Leveling the Odds: The Effect of Quality Legal Representation in Cases of Asymmetrical Capability

How much does attorney quality influence the outcome of cases in which one litigant is significantly more capable than the other? Using a unique dataset of all asylum merits decision from 1990 to 2010, we find that high quality representation evens the odds for asylum applicants and that not being represented by legal counsel is actually better than being represented by a poor lawyer. In this analysis, we draw on a modified party capability theory and create new measures of attorney capability. We find that variation in attorney capability is a primary driver of the disparity in asylum outcomes in U.S. immigration courts and that a likely causal mechanism for this influence is the judge‐specific reputation of an attorney.     

Family Drug Court,Targeted Parent Training and Family Reunification: Did this Enhanced Service Strategy Make A Difference?

This article reports findings from an evaluation of reunification outcomes for children and families who participated in a family drug court (FDC) that incorporated the use of two innovative evidence‐based parenting programs. In addition to comprehensive FDC services, families participated in the Strengthening Families Program and Celebrating Families!^TM programs in a sequential format. Data analyses were conducted on a sample of 214 children whose child welfare cases were adjudicated through the FDC and 418 matched comparison cases. Entry‐cohort survival analysis results indicated that families receiving FDC services were more than twice as likely to reunify in a 45 month observation window.     

A Comparison of State Traditions and the Revival of a Nuclear Power in Four Countries

Abstract

The British, American, French and Finnish governments are seeking to promote investment in a new generation of nuclear power plants. Nuclear power programmes are delivered through networks of international companies through which government must manage. This is consistent with the concept of governance. Governments can advance their policy goals by using a variety of policy instruments to shape and organize governance networks. This is known as metagovernance. The paper considers the extent to which the selection and deployment of the policy instruments used to metagovern is informed by the prevailing tradition of government. The paper examines how the British, American, French and Finnish governments have tried to metagovern. It is shown that whilst governing traditions do inform the selection and deployment of the policy instruments used to metagovern, the composition of the network, and the nature of the policy problem also plays a role in shaping government action.     

The spatial mismatch hypothesis: A review of recent studies and their implications for welfare reform

Abstract

In 1992, Housing Policy Debate published John Kain's comprehensive review of the extensive scholarly literature on the spatial mismatch hypothesis. This hypothesis maintains that the suburbanization of jobs and involuntary housing market segregation have acted together to create a surplus of workers relative to the number of available jobs in submetropolitan areas where blacks are concentrated.

Since Kain's review, more than two dozen new studies on the spatial mismatch hypothesis have been completed. Generally, these studies use more suitable data and superior methodologies than earlier studies and therefore provide the most reliable evidence to date on the spatial mismatch hypothesis. This article critically reviews the new studies and assesses what implications can be drawn for welfare reform.