Parliamentary Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation: Lessons from Comparative Experience

Recent years have seen an increase in the use of delegated legislation to implement major policy decisions in the UK. This has exacerbated the longstanding criticism that Westminster lacks sufficiently robust procedures for parliamentary scrutiny of delegated legislation. However, the UK is not the only country to use delegated legislation, or to face the challenge of ensuring it receives adequate parliamentary scrutiny. This article therefore places the UK system in wider context by comparing it to six other national parliaments. We highlight one comparative strength of the UK system, two weaknesses it shares with the other six cases, and one way in which the UK might learn lessons from elsewhere. Overall, our evidence suggests that no one country offers a clear template for more rigorous parliamentary scrutiny of delegated legislation. Successful reform of the UK's system is likely to require creative procedural innovation.     

Societal Actors Shape Collective Identities of Minorities: Procedural Fairness Climate Effects on Identification,Subjective Well-Being and Psychological Health

In the present studies, we aimed to show that the perceived procedural fairness of societal actors’ multicultural decisions promotes ethnic minority members’ societal identification. These enhanced identification levels, in turn, contribute to better psychological health and well-being. Firstly, a vignette study in a sample of African Americans explored the effect of procedural fairness climate on identification. The second and third studies used self-report questionnaires. Study 2 consisted of a sample of sojourners in a university context, Study 3 analyzed online data through an African American sample. The studies provided evidence for the effect of procedural fairness climate on increased societal identification, which in turn mediates the fairness effect on increased well-being and psychological health. Societal actors can use procedural fairness to increase well-being when making decisions that involve ethnic minorities.

     

The Reform of Skill Formation in Russia: Regional Responses

Abstract

Effective systems of vocational education are crucial to economic and social development. However, the coordination of labour market demand and the supply of skill requires either well-functioning labour market institutions or institutionally embedded strategic partnerships among government, labour and employers. In particular, the transplantation of German-style dual education methods to a different environment poses significant institutional dilemmas. Russia presents a useful case for examining the conditions under which such arrangements can be established. Based on a series of interviews in six Russian regions and a set of case histories, we seek to draw testable hypotheses that can be applied to other settings.     

The erosion of the administrative state under President Trump: Citizens' pushback against individual and institutional racism

President Trump encouraged bad state actors within the administrative state to contribute to inequities for civilians. We highlight how Trump's actions and rhetoric led to increased individual, institutional, and systemic racism and violence. As a response to this increased violence and rhetoric, we discuss the role civilians (including professional athletes) played in engaging in protests and the 2020 election. Given that more individuals voted in that election cycle, we emphasize the importance for public administration to adapt, evolve, and engage with new actors concerned with administrative action or inaction.     

Ambivalence,Political Consensus and Conditionality: Support for Whistleblowing among Danish Employees

Whistleblower research is understandably focused around the protagonists of the practice. We still know surprisingly little about how whistleblowing is perceived in the wider population. Drawing on a representative survey of Danish employees (N = 1,709), this paper analyses how whistleblower public support is distributed along variables such as political preference, political interest and job type, and tests whether it is conditional on whistleblower motivation and type of wrongdoing. The paper finds that public support is strong but also ambivalent. It shows that support is evenly distributed along party preference. It also demonstrates that support is not uniform but conditional on the characteristics of the whistleblower situation. These insights are important for both social and political reasons in the present situation where whistleblowing seems to be on the rise. From a policy perspective, it offers policymakers an important evidence‐based navigation tool in devising whistleblower legislation.     

Trust and verification: balancing agency and stewardship theory in the governance of agencies

ABSTRACT

Many government services are delivered by (partially) autonomous agencies. Governments need effective measures for contracting, steering, and monitoring agencies and to balance control and trust. In the literature, control-based agency theory and trust-based stewardship theory have often been portrayed as alternative and competing approaches. In empirical studies in public administration, however, these approaches often find mixed and contradictory results. Against this background, this article analyzes how a combination of trust- and control-based approaches, explicitly founded on agency and stewardship theory, can help explain when participants find a given governance regime to be most satisfactory. A survey instrument is developed which, for the first time, fully measures the rich concept of stewardship theory in conjunction with agency theory. The analysis of the governance of Dutch agencies shows that government indeed combines governance solutions from both theoretical camps and illuminates under which conditions this combination is most satisfactory.     

Feedback on Forensic Mental Health Assessments in a Juvenile Court Clinic Certification Program

Public-sector mental health systems have set forth specialized practice competencies for forensic mental health clinicians conducting court-ordered examinations. This study examined a sample of feedback letters to clinicians who submitted mid-training and final reports for review as part of the requirements for certification as a juvenile court clinician. The most common feedback points were insufficient/irrelevant historical data, problems with clarity/organization of the report, problems with interview/mental status examination, and problems with competency to stand trial data/opinions. Clinicians had fewer deficiencies in their final report compared to their mid-training report, supporting the perspective that forensic training and supervision is associated with better quality reports.     

The political economy of labor market deregulation during IMF interventions

This study examines the relationship between policy interventions by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and de jure labor rights. Combining two novel data sets with unprecedented country-year coverage – leximetric data on labor laws and disaggregated data on IMF conditionality – our analysis of up to 70 developing countries from 1980 to 2014 demonstrates that IMF-mandated labor market policy measures significantly reduce both individual and collective labor rights. Once we control for the effect of labor market policy measures, however, we find that collective labor rights increase in the wake of IMF programs. We argue that this result is explained by the impact of union pressure on governments which, in such a context, are imbued with the policy space to respond to domestic interest groups. The study has broader theoretical implications as to when international organizations are effective in constraining governments’ choices.     

Herod the Great and the Iudicium Domesticum: Legal Pluralism to Die For

The central question under consideration in this article is whether the various trials to which Herod, the well-known king of Judaea, subjected family members qualify as instances of the Roman iudicium domesticum. Modern debate among legal historians has been shaped by the views of two scholars in particular, Wolfgang Kunkel, who argues that one of them so qualifies, and Alfredo Mordechai Rabello, who contends that the rest do not, asserting that Herod simply followed the rules and procedures associated with a Hellenistic court. For the first time in modern scholarship, this article scrutinizes in detail all six examples of such trials. By itself, the evidence, though relatively copious, does not permit us to resolve this dispute as clearly and unambiguously as we would like. Much depends, for example, on precisely how one wishes to define the institution in question. Recent scholarly advances in the area of legal pluralism, however, point in the direction of a solution that does justice to both sides of this debate, as well as, perhaps, to Herod himself.