Piercing the surface: A mechanical analysis of stabbing with household tools

Estimating the applied power during a stabbing incident, or estimating the minimal force necessary to penetrate the body with a certain weapon is a challenging task in forensic practice. A thorough forensic evaluation of stabbing forces needs objective numerical experimental data. Stabbing tests of 12 different weapons – including knives, a pair of scissors, a fork, screwdrivers, a rasp, a corkscrew, and a utility knife blade – were performed with a Mecmesin MultiTest-dV material tester on pork loin and ballistic gel to estimate the stabbing forces and dynamics. Penetration force (F_p) and maximal force (F_max) were recorded, and the registered force curves were analyzed. F_max was 159.8–212.07 Newton (N), 30.56–30.58 N, 168.9–185.48 N for various knives; 171.39–190.43 N for the pair of scissors, 233.6 N for the fork; 532.65–562.65 N, 370.31–367.19 N and 314.51–432.89 N for various screwdrivers, 44.14–56.62 N for utility knife during pork loin stabbing. The butter knife, corkscrew and rasp were not able to penetrate the pork loin, and the curved fork bent during stabbing. The results prove that weapon characteristics greatly influence the force necessary for penetration. Maximal stabbing force depends mostly on tip sharpness, and the force sharply decreases after penetration occurs, which indicates that edge sharpness is not as important as tip characteristics during stabbing perpendicular to skin surface. The penetration force during stabbing with a pair of scissors is comparable to the penetration force of knives. Stabbing with screwdrivers generally needs larger force than average knives but depends greatly on screwdriver size.     

Cross-national convergence in times of crisis? Integration policies before,during and after the refugee crisis

This article analyses if, how and why Scandinavian integration policies converged as a result of the refugee crisis in 2015, studying policies of permanent residence, citizenship, family reunification and access to social benefits. The analysis of policy processes finds that a logic of regulatory competition led to goal convergence, as all three countries explicitly adapted their policies relative to other countries’ policies. Nonetheless, when comparing the configuration of policy instruments and their settings, the cross-national gap persists as all three countries took restrictive steps, thus showing traits of path dependency. The conclusion discusses a severe challenge in the current policy convergence debate in the integration literature: how an insufficient level of precision (1) concerning different dimensions of the policies and (2) concerning how to assess convergence could lead to inaccurate and even opposite conclusions when interpreting empirical analyses.     

Central coercion or local autonomy? A comparative analysis of policy instrument choice in refugee settlement policies

Although existing literature on central–local governance includes comprehensive studies on how constitutional and financial frameworks regulate local government autonomy, this study seeks explanations for the introduction or absence of central coercion within these frameworks. The analysis studies six processes of policy instrument choice with different outcomes in Norway, Denmark and Sweden in the field of refugee settlement. It finds that a uniform perception of crisis and political compromises make political parties abandon their political–ideological standpoints relating to central–local governance. Additionally, the success and failure of political strategies of obfuscation and of dividing the opposition help to explain the different outcomes. The study reveals differences in the political salience of central–local governance in three countries that have systematically been categorised in the same groups in central–local studies. Consequently, more studies on how and why local autonomy is regulated within national frameworks are necessary to understand the actual autonomy that local governments enjoy.     

Policy preferences and ministerial structures: Immigrant integration governance in Western Europe, 1997–2017

This article tests an often‐stated assumption in the “machinery of government” literature: that government parties’ issue and policy preferences affect the ministerial structure. Using a new Dataset on Immigrant Integration Governance (DIIG) that documents the ministerial structure of immigrant integration in 16 Western European countries during 1997–2017, the analysis finds that divergence and change characterize the ministerial structure. The analysis finds that right‐oriented governments are more inclined to couple integration with immigration and justice than are left‐oriented governments, indicating different policy preferences. However, it does not find that governments with radical parties are more inclined to signal “integration” in ministerial titles. The study's comparative approach challenges the generalizability of existing knowledge on drivers of ministerial changes. Additionally, it fills a gap in current immigrant integration literature: the study of the horizontal governance structure.