Peter Ebsen, Emissionshandel in Deutschland

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Does Federalism Weaken Democratic Representation in the United States?

The framers of the U.S. Constitution explicitly designed federalismto enhance representation. Because powers are divided amongmultiple governments, citizens are able to exert pressure onthe elected officials of various governments in an effort toachieve desired outcomes. If one government is not doing whatcitizens prefer, they can seek it from a different government.This assumes that individuals form opinions about the functionsperformed by different governments. Given the complexity offederalism, this may be an unrealistic assumption for many citizens.Original survey data uniquely suited to explore this questionsuggest that citizens do behave in a fashion consistent withthe federalist framework. Moreover, the actual change in theassignment of functional responsibilities across governmentsbehaves as if it responds to public opinion.     

The European community software directive: The United Kingdom implementation

Conclusion The Regulations appear to have reinforced the protection available to software producers under United Kingdom law. The provisions of the Software Directive and the Regulations are complex and not without significant inconsistencies which are likely to prove to be a source of litigation. The drafters of the Regulations chose, unlike many of its European partners, not to adopt the wording of the Software Directive but to write their own interpretation, adding an element of uncertainty to the law in this area, which is perhaps inevitable bearing in mind the linguistic problems of translating and interpreting any directive coupled with the ambiguity and omission of definitions of several key terms. More important, however, than any academic argument will be the practical impact of the new law and its effectiveness in achieving its aim.     

The relationship management function of public affairs officers in Chile: Identifying opportunities and challenges in an emergent market

Research on the public affairs profession in both South and Latin America is one of the leading limitations today in international public relations research. This study helps to lessen such a gap by offering more realistic insight into the ideologies and pressures that govern public affairs practice in Chile. In‐depth interviews were conducted with 15 experts who are current senior‐level public affairs practitioners in the Chilean capital of Santiago. Results offer three key insights: First, the core function of public affairs in Chile surrounds behaviors of lobbying and governmental relations. Second, leveraging cohesion between organizational private interest and the public interest is a key to leveraging pressure on elected officials and governmental agencies. Lastly, there is significant concern regarding public trust in the lack of transparency in the Chilean public affairs field, facilitated by insufficient governmental regulation. Such research offers practical and grounded insights for public affairs and public relations scholarship.     

Who Is Mobilized to Vote? A Re‐Analysis of 11 Field Experiments

Many political observers view get-out-the-vote (GOTV) mobilization drives as a way to increase turnout among chronic nonvoters. However, such a strategy assumes that GOTV efforts are effective at increasing turnout in this population, and the extant research offers contradictory evidence regarding the empirical validity of this assumption. We propose a model where only those citizens whose propensity to vote is near the indifference threshold are mobilized to vote and the threshold is determined by the general interest in the election. Our three-parameter model reconciles prior inconsistent empirical results and argues that low-propensity voters can be effectively mobilized only in high-turnout elections. The model is tested on 11 randomized face-to-face voter mobilization field experiments in which we specifically analyze whether subjects' baseline propensity to vote conditions the effectiveness of door-to-door GOTV canvassing. The evidence is consistent with the model and suggests that face-to-face mobilization is better at stimulating turnout among low-propensity voters in prominent elections than it is in quiescent ones .