Political and public acceptability of congestion pricing: Ideology and self‐interest

Studies of the “stated preferences” of households generally report public and political opposition by urban commuters to congestion pricing. It is thought that this opposition inhibits or precludes tolls and pricing systems that would enhance efficiency in the use of scarce roadways. This paper analyzes the only case in which road pricing was decided by a citizen referendum on the basis of experience with a specific pricing system. The city of Stockholm introduced a toll system for seven months in 2006, after which citizens voted on its permanent adoption. We match precinct voting records to resident commute times and costs by traffic zone, and we analyze patterns of voting in response to economic and political incentives. We document political and ideological incentives for citizen choice, but we also find that the pattern of time savings and incremental costs exerts a powerful influence on voting behavior. In this instance, at least, citizen voters behave as if they value commute time highly. When they have experienced first‐hand the out‐of‐pocket costs and time savings of a specific pricing scheme, they are prepared to adopt freely policies that reduce congestion on urban motorways. © 2010 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

Legal Pluralism,Gendered Discourses,and Hybridity in Land‐titling Practices in Cambodia

This article describes and analyses the tensions, ambivalence, and hybridity that prevail in the nexus between discourses of gender and the legal pluralism of the new, formalized, and customary ways of handling land titles. Based on empirical research in Cambodia, it reveals a number of mechanisms, challenges, and inconsistencies in the practice of land‐titling. Foremost, the practice of titling seems to be highly informed by local discourses of marriage, family, gender, and age, which all affect to whom land is assigned; this leaves a hybrid construction in the nexus between statutory law and customary practices. The article departs from this observation and adds three contributions – on a theoretical level – to existing research: by incorporating the dimensions of discourse analysis and legal hybridity, by linking the concept of legal pluralism to the process of hybridization, and by introducing the notion of hybridity of implementation as a supplement to hybridity of law.     

Lawfulness of a randomised trial of the new community treatment order regime for England and Wales

This article debates and defends the lawfulness of a randomised controlled trial of compulsory outpatient treatment under the mental health legislation for England and Wales. The trial is designed to compare the outcomes for patients of their treatment under the new Community Treatment Order (CTO) regime with their treatment under the older leave scheme - the two main forms of compulsory care in the community now authorised by the revised Mental Health Act 1983. The methods for the trial involve the random allocation of some patients between the two schemes, when they are considered by their Responsible Clinicians to be eligible for some form of compulsory outpatient care. The main question we consider is the lawfulness of that aspect of the methods. Can a carefully selected group of patients be allocated at random between the two regimes to permit an evaluation to proceed? Or would that involve some departure from the decision-making criteria specified by law? We argue that a group of patients can be identified who meet - simultaneously - the tests for treatment under both the CTO and the leave schemes. Those patients could then be allocated lawfully to treatment under either scheme. This opens the door, we argue, to their random allocation between the two schemes for the purposes of the research. In reaching this conclusion, we explain the methods and aims of the trial and closely compare the respective features of the leave and CTO regimes.     

‘Changing teams’: a participant perspective on citizenship ceremonies

Several European countries of immigration have recently introduced citizenship ceremonies on either a mandatory or voluntary basis. Yet, little is known about how the target group for such ceremonies experiences them, and to what extent citizenship ceremonies achieve their goals of contributing to a greater sense of belonging. In this article, we analyse interviews with more than 50 newly naturalised Norwegian citizens about their reasons to attend or to not attend the voluntary ceremony in Norway. We find little resistance to the idea of citizenship ceremonies. For some participants, the ceremony seems to have great emotional value; the majority, however, chooses not to participate.     

Family caregivers: a shadow workforce in the geriatric health care system?

Based on two years of fieldwork, conducted between March 2003 and March 2005 in the health care industry of the northeastern United States, this study shows that the work of family caregivers of elders goes far beyond previously recognized care in the home to acknowledge care inside health care facilities and in conjunction with community services. It reveals that family caregivers--untrained, undersupported, and unseen--constitute a "shadow workforce," acting as geriatric case managers, medical record keepers, paramedics, and patient advocates to fill dangerous gaps in a system that is uncoordinated, fragmented, bureaucratic, and often depersonalized. Detailed examination of what family caregivers actually do in traversing multiple domains reveals the extent of their contribution to and the weaknesses in the present geriatric health care system. It suggests that the experiences of family caregivers must be central to the creation of new policies and a more coordinated system that uses the complex work of family caregivers by providing the training and support that they need.     

