Conceptual issues in the study of centralization and information technology

Abstract: Growing government reliance on information technology for decision-making and the delivery of public services spotlights the contemporary relevance of the centralization debate. The view that the employment of advanced technology by bureaucracies will dispossess local actors of their policy-making autonomy provides the foundations for a substantial body of literature on information technology and organizational change. The reliance of past research on anecdotal or case data casts doubt on the theoretical and empirical soundness of this proposition. Findings have contributed few reliable generalizations about the ways in which the locus of authority between a government agency and its field service shifts. This paper offers a revised approach to characterizing an administrative system as moving towards centralization over time. Assumptions about the nature and direction of causal influence for conceptualizing centralization as a dynamic process are explored. An issue-centered approach and process orientation are proposed to assess changes to the relative distribution of power between field and headquarters. An acknowledgment and understanding of these refinements serve as a basis for future empirical research. Sommaire: La dépendance croissante du gouvernement à I'égard de la technologie de I'information, pour ce qui a trait aux prises de décision et à I'offre de services publics souligne bien la pertinence contemporaine d'un ddbat sur la centralisation. L'une des principales observations notées dans la littérature sur I'informatique indique que le recours à une technologie de pointe mène inévitablement a une plus grande centralisation des décisions dans le domaine des politiques administratives. Bien que les documents ex-istants fournissent le cadre nécessaire à la plus grande partie des réflexions théoriques, presque tous évitent ou ignorent les considérations de méthodologie. On sait bien peu de choses sur les glissements de pouvoir qui s'opèrent entre un organisme gouvernemental et ses services sur le terrain. L'auteur propose ici une nouvelle approche pour caractériser un systéme administratif en processus dorientation vets une plus grande centralisation. Il explore les hypothèses sur la nature et I'orientation de I'influence causale pour con-ceptualiser la centralisation en tant que processus dynamique. II propose une approche centrée sur les problèmes et une orientation fondée sur les processus pour évaluer les changements quant h la distribution relative des pouvoirs entre les services sur le terrain et le bureau principal. La prise en compte et la compréhension de ces rafhements servent de fondement à de futures recherches empiriques.     

Simple rules for a complex regulatory world: the case of financial regulation

European Journal of Law and Economics - Twenty-five years ago Richard Epstein published Simple Rules for a Complex World, which would go on to become one of Epstein’s most influential works....     

Implementing Democratic Equality in Political Parties: Organisational Consequences in the Swedish and the German Pirate Parties

This article theorises and empirically assesses some important intra‐organisational implications of maximising democratic equality in political parties both between followers and members and between members and elites. They include weak member commitment, passivity of the rank‐and‐file membership and – depending on party structure – high levels of internal conflict. To substantiate the arguments, two parties that implement principles of democratic equality in their organisations are examined: the Swedish and German Pirate parties. These cases show, first, that while organisational structures implementing norms of equality allowed them to rapidly mobilise a considerable following, the same structures systematically reduced their capacity to consolidate support in the longer term – a weakness that might eventually put these parties' survival at risk. Second, they show that differences in the extent to which subnational units provide a foundation for member mobilisation helps to explain variation in the level of internal conflict experienced by these parties.     

From Participatory Reform to Social Capital: Micro‐Motives and the Macro‐Structure of Civil Society Networks

Although a wide‐ranging literature explores the favorable effects of social capital, it is only relatively recently that systematic attention has been directed to the manner in which social networks emerge and the consequent implications for civic engagement and collaborative governance. This article employs advanced social network statistical models to examine civic network emergence following a participatory reform in Los Angeles. Findings suggest that the reform fostered a number of favorable network attributes supportive of democratic participation. At the same time, subtle but ubiquitous effects of socioeconomic sorting had the unintended and undesirable effect of elevating higher‐status actors within the emergent civic network. These findings suggest that macro‐level policy interventions are required to foster the development of ties that promote cross‐talk among socioeconomically distinct community groups.     

Using Bayesian Aldrich‐McKelvey Scaling to Study Citizens' Ideological Preferences and Perceptions

Aldrich‐McKelvey scaling is a powerful method that corrects for differential‐item functioning (DIF) in estimating the positions of political stimuli (e.g., parties and candidates) and survey respondents along a latent policy dimension from issue scale data. DIF arises when respondents interpret issue scales (e.g., the standard liberal‐conservative scale) differently and distort their placements of the stimuli and themselves. We develop a Bayesian implementation of the classical maximum likelihood Aldrich‐McKelvey scaling method that overcomes some important shortcomings in the classical procedure. We then apply this method to study citizens' ideological preferences and perceptions using data from the 2004–2012 American National Election Studies and the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study. Our findings indicate that DIF biases self‐placements on the liberal‐conservative scale in a way that understates the extent of polarization in the contemporary American electorate and that citizens have remarkably accurate perceptions of the ideological positions of senators and Senate candidates.