The shaping of collective values through deliberative democracy: An empirical study from New York's North Country

Participatory planning and policy analysis has gained increasing attention in recent years because of its potential to improve the knowledge base for policy design (substantive benefits), increase the likelihood of stakeholder compliance and support (instrumental benefits), and strengthen the democratic legitimacy of public policies (normative benefits). Deliberation among stakeholders is considered essential for participatory policy analysis, representing a democratic process for clarifying the particular as well as the collective goals and values as well as the potential impacts of alternative policies. This study examines the effects of democratic deliberation on participants' viewpoints of the policy domain (the local food system), based on two-and-a-half day participatory planning events in each of six rural counties in northern New York. Participant viewpoints were assessed several weeks before and after these events, using Q methodology. The results reveal three major viewpoints, representing concerns for social justice, the viability of conventional agriculture, and the potential environmental and social externalities associated with conventional agriculture. The substance of these viewpoints remain unchanged before and after the deliberative events, but the salience of the conventional agriculture viewpoint increased and the salience of the social justice and alternative agriculture viewpoints decreased significantly, even among those participants who most clearly defined the latter two viewpoints. These findings, together with an analysis of the action agendas emerging from these planning events, suggest that local deliberative processes may produce outcomes that are neither fair nor efficient and that reflect the values and interests of certain stakeholders more than others, even in the absence of overt conflict. Moreover, it appears that such processes may cause some participants to alter their viewpoints in ways that appear contrary to their values and interests as expressed prior to the deliberative event. The implications for participatory policy analysis are explored.     

The pious or the doctrinaire? who supports suicide terrorism in Indonesia?

ABSTRACT

Indonesia is generally viewed as a moderate Muslim nation that episodically struggles with terrorism. Between 1981 and the end of 2016, Indonesia experienced 156 attacks from some 15 Islamist militant groups. However, the lineaments of popular support for Islamist militancy in Indonesia remain understudied. In this paper, we expand upon the existing literature on popular support for Islamist violence in Indonesia by replicating and extending the empirical framework for modeling the relationship between support for various conceptualizations of Shari’a and support for Islamist violence offered by Fair, Littman and Nugent (2018) for Pakistan and extended to Bangladesh by Fair, Hamza and Heller (2017). To do so, we conduct ordered logistical regression analysis of Pew survey data which includes information about respondents’ religious beliefs and practice as well as support for Islamist violence. We find considerable evidence that their framework is useful for understanding support for violence in Indonesia.     

The distribution of honoraria income in the U.S. Congress: Who gets rents in legislatures and why?

The major conclusion to be drawn from this analysis is that low-cost suppliers of political favors receive the highest honoraria incomes. There is no evidence that being a lawyer, acquiring a large number of committee assignments, receiving high ratings by labor unions, representing a safe district, or introducing numerous legislative bills, increases one's honoraria income in any significant way. The wider dispersal of power reduces the effects of seniority, and membership on the Finance Committee, in determining institutional power in the Senate; hence, these variables are only significantly related to honoraria income in the House. The smaller the number of suppliers in the Senate, relative to the House, means that senators obtain higher prices for their services. As a result, business groups are more willing to pay extra — a price premium — to assure that no shirking occurs.While the distribution of honoraria has caused considerable concern and given rise to cynical explanations as to who gets them and why (see, for example, McChesney, 1987), this analysis suggests a less pejorative but empirically valid conclusion: business, and therefore honoraria, gravitate to those who can supply political favors at a lower cost than other legislators, just as low-cost suppliers gain a greater proportion of the sales in the market than those who supply the same service but at a higher price.     

Personality Matters: The Effect of Defiant Individualism on both Deviant Associations and Normative Behaviors among Juveniles in Rural North Carolina

The role of defiant individualism in the production of deviant behavior has not been extensively explored within Criminology. This study used data from a juvenile gang assessment of two rural counties in North Carolina to examine the effect of defiant individualism on association with deviant peers, association with gang members, school engagement and grade point average. The researchers developed a proprietary scale with which to measure defiant individualism. Additionally, an integrated defiance continuum was constructed in which to better contextualize the findings. Findings suggested that defiant individualism had positive relationships with both deviant peer associations and association with gang members. Furthermore, there were inverse relationships between defiant individualism and school engagement as well as grade point average. These statistics suggested that besides promoting deviant associations, defiant individualism also inhibited normative behaviors like school engagement and academic achievement which may actually ameliorate deviant behavior in juveniles.     

To What Extent Do Third Parties Influence Business Compliance?

Regulatory scholars have increasingly observed that it is not only public regulatory agencies and official enforcement action that motivate and enforce businesses' compliance with the law; in many situations, certain third parties may have greater capacity and power to motivate and enforce compliance with the law than do official regulatory agencies. This paper examines the extent to which businesses' worries about, and perceptions of pressure from, various third parties influence their internal compliance management activities and moral commitment in relation to complying with the objectives of competition and consumer protection law. Using data from a survey of 999 large Australian businesses, we find that businesses worry a lot about the reactions of a range of third parties including customers, shareholders, employees, and business partners to non-compliance. We find little evidence that these worries have much impact on what businesses actually do. However, perceptions of risk of complaints do influence what they do.     

Literatur

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

A Move Toward Specificity: Examining Urban Disadvantage and Race-and Relationship-Specific Homicide Rates

The purpose of this research is to estimate the differential impact of structural conditions on race- and relationship-specific homicide rates for U.S. cities in 1990. The structural conditions commonly employed in race-specific homicide research are examined, such as job accessibility, economic deprivation, racial segregation, and racial inequality. Furthermore, four relationship categories of homicide—acquaintance, family, stranger, and intimate—are disaggregated by racial group. The detailed relationship-specific homicide rates are compared to a baseline homicide rate to determine whether structural factors associated with urban disadvantage similarly influence homicide rates across relationship types. The results indicate that differences emerge in the impact of structural conditions on homicides disaggregated by race- and relationship-specific categories. Theoretical explanations consistent with criminology and race-relations literature are discussed, as well as the potential benefits and implications for studies that pursue more meaningful and detailed classifications in homicide offending.     

Revisiting the legal standards that govern requests to sterilize profoundly incompetent children: in light of the "Ashley Treatment," is a new standard appropriate?

This Note discusses the recent controversy surrounding a six-year-old girl named Ashley, whose parents chose to purposefully stunt her growth and remove her reproductive organs for nonmedical reasons. A federal investigation determined that Ashley's rights had been violated because doctors performed the procedure, now referred to as the "Ashley Treatment," without first obtaining a court order. However, the investigation did not make any conclusions regarding whether the "Ashley Treatment" could present a legally permissible treatment option in the future. After discussing the constitutional rights that the "Ashley Treatment" implicates and the current legal standards in place, this Note examines how courts have applied these legal standards to cases involving extreme requests. Drawing upon legal commentators, this Note concludes that a court could approve a request for the "Ashley Treatment" in appropriate and limited cases where the parents have presented clear and convincing evidence before a court that the benefits that the "Ashley Treatment" would provide to the child and her family outweigh the risks associated with the procedure. This Note argues that those benefits may include extrinsic considerations, but courts should remain cautious when considering such evidence and be sure that the evidence as a whole supports their conclusions.