Crack as Proxy: Aggressive Federal Drug Prosecutions and the Production of Black–White Racial Inequality

In this article, we empirically examine jurisdictional variations in federal crack prosecutions to measure whether aggressive crack prosecutorial practices are associated with racial inequality in federal caseload characteristics and outcomes. Building on theories that address the production of inequality in institutional settings, we hypothesize that U.S. Attorneys’ offices that are more proactive in charging defendants with crack, relative to other kinds of drugs, and relative to case strength and seriousness, will demonstrate higher rates of black–white racial inequality in case outcomes across the entire criminal caseload. Consistent with theories of institutional racism, our findings demonstrate that aggressive crack prosecutions at the district level are a strong predictor of black–white inequality in conviction rates across the entire criminal caseload, and a much more modest predictor of inequality in final sentence outcomes. We conclude by discussing the importance of organizational‐level empirical analyses for more effectively uncovering the conditions under which inequality can and does flourish in legal settings, and suggest possible future lines of inquiry along these lines.     

Death Qualification in Black and White: Racialized Decision Making and Death‐Qualified Juries

Death qualification has been shown to have a number of biasing effects that appear to undermine a capital defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a fair jury. Attitudes toward the death penalty have shifted modestly but consistently over the last several decades in ways that may have changed the overall impact of death qualification. Specifically, the very large gap between black and white Americans' current support for capital punishment raises the question of whether death qualification procedures disproportionately exclude African Americans from capital jury participation. In order to examine this possibility, we conducted two countywide death penalty attitude surveys in the California county that has the highest percentage of African American residents in the state. Results show that death qualification continues to have a number of serious biasing effects—including disproportionately excluding death penalty opponents—which result in the significant underrepresentation of African Americans. This creates a death‐qualified jury pool with the potential to be significantly more likely to ignore and even misuse mitigating factors and to rely more heavily on aggravating factors in their death penalty decision making. The implications of these findings for the fair administration of capital punishment are discussed.     

Moral judgement,cognitive distortions and empathy in incarcerated delinquent and community control adolescents

Abstract

Immature moral judgements, cognitive distortions and low empathy could contribute to criminal offending and are often targeted in interventions aimed at reducing risk of recidivism. We compared 58 delinquent 13–18-year-olds, incarcerated in youth homes in Sweden (29 males, 29 females) with 58 (29 males, 29 females) community control adolescents individually matched on age, gender, ethnicity and socio-economic position. Self-report questionnaires examined moral judgement, cognitive distortions, and empathy. Delinquent adolescents exhibited less mature moral judgements and more cognitive distortions than control adolescents. However, no association between delinquency status and self-reported empathy was found. In addition, girls reported more mature moral judgements, less cognitive distortions and more empathy than boys did. Moral judgement and empathy were positively correlated and both measures were negatively correlated with cognitive distortions. Our data support the idea that moral judgement and cognitive distortions are important treatment targets for juvenile delinquents, whereas empathy may be less meaningful to address directly.     

Internal reliability and construct validity of the Novaco Anger Scale-1998-S in a sample of violent prison inmates in Sweden

Abstract

In this study, the internal reliability and construct validity of the recently adapted Swedish version of the Novaco Anger Scale (NAS-1998-S; Lindqvist, Dåderman, & Hellström, Social Behavior and Personality, 8, 773–788, 2003), as well as its scale correlations with demographic and criminality variables, were investigated. Construct validity was established by assessing the correlation pattern of the scales of NAS-1998-S with concurrent scales of similar and distinct constructs. Ninety-five male violent prisoners, ranging in age from 18 to 67 years, participated. The results demonstrated good internal reliability, consistent intrascale relationships, and appropriate construct validity of NAS-1998-S. The number of previous convictions had a moderate negative relationship with the capacity of control. Age and education correlated negatively with the NAS-1998-S scales, except Regulation. In addition to psychometric issues, the results were discussed from a clinical perspective on the offender population.     

Gender effects in eyewitness accounts of a violent crime

Abstract

This research examined two aspects of gender effects in eyewitness accounts: whether there are gender differences in memory for a violent crime and how gender of perpetrator/victim affect witnesses' evaluations of perpetrator/victim behavior. Eighty male and 84 female university students saw a film showing a simulated manslaughter with either a male or female perpetrator stabbing a male or female victim. A female advantage was found in overall memory of the crime, and both a male perpetrator and a male victim were assigned more culpability than their female counterparts. It is suggested that females may have more elaborated categories for person information than males, which should facilitate female accuracy in person memory. Alternatively, the present findings may reflect a more general female advantage in episodic memory performance. Stereotype assimilation is suggested to account for the differential evaluations of a male and female perpetrator/victim.