Federalism, Political Structure, and Public Policy in the United States and Canada

Two of the three large countries on the North American continent—the United States and Canada—share a number of similarities that often make it difficult for the untrained observer to differentiate between the two nations. On the surface, the two are structured similarly as federal systems that, by definition, exhibit shared power between the national government and provincial or state political entities.Although there are other important social and economic characteristics of the two countries that help explain differences in policy processes and outcomes, it is the contention of this article that one gets the clearest sense of what Elazar has called thinking federal by utilizing an analytical approach that joins questions related to federalism with some conceptual frameworks of the public policy field. Two frameworks undergird the argument in this article—the Lowi typology of different types of policies and Deil Wright's typology of different models that describe the American inter-governmental system.In both countries, policies must be sensitive to the greater interdependencies between units of government as well as to linkages between policy areas. The mechanisms or instrumentalities for dealing with policy issues are intrinsically complex. It is also clear that the intergovernmental networks that exist in both the U.S. and Canada are composed of an array of actors. The differing political structures of the systems do impact the types of intergovernmental policies that have emerged in the two countries. The executive dominance so imbedded in Canadian governments has contributed to their ability to adopt and implement certain controversial redistributive policies, such as a national health insurance program. By contrast, the fragmentation of the U.S. system makes redistributive policies more difficult.     

The structure of foreign policy attitudes in transatlantic perspective: Comparing the United States,United Kingdom,France and Germany

While public opinion about foreign policy has been studied extensively in the United States, there is less systematic research of foreign policy opinions in other countries. Given that public opinion about international affairs affects who gets elected in democracies and then constrains the foreign policies available to leaders once elected, both comparative politics and international relations scholarship benefit from more systematic investigation of foreign policy attitudes outside the United States. Using new data, this article presents a common set of core constructs structuring both American and European attitudes about foreign policy. Surveys conducted in four countries (the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany) provide an expanded set of foreign policy‐related survey items that are analysed using exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM). Measurement equivalence is specifically tested and a common four‐factor structure that fits the data in all four countries is found. Consequently, valid, direct comparisons of the foreign policy preferences of four world powers are made. In the process, the four‐factor model confirms and expands previous work on the structure of foreign policy attitudes. The article also demonstrates the capability of ESEM in testing the dimensionality and cross‐national equivalence of social science concepts.     

美国多元文化教育的理论困境与转向

20世纪90年代以来,在全球化与全球化教育、新保守主义和新自由主义等思潮的冲击下,美国的多元文化教育理论进入反思和深化阶段,并且开始从"民族国家多元文化教育"向"全球社会多元文化教育"转向,在新的发展路径中,多元文化教育仍然面临着如何调适国家、民族利益与全世界共同利益,以及文化诉求、经济诉求与政治诉求的复杂关系。     

Mind the (Mobilization) Gap: Comparing Climate Activism in the United States and European Union

The barriers to concerted political action on climate change mitigation are steep, especially in multilevel systems where power is diffused and authority contested. This article seeks to explain how mobilization—galvanizing resources and people to participate actively—occurs in complex multilevel systems. It compares two different polities—the United States and the European Union—to tease out the key features of multilevel systems and how they affect climate activism and mobilization. To capture this dynamic, it proposes a three‐staged model of mobilization: awareness building, alliance building, and network creation. The latter stage features “mobilization networks”—stakeholder networks able to transcend levels and institutional inertia and steer polities toward particular climate goals. The article demonstrates how each stage of mobilization is highly contingent on stakeholders' ability to exploit—or at least navigate—multilevel institutional barriers.     

