Does an Appropriate Coalition Theory Exist for Germany? An Overview of Recent Office- and Policy-Oriented Coalition Theories

Recent coalition theories assume that parties are both office and policy motivated and thus use utility functions that combine both motivations. Although such utility functions may be adequate in general, a discussion on the theories' assumptions in detail is lacking. Such a discussion is necessary in order to find out which theory is in accordance with the institutional background of the observed and analysed coalition bargaining processes. This contribution deals with the question of whether or not an appropriate coalition theory for Germany exists. Since the answer is ‘no’, it furthermore discusses the conditions which such a theory should fulfil.     

Sex/gender‐based decision‐making in the criminal justice system as a possible (additional) explanation for the underrepresentation of women in official criminal statistics — a review of international literature

This article represents an analysis of the literature on sex‐based selection processes in the criminal justice system. It is only since the feminist wave of the sixties that sexual discrimination has been considered as an issue of importance in the study of the criminal justice system and that female criminality has been looked at more thoroughly. The article deals with the different assumptions and hypotheses which have come forward in the debate on the possible discrimination of men and women in the criminal justice process. In the first part of the article the various theoretical models are outlined: the chivalry and evil women hypotheses, the legal or etiological model, the social control theory, the family‐based justice model, and a multifactoral model. In the second part of the article, the results of empirical research relevant to these hypotheses are presented. American, British, Belgian, Dutch and some German literature has been taken into account. The review of the literature shows that the chivalry hypothesis cannot offer an all‐embracing explanation for the possibly perceived preferential treatment of women. Similar conclusions can be drawn for the explanatory value of the legal model. Although a more lenient treatment of women can sometimes be explained by legal factors, these factors can offer no more than a partial explanation for observed sex differences in the criminal justice system. Especially in the case of pre‐trial release and sentencing, more particularly when deciding whether or not to send a defendant to prison, a noticeable sex‐effect can still be found. In the literature we find strong suggestions — although not always confirmed — that an (initially observed) more lenient treatment of women at these stages can be explained by stereotypes and expectations about the personality of women as less dangerous and the specific role which women fulfill in western society.     

Gender Differences in Health Symptoms Associated with the Exposure to Physical Violence in Family: Data from the 2006 National Health Survey in Serbia

This study analyzed gender differences in exposure to family violence in Serbia and its association with health symptoms. Using data from the National Health Survey 2006 in Serbia, univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were run to examine the association between exposure to physical violence in the family (in the past 12 months) and the occurrence of 15 different health symptoms (in the past 4 weeks). Out of 12,646 interviewed adults (older than 20), women reported experiencing family violence nearly 1.7 times more often than men (1.28 % vs. 0.75 %). Women had nine health symptoms significantly associated with experienced violence, while men had four, even after controlling for socio-demographic characteristics. Depression and insomnia were common for both genders. Results suggest that physicians should pay attention to health complaints, consider family violence as an associated factor, and address violence in a gender sensitive way that is free of prejudice and preconceptions.     

Reassessing and Redirecting Research on Race and Sentencing

Drawing on a systematic assessment of the accumulated empirical literature and interviews with 25 race and sentencing scholars, this paper argues that the standard approach adopted in research on race and sentencing in criminology is insufficient for addressing the key underlying questions that motivate this work, including whether, where, how, and why race may matter. In light of this assessment, the paper lays out some additional directions for empirical research in this area that would bolster the validity and reliability of our knowledge about how race shapes sentencing and enhance the policy relevance of this work.     

The Association of Occupational Stressors with Different Forms of Organizational Commitment Among Correctional Staff

Committed staff are arguably an absolute necessity for the success of correctional facilities. A growing body of literature has examined how different aspects of the work environment relate to organizational commitment; however, organizational commitment can be operationalized as continuance, moral, or affective. Work environment variables may impact the various forms of commitment differently. Using survey data from 272 staff who worked at a Midwestern maximum-security state prison, this study examined the association between the occupational stressors of perceived dangerousness of the job, role conflict, role ambiguity, repetitiveness, and work-on-family conflict with the three forms of organizational commitment. The effects of the occupational stressors varied for each form of organizational commitment. Specifically, work-on-family conflict had a significant positive association with continuance commitment. Role conflict and repetitiveness had negative associations with moral commitment. Finally, all five stressors had significant negative associations with affective commitment.     

Disruption is Not Permitted: The Policing and Social Control of Occupy Oakland

Negotiated management—various forms of communication, collaboration and cooperation between police and protest organizers, often taking the form of protest permits—has been mainly theorized as a means to mitigate police violence while respecting protesters’ 1st Amendment rights. A few theorists have problematized this view, suggesting that negotiated management is a form of social control that puts various restrictions on dissent. Drawing from my research on Occupy Oakland, I build upon these critiques to illustrate how negotiated management was used as a tool of repression in two key ways, and how newer forms of repression (strategic incapacitation) are still enmeshed in its logic. First, by criminalizing legal activity among protesters, through the use of a permit, who were then subjected to police repression. Second, I show how negotiated management as a normative structure of protest was used as a form of repression, even when communication and cooperation with police were clearly rejected by the movement. I illustrate how the refusal of negotiated management was used to discredit the movement and subject it to physical repression. Rather than seeing negotiated management as an alternative to police repression and strategic incapacitation, I argue that they are two sides of the same policing project, the primary aim of which is to prevent disruptive protest.     

“Broken Windows,” Urban Policing, and the Social Contexts of Race and Neighborhood (Dis-)Empowerment

Robert Sampson’s “Great American City” is a methodologically rich and theoretically broad contribution to the literature on durable inequality in US cities. While empirically clear on the causes and consequences of lasting social exclusion, the text’s insights remain somewhat trapped behind the “collective efficacy” language of the “broken windows” theories it attempts to shatter. In looking at community empowerment, or its lack, in the inner-city, the racialized role of urban police must be central to any analysis of the cycle of crime and poverty, and how to break it.     

Up and Down,Old and New: Values and Value Systems of MPs and Voters in France

MPs are often criticised as being homogeneous. This is well known in terms of social background or gender, but the criticism also holds for values and norms. MPs are said to share normative agreements on the essential points and demonstrate differences on second-order issues. This criticism is even more widespread regarding the new politics based on the cultural divide, notably vis-à-vis politicians from the extreme right as far as immigration, European integration or globalisation are concerned. In this contribution, these criticisms are addressed by investigating the degree of normative agreements and disagreements of French MPs. Furthermore, the differences both in old and new politics between MPs on the one hand and the electorate as a whole and their supporters on the other hand are evaluated. It is concluded that MPs are definitely not all the same and the degrees of difference among MPs or with the electorate are far from being those expected.