SELF‐REGULATION WITHIN THE REGULATORY STATE: TOWARDS A NEW REGULATORY PARADIGM?

An emerging feature of the modern regulatory state in Britain and elsewhere is the promotion of self‐regulation. This paper examines the relationship between the state and self‐regulation in the context of the challenge of meeting public interest objectives. It draws on research on the policy and practice of self‐regulation in recent years in Britain. The paper argues that the institutions, processes and mechanisms of the modern regulatory state and the ‘better regulation’ agenda in Britain, notably those that aim to foster transparency and accountability, can assist in the achievement of public interest objectives in self‐regulatory schemes. We conclude that a ‘new regulatory paradigm’ can be put forward which involves a form of regulatory ‘subsidiarity’, whereby the achievement of regulatory outcomes can be delegated downwards to the regulated organizations and self‐regulatory bodies while being offset by increasing public regulatory oversight based on systems of accountability and transparency.     

JUVENILITY AND PUNISHMENT: SENTENCING JUVENILES IN ADULT CRIMINAL COURT*

The study outlined in this article addressed a key limitation of prior research on the punishment of juveniles transferred to adult court by employing propensity score matching techniques to create more comparable samples of juvenile and young adult offenders. Using recent data from the Maryland State Commission on Criminal Sentencing Policy, it tested competing theoretical propositions about the salience of juvenile status in adult court. Findings indicate that even after rigorous statistical matching procedures, juvenile offenders are punished more severely than their young adult counterparts. We found no evidence that this “juvenile penalty” is exacerbated by an offender's race or gender, but it does vary starkly across offense type and mode of transfer, being driven primarily by drug crimes and discretionary waivers. The import of these findings is discussed as they relate to the future of juvenile justice policy regarding the continued use of juvenile transfer to adult court.     

Voter satisfaction and electoral systems: Does preferential voting in candidate-centred systems make a difference?

Abstract.  Over the years, many scholars have examined the relationship between electoral systems and measures of voter satisfaction with democracy. The tendency in these studies has been to explore the traditional Proportional Representation/non-Proportional-Representation dichotomy, assessing whether more proportional systems produce higher levels of satisfaction. This article examines another dimension of electoral system variation – namely the degree to which the ballot structure incorporates ordinal, or preferential features. Given that proponents of such systems extol their virtues as offering voters 'greater choice', it is interesting to explore how this actually plays with the voters. The article makes use of cross-national data from the comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) project to examine the relationship between preferential voting and levels of satisfaction with democracy.     

GENDER BIAS IN THE DISPOSITION OF JUVENILE COURT REFERRALS: THE EFFECTS OF TIME AND LOCATION*

Theory based on sex role traditionalism predicts a more punishing decision for female than for male offenders, while theory based on chivalry (paternalism) predicts greater leniency by the courts for female offenders. This paper tests these two models using a large sample (36,680) of juvenile court referrals in metropolitan, urban, and rural locations spanning a nine-year period. Nonparametric analysis of covariance is used to control for differences in offense, previous contact with the court system, and other background variables. Evidence of gender bias in dispositions was found. The patterns of bias across time, location, offense committed, and previous referral to the court system supports the persistence of chivalry and a decline in sex role traditionalism in court decisions. Greater punishment for girls than boys was found only for repeat offenders committing more serious offenses. Even in those cases, girls were more likely to be taken out of the home environment by the courts through a custody transfer while boys were more likely to be sent to a lock-up facility.