'Talking to Fishers': A Response to Kesteven

Geoffrey Kesteven's 'Talking to Fishers' appeared in the March 1996 issue of AJPA 55(1). Here, Nick Rayns takes issue with Dr Kesteven's observations on the South East Fishery Workshop, held at Bateman's Bay in September 1994. Dr Kesteven's rejoinder follows this response.     

Professionalism and the Millbank Tendency: A Response to Webb and Fisher

This short response examines critically both the analysis and data provided in the Webb and Fisher article concerning the trends towards professionalisation. It calls for a more thorough understanding of the idea of professionalisation and a more careful use of the word when applied to particular organisational contexts.     

Crises and Paradigm Shift: A Response to Critics

International financial and regulatory reform continues in 2014, building upon the burst of crisis‐induced institutional and regulatory reforms begun in 2008. In particular, the Financial Stability Board is an element and an agent of reform and this paradigm shift. The leap taken was and remains a predominantly technocratic central banking macroprudential narrative and process, controlled by this elite epistemic community. As the new regulatory normal evolves in 2014, it now does so at a slower pace, as the crisis appears to abate. Today elements of paradigm defence, maintenance and resilience are seen.     

From Neoliberalism to Pluralism: A Response to Mulheirn and Jacobs

This essay puts into context the debate between Michael Jacobs and Ian Mulheirn, exploring the theories and themes underpinning their arguments, published in issue 84 1 of the Political Quarterly. It discusses, firstly, the roots of Mulheirn's approach in European neoliberalism and, secondly, the roots of Jacobs' approach in a range of sources currently contending for authority over debates within the Labour party. These include themes drawn, broadly, from Polanyi, Keynes, Schumpeter and Schumacher. In a conclusion the article makes the case for a ‘pluralistic’ to the organisation of political and economic power in the UK.     

Defending the Articles of Conferation: A Response to Sobel

A fundamental mystery of the Articles of Confederation is why the statescontributed sizeable resources to the confederation government when theywere allegedly caught in a collective action problem. In a recent article,Russel Sobel denies the collective action problem and suggests that ourresearch on the incentive structure of the confederation contradicts theevidence. This note clarifies both of our arguments, introduces the typeof evidence that would determine whether national public goods weresub-optimally supplied, and explains why states contributed in a mannerthat is consistent with the evidence and with a deficient institutionaldesign.     

Structuring the Debate on Consolidation: A Response to Leland and Thurmaier

In their essay "When Efficiency Is Unbelievable: Normative Lessons from 30 Years of City–County Consolidations," published in the July/August 2005 issue of PAR , Leland and Thurmaier make an important contribution to understanding how city–county consolidation occurs. They revise the widely accepted Rosenbaum and Kammerer model of consolidation and posit that "strong arguments" based on economic development, especially in the absence of organized opposition, led to victory for consolidation advocates. In this response, we argue that efforts to identify a set of arguments or charter provisions that will lead to successful consolidation are misguided. The real story in consolidation campaigns is how participants use heresthetical arguments in an effort to turn their opponents into political losers. What makes arguments strong or weak is not their substantive policy focus, but how they are structured.     

Cultural Pluralism: A Response to Seglow's Critique

I examine Seglow's critique (Politics 17(3) 1997) of my assessment of Parekh's theory of operative public values (Politics 16(3) 1996). This examination has four main stages: (a) the rejection of crucial aspects of Seglow's interpretation of my argument, (b) the rejection of his claim that my argument is logically committed to certain other specific positions which I do not support, (c) the rejection of his claim that I my argumentative strategies are misleading, (d) the consideration of possible similarities and disagreements between our respective positive positions on cultural pluralism.     

Politics and Mass Media: A Response to John Street

This short article is a response to an overview of research on media-political relations written by John Street and published in the Political Studies Review in 2005. The usefulness of the exercise is recognised but issue is taken both with the organising concepts of Street's account and the way he excludes a significant body of research from his assessment, raising questions about his characterisation of the field under scrutiny. A case is made for assessing the tensions and the varieties of work in this broad area by the use of other categories, including the play-off between media-centric and politics-centric accounts, the continuing strand of work informed by critical theory and the sheer variety of the topics upon which researchers have chosen to focus as a way into a broader agenda. The importance of work engaging with issues at an international level is emphasised together with the value of new comparative studies. In conclusion, the state of the area is judged more positively than in Street's assessment. Questions of power are argued to be the principal point at issue in comparing research approaches and the need for further explicitness and clarity here is noted.     

Labour and the Scottish National Party: the Triumph of Continuity in a Changing Scotland

Scotland's party system appears on the verge of major change with the Scottish National Party poised to supplant the Labour party as the dominant force. Under a charismatic leader, the SNP is using populist means to try and secure independence. However, real change appears elusive even if constitutional arrangements are altered further. The SNP distrusts democratic participation and is keen to rule through mobilised interests groups and the civil‐service, strengthening the corporatist style of government characterising Scotland for centuries. Labour might avoid long‐term marginalisation, if it was to embrace an agenda based on strong democratic citizenship and a broad nationalism which emphasises a continuing Union in which the benefits of devolution are clearly directed towards individual citizens as well as elite groups