Nationale und europäische Anforderungen an Umweltbeiträge in der Verkehrsplanung

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Managing the hollow state

Beginning in the mid-1970s and continuing through the 1980s and into the early 1990s governments in the industrialized democracies have brought about tremendous changes in their own State structures and in the relationship between the State and society. In the United States we refer to the “Reagan revolution,” but the changes have been no less profound in other countries, including those such as France and Sweden with very large and well-respected bureaucracies. While these changes in the nature of government are well-known and well-documented, their implications for the implementation and management of the public sector have not been explored adequately, especially in comparative context.⁽¹⁾ To the extent that the implications have been discussed it has been primarily in the context of the “new managerialism” but the changes really extend much more deeply into the process of governing and the manner in which the State relates to society.

This paper will be a step in the direction of more fully ramifying the nature of the changes using the phrase “the hollow state” to capture the changes that have occurred. The paper will attempt to look at what has been happening in government, as well as the implications for the future of the State, and for “statecraft” in contemporary democracies. That statecraft, by which the policy initiatives of government are linked to the lives of citizens, must continue to be a central element in the design of governments, but often has been ignored in the rush to reach fashionable political goals. If government is to continue to be a positive force in the future, then that craft must be fostered and mobilized rather than ignored with contempt.     

Returning to the record: Originalism and the evolution of public assistance policy

This article clearly demonstrates that qualitative techniques are indispensable for gaining a more comprehensive understanding of public assistance policy's evolution. Rather than reinforcing the generally accepted view that Southern Members of Congress were steadfastly opposed to an expansion of central government power and influence, an analysis of the Congressional Record reveals that representatives from the South often were ardent advocates of an expanded federal role. Qualitative analysis also challenges the prevailing view that the national government is the primary instigator of policies which enhance federal power. During the period under study, all increases in federal match rates for public assistance, except one, emanated from Members of Congress who were attempting to increase the flow of federal funds to their states. In view of the divergence between generally accepted views and the findings produced by qualitative analysis, it is clear that qualitative methods are an invaluable tool in theory construction and highlighting promising avenues of inquiry.     

On the Psychology of the Advantaged: How People React to Being Overpaid

Based on the idea that overpaid people are in conflict between hedonic principles (i.e., what makes them pleased) and what they believe to be right, two studies tested the hypothesis that it should be relatively difficult for people to make satisfaction judgments regarding outcomes in which they are being advantaged. In line with this hypothesis, Study 1 demonstrated that response latencies of satisfaction judgments were longer when participants were being overpaid, compared to when they were underpaid or equally paid. Study 2 extended these findings by demonstrating that people required more time to make satisfaction judgments when they were overpaid in the context of a close relationship (i.e., in which the conflict between hedonic and concerns for the other’s need should be stronger) than when overpaid in the context of a non-close relationship. Theoretical implications regarding the social-cognitive processes underlying reactions to overpayment are discussed.