Is there a selection bias in roll call votes? Evidence from the European Parliament

We examine the magnitude and significance of selection bias in roll call votes. Prior to 2009, all recorded (roll call) votes in the European Parliament had to be requested explicitly by European Political Groups. Since 2009, a roll call vote has been mandatory on all final legislative votes. We exploit that change in the rules and compare differences between final legislative votes, amendment votes and non-legislative votes before and after 2009, using a difference-in-differences approach with extensive controls. Using data from the Sixth (2004–2009) to Seventh (2009–2014) European Parliaments, we fail to find any large differences in voting cohesion for the main political groups. We find even less significance when we control for changes in parliamentary membership between those two periods. The results suggest that selection biases in the European Parliament associated with strategic choices are negligible.     

Vulnerability to Multidimensional Poverty: Findings from Households in Melanesia

This paper examines vulnerability in two Melanesian small island developing states: Solomon Islands and Vanuatu. With large proportions of the population living semi-subsistence lifestyles in rural areas, consumption poverty is notoriously difficult to measure. The paper therefore departs from the standard approach and assesses household vulnerability to multidimensional poverty. The paper employs cross-sectional data from a household survey. Results indicate that vulnerability is more widespread than poverty and that vulnerability stems more from excess volatility in expected wellbeing than a particularly low expected level of wellbeing, per se. Results point to a pressing need for formal social protection policies to be implemented.     

Testifying in an International War Crimes Tribunal: The Experience of Witnesses in the Special Court for Sierra Leone

The research described in this article investigates the extentto which witnesses who testified in the Special Court for SierraLeone (SCSL) report the experience as positive or negative.It also seeks to identify the factors that contribute to theseevaluations. It reports the results of structured interviewsconducted with 171 witnesses who testified in the SCSL. Thefinding that emerges most strongly is that the experience oftestifying was positive for the majority of witnesses. The courtroomenvironment was experienced as supportive, and witnesses ratedthe experiences of both examination-in-chief and cross-examinationas being more positive than negative, with examination-in-chiefbeing the more positive of the two. The findings suggest thata positive testimony experience can be predicted when a witnessdoes not feel worried at the prospect of testifying, feels respectedby court staff and, to a lesser extent, has a positive experienceof cross-examination.     

Regulatory Failure and the Collapse of Japan's Home Mortgage Lending Industry: A Legal and Economic Analysis

This article analyzes the dynamics of contemporary cooperation and conflict in Japanese financial regulation through the prism of the jusen problem, the collapse of Japan's home mortgage lending industry in the 1990s. The jusen problem is one of the most striking examples of regulatory failure, strategic interest group bargaining, and large-scale dispute resolution in Japanese history.