BritCrits: Subversion and submission,past, present and future

This article explores some of the intellectual influences which have shaped the development of Critical Legal Studies in Britain and the contexts in which these influences made themselves felt. It then considers which influences might or should steer Critical Legal Studies in the future. In terms of the past, specific attention is given to the influence of Marxism, Freud and Lacan, feminism, Foucault and Derrida, and recent genres of history-writing. As to the future, the question is asked whether Critical Legal Studies will engage constructively with recent developments in the life sciences and the philosophy of science, and, more generally, whether it will be able to surpass its established mooring in the philosophy of history. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Urban Change and Policing: Mass Private Property Re-considered

This article examines a key explanation for the growth of private policing in North America and Western Europe - the influential mass private property thesis (Shearing and Stenning 1981). The discussion of private policing in Western Europe still tends to be heavily influenced by theories developed in the North American context, theories which may be problematic in the contrasting legal, social and economic contexts of Western European nations. The development of more Eurocentric theories has to date been inhibited by the relative paucity of empirical data on the rise of private policing in European countries. Recent research in Britain (Jones and Newburn 1998b) has begun to address this problem, and to map out some important contrasts with the North American experience. By considering these contrasts, it is possible to identify some key areas for future research on private policing in European countries and thus provide a more contextually-grounded series of explanations for what is happening to policing.Joseph Rowntree Foundation Professor of Urban Social Policy     

Interdisciplinary problem-solving: Next steps in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, a 7.6-million-hectare region in the Central Rocky Mountains of the United States, is used to illustrate both the challenges and means to improve problem solving in the natural resources arena. The challenges in this world-famous region are contextual (rapid change, growth, pluralism, complexity, state/federal conflicts, and lack of a common perspective), institutional (multiple organizations with overlapping authority and control and disparate mandates, uneven leadership, lack of creativity in problem solving, and resistance to change), and human (diverse perspectives and values and epistemological limitations). To overcome these challenges, an interdisciplinary method that integrates knowledge to improve policy making is briefly described. It provides a framework with a comprehensive set of categories to use in investigating and analyzing problems and inventing alternatives for substantive, process, and structural improvements. Five programs or interventions, all of which are based on this method, are suggested to address the challenges facing Greater Yellowstone: (1) workshops for capacity building, (2) leadership, staff development, and student internships, (3) case analyses and appraisals for policy learning, (4) problem-solving exercises and decision seminars, and (5) prototyping exercises to improve interdisciplinary and interagency coordination. These are described, examples given, and benefits outlined.     

Outsourcing – Financial Services Authority report on offshoring

This article evaluates the 2005 Financial Services Authority report into offshore outsourcing with specific reference to experience in India. It concludes that, on the whole, the findings are positive and that UK business methods appear to transfer well.     

Sequential torts and bilateral harm

This paper analyzes care incentives of individuals in a bilateral-harm setting if care choices are sequential. We find that the efficient outcome is not guaranteed under any liability rule considered, irrespective of whether information is perfect or imperfect. Furthermore, it is no longer possible to generally rank liability rules according to their induced social costs. These findings are in strong contrast to the sequential-torts setting in which harm is unilateral.     

Why do only some people who support parties actually join them? Evidence from Britain

What makes people join a political party is one of the most commonly studied questions in research on party members. Nearly all this research, however, is based on talking to people who have actually joined parties. This article simultaneously analyses surveys of members of political parties in Britain and surveys of non-member supporters of those same parties. This uniquely enables us to model the decision to join parties. The results suggest that most of the elements that constitute the influential ‘General Incentives Model’ are significant. But it also reveals that, while party supporters imagine that selective benefits, social norms and opposing rival parties’ policies are key factors in members’ decisions to join a party, those who actually do so are more likely to say they are motivated by attachments to their party’s values, policies and leaders, as well as by an altruistic desire to support democracy more generally.