Public Attitudes toward Climate Science and Climate Policy in Federal Systems: Canada and the United States Compared1

Multilevel governance poses several challenges for the politics of climate change. On the one hand, the unequal distribution of power and interests can serve as a barrier to implementing coherent policy at a federal level. On the other, these features also enable policy leadership among sub‐federal units. In the context of wide variation in climate policy at both national and sub‐federal levels in Canada and in the United States, this paper utilizes an original data set to examine public attitudes and perceptions toward climate science and climate change policy in two federal systems. Drawing on national and provincial/state level data from telephone surveys administered in the United States and in Canada, the paper provides insight into where the public stands on the climate change issue in two of the most carbon‐intensive federal systems in the world. The paper includes the first directly comparable public opinion data on how Canadians and Americans form their opinions regarding climate matters and provides insight into the preferences of these two populations regarding climate policies at both the national and sub‐federal levels. Key findings are examined in the context of growing policy experiments at the sub‐federal level in both countries and limited national level progress in the adoption of climate change legislation.     

Education and economic growth in the United States: cross-national applications for an intra-national path analysis

Do the leading predictors of economic growth found in the cross-national research have a capacity to predict economic growth at the state level in the United States (US)? Are the effects of education spending on economic growth underestimated because research fails to examine the indirect effects of spending on economic growth? This article presents the findings from a study investigating the relationship between education and economic growth in US states while controlling for the effects of the leading predictors of economic growth from the cross-national research. It also utilizes a path model to examine direct and indirect relationships between education spending and economic growth measured as per capita income growth. The results indicate that spending on higher education and highway expenditures demonstrate a positive association with growth in per capita income, while K12 (kindergarten through 12th grade) spending and K12 pupil–teacher ratios demonstrate a negative association with income growth from 1988 to 2005. Moreover, K12 spending and population growth indirectly affect income growth through their relationship with K12 pupil–teacher ratios, and spending on higher education indirectly affects income growth through college attainment rates. Overall, all but one variable from the cross-national research demonstrates a significant direct or indirect relationship with income growth during at least one time-period investigated. Treating K12 pupil–teacher ratios and college attainment as mediating variables also enhances our understanding of the dynamics that explain growth in per capita income at the sub-national level in the US. However, some unexpected findings emerge when the data are analyzed on the basis of two eight-year sub-periods.     

Advanced Metering Infrastructure Deployment in the United States: The Impact of Polycentric Governance and Contextual Changes

Advanced metering infrastructure provides the first building block in smart grids by empowering customers and utilities with real‐time information regarding energy use. It is a key element in the U.S. government's push for electric grid modernization. Using a panel dataset for 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia over the years 2007–2012, we evaluate the impacts of a polycentric governance system and socioeconomic contexts on states' performance in smart metering deployment. We find that the advanced metering technological change in the United States has been exclusively created by the interdependencies and interactions between different layers of government. High‐tech industry is the only socioeconomic factor that has a negative impact on smart meter deployment, whereas other factors, such as pressures from energy consumers and environmental groups, and electric grid conditions, have negligible impacts.     

Public Support for Climate Change Policy: Consistency in the Influence of Values and Attitudes Over Time and Across Specific Policy Alternatives

This study examines the factors that explain public preferences for a set of climate change policy alternatives. While scholarly work indicates a relationship between attitudes and values on views toward specific issues, the literature often examines general support for issues rather than specific policy proposals. Consequently, it is unclear the extent to which these attitudes and values affect specific policy considerations. This project examines public support for five climate change policy options in two national surveys taken three years apart. The empirical analysis reveals that time is a factor and that those who are liberal, have strong ecological values, report greater concern for climate change, and trust experts are consistently more supportive of the climate policy options considered here. The results shed new light on the nuanced views of the American public toward climate change.     

Stem Cell Research and Technology in Iran—Window of Opportunity in the Midst of International Tension

This paper aims to explain how the key characteristics of “stem cell research” as an emerging technology facilitate the strategy of an Iranian organization, namely, “the Royan Institute” to learn by interaction and to generate knowledge. It argues that the Royan could take advantage of the window of opportunity that stem cell research and technology had temporarily opened up but its endeavors are now being hampered by unfavorable international factors and weak domestic infrastructure. The article substantiates the case by giving an objective account of networking and gatekeeping in the process of learning/innovation at the Royan and concludes by questioning the continuity of the actual learning strategy in order to sustain the Royan's knowledge production.