WOMEN’S MOVEMENTS AND NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT: HIGHER EDUCATION IN SWEDEN AND ENGLAND

This article considers change in academe in Sweden and England, focusing on gender equity and the new public management reforms. In drawing on social movement theory, it is argued that public sector agendas in these countries have been affected by the influences of their respective women’s movements as well as by the new public management. The article explores these developments through the experiences of a group of employees whose voices are heard infrequently in the literature, those in middle‐level academic positions in universities who are responsible for delivering change. It is argued that the rational, hierarchical, masculine discourses of the new public management offer challenges to women’s movement supporters, whose influences and responses are examined. It is contended that the use of social movement theory, as a vehicle through which to conceptualize change, offers a number of insights. These are: the contribution made to gender equity by women who are not self‐defined feminists or strongly committed to equal opportunities, known as femocrats; the contribution made by some supportive men to gender equity; and the potential for future collective opposition to the new public management from women’s movements.     

MOBILIZING FRIENDS AND FOES IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS

A common justification for the use of trial-type procedures in administrative agency decisionmaking is the assertion that such procedures will help legitimize decisions or increase their acceptability. Writers who take this position often assume that members of affected interest groups have fixed attitudes toward decisionmaking procedures, that such attitudes are highly salient, and that perceptions of procedural acceptability will not be greatly influenced by the social setting. This article reports on the results of a survey administered to witnesses in federal agency rulemaking proceedings which indicate that procedural attitudes have low salience, are mobilizable rather than fixed, and are strongly influenced by the activities of intermediary organizations such as trade associations and public interest groups. These findings imply particular strategies for designing and implementing regulatory procedures.     

Pulling Punches: Congressional Constraints on the Supreme Court's Constitutional Rulings, 1987–2000

To date, no study has found evidence that the U.S. Supreme Court is constrained by Congress in its constitutional decisions. We addressed the selection bias inherent in previous studies with a statute‐centered, rather than a case‐centered, analysis, following all congressional laws enacted between 1987 and 2000. We uncovered considerable congressional constraint in the Court's constitutional rulings. In particular, we found that the probability that the Rehnquist Court would strike a liberal congressional law rose between 47% and 288% as a result of the 1994 congressional elections, depending on the legislative model used.     

Chinese Mining Enterprises in Zambia ＂Bad Employers＂？

In overlooking multiple faceted labor issues, Human Rights Watch has indiscriminately accused CNMC of deep-rooted, persistent human rights misdemeanors.