Static law and dynamic administration: Marshall dimock's assault on the legal profession

This article examines Marshall Dimock's thought on the relation between public administration and law. The examination revolves around his book, Law and Dynamic Administration,but also incorporates insights from his many other works. Dimock treated the idea of rule of law as an important source of authority and guiding principles for both the public administrative and legal professions. He criticized the legal profession harshly for its tendency in this century to disparage and reject law as such a source. Its treatment of law has led to many abuses that affect the legitimacy and efficacy of all who govern in our society. Dimock hoped to reunify the fields with a common jurisprudence that is mindful of public, institutional needs. In the process, he pressed the point that public administrators should be legal artisans in their own right, contributing confidently to the content and processes of the law for public benefit.     

The rise of China—challenges and opportunities for the European Union

Asia Europe Journal - China’s growing power and influence raise important and inescapable questions for countries and societies around the world, not least for Europe. A rising China offers...     

Some models of academic corruption

The paper notes that while much work has been done in the past on corruption in government and business, relatively little attention has been devoted to corruption in academic institutions. The principal forms of academic corruption are plagiarism and various forms of cheating, research fraud and financial fraud. Two simple mathematical models are proposed for exploring the motivations for (1) plagiarism, which is essentially a solitary crime, and (2) bribery. The responsiveness of the demand for the first of these, and the demand for and supply of the second to changes in underlying parameters are explored.     

The impact of a ready‐made state: East Germans in comparative perspective

To understand the impact of reunification upon Germans, we must make before and after comparisons across time, and also across central Europe. The first section shows that from the perspective of comparative Communist regimes, east Germans have been doubly advantaged, in former times because of belonging to a relatively prosperous part of the Soviet bloc and since reunification as subjects of a ‘ready‐made state’ with democracy and a wealthy social market economy. Analysis in the second section of the impact of reunification on west Germans shows that a significant proportion feel less satisfied than before, whereas the opposite is the case for east Germans. The third section introduces comparisons with Austria. Like the Federal Republic, it has enjoyed the advantages of democracy and a market economy, but without the trauma of division and reunification.