Foreign advisors and capacity building: The case of Kenya

Approximately 100,000 foreign advisors work in the public sectors of Sub-Saharan African countries at an annual cost of more than $4 billion. The numbers, range of services, and costs of such advisors increased during the 1980s while at the same time donors launched new efforts to build professional capacity in the African civil service. Based on a study of advisors and their counterpart economists in Kenya's Ministry of Planning and National Development, this article addresses three important questions: what are the functions carried out by advisors in the development ministries?; why is it so difficult to retain skilled professionals in the civil service?; and how does the provision of advisors affect the retention of skilled government officers?     

The lack of experimental research in criminology—evidence from Criminology and Justice Quarterly

Journal of Experimental Criminology - Despite experiments being termed the “gold standard,” criminology has been slow to adopt experimentation as a methodology. The goal of this...     

Patterns and strategies of court administration in Canada and the United States

Abstract. This paper argues that patterns of court administration and the strategies pursued by judiciaries in Canada and the United States are quite different as a result of contrasting constitutional principles. Parliamentary supremacy in Canada has led to executive department administration of the courts, while the American separation of powers doctrine has encouraged judicial branch administration of the courts. Constitutional differences have also promoted more unified systems of court administration in Canada than in the United States. As a result of these differences, Canadian judiciaries have pursued an encapsulation strategy and have depended on the legal community to serve as their patron. On the other hand, American judiciaries have promoted organizational growth and sought empowerment — the development of a separate power base — rather than relying on powerful allies. Sommaire. D'après l'auteur de cet article, les scénarios de l'administration des tribunaux et les stratégies adoptés par les fonctionnaires judiciaires sont très différents au Canada et aux Etats-Unis, par suite de la divergence de leurs principes constitutionnels. La suprématie du parlement, au Canada, a conduit à l'exercice d'un contrǒle par l'exécutif sur l'administration des tribunaux alors que la doctrine américaine de la séparation des pouvoirs a encouragé l'exercice de ce contrǒle par le pouvoir judiciaire lui měme. Les différences constitution-nelles ont aussi contribuéà promouvoir des systèmes d'administration des tribunaux plus unifiés au Canada qu'aux Etats-Unis. A cause de ces différences, les fonctionnaires judiciaires canadiens ont adopté une stratégie de retranchement, comptant sur la communauté des juristes pour leur servir de protecteurs. Leurs homologues américains, par contre, ont cherché ce promouvoir la crois-sance de leur organisation et de ses pouvoirs en fait le devéloppement d'un pouvoir siparé-au lieu de se fies à des allies puissants extérieurs.     

South Asian nuclear arms competition: An American perspective∗

The analysis of nuclear arms competition in South Asia forms part of a much larger study of American relations with the region after the Cold War carried out under the auspices of The Asia Society. The nuclear policies of both India and Pakistan enjoy strong domestic political support. While a case can be made that a rudimentary state of nuclear deterrence exists between New Delhi and Islamabad, this may be undermined by deployment on both sides of ballistic missiles.