In this paper we argue that this way of managing value conflicts represents only one possibility from a larger and more varied repertoire of strategies that draw from more complex models of practical reasoning. Policy actors do sometimes try to strike a "balance" among conflicting values, but they often avail themselves of other strategies as well: they cycle between values by emphasizing one value and then the other; they assign responsibilities for each value to different institutional structures; or they gather and consult a taxonomy of specific cases where similar conflicts arose. We argue that each of these strategies can be rational in some institutional contexts, and that conclusion challenges the view that policy values must always be treated as commensurable for rational policy choices to be made. Government responds to value conflict in ways that are more varied and changing than existing views of public policy imply.     

A two-dimensional analysis of seventy years of United Nations voting

International relations scholars frequently use roll-call votes on resolutions in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to measure similarity in the foreign policy ideologies of states. They then correlate those measures with consequential outcomes, such as development lending, trade, or military disputes. Dynamic ideal point models of UNGA voting thus far have been restricted to a single dimension. We examine the existence of a stable, important, and interpretable second dimension underlying contestation in the UN. From the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s, North–South conflict constitutes a stable second dimension, shaped heavily by the agenda-setting powers of the so-called Non-aligned Movement and the Group of 77. In the periods before and after, the second dimension neither is stable nor easily interpretable, though it is sometimes important. We suggest that in most applications, our original one-dimensional estimates have conceptual advantages with minimal losses in explanatory value. We illustrate that conclusion with an analysis that correlates ideal point changes with militarized interstate disputes. Yet, our findings also suggest that scholars interested in specific issues, such as the Middle East, human rights, or arms control, might benefit from more specifically tailored ideal point estimates.     

组织学习：管理学视角下的多元理论

就管理学领域中关于组织学习的理论进行了比较系统的研究.在彼得·帕沃夫斯基提出的五大类组织学习理论的分类基础上,进一步对每类理论下各种研究视角和研究思路进行了更为系统的规范分析.主要是对管理学中关于组织学习问题研究的各种理论的缘起、分化、进程及现状进行了系统的分析与评价.研究发现,由于学者们对组织学习的本质的看法、研究视角以及研究范式的不同,使得组织学习问题的研究呈现出理论多元化倾向.但近年来,一些从不同角度研究组织学习问题的理论,又正在趋向于新的整合.认为,关于组织学习问题的更为系统的看法,将建立在关于组织学习本质的多元视角而形成的综合观点基础之上.     

Think territory politically: the making and escalation of Beijing’s commitment to Sovereignize Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands

In popular narratives, intellectual and media analysts believe the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands dispute between China and Japan is a contestation for potential hydrocarbon reserves and other maritime rights which are per se divisible, but nationalism – particularly on China side – and relative power change between the two competing claimants make these territories increasingly indivisible and the dispute war-prone. Based on a review over People's Daily’s coverage of the disputes and other secondary information, this article reveals a different scenario by highlighting the political meanings of disputed territories for national cohesion and regime self-preservation. It finds, Beijing’s strategic moves in the disputes are influenced by its efforts at different occasions to de-legitimate Republic of China at Taiwan and defend its core interests – namely Taiwan and the "One-China" principle, to appease the patriotism in Hong Kong and facilitate the latter’s stable reversion to China in 1990s, and what is more, to rally popular support at home. In addition, Beijing’s Diaoyu/Senkaku strategy did not follow a carefully calculated path, but was mostly reactive to the contingencies and ultimately took shape through the incremental accumulation of previous policies and behaviours.