Shifts of meaning within explanations of voting and party competition

Rational choice models are increasingly used in explanations of voting and elections. Their adoption is often urged, rather uncritically, on the grounds that they provide a unified and exact explanation across political science. Far from doing so, however, their definitions of ‘rationality’ may differ radically even within a limited area, such as party and voting behaviour. Shifts of meaning from one model to another may be obscured by mathematical formalism, which concentrates attention on the derivation of conclusions from basic assumptions, rather than on the practical relevance of their relationship to the assumptions behind other models. A mathematical formulation may not, however, be the most relevant for purposes of electoral explanation. Rigorous verbal formulations can represent electors' and politicians' decision procedures more realistically, while remaining generally accessible and supporting detailed inter-comparisons of their working assumptions. Through these, rational choice explanations can be brought closer together and decisions between them made with a clear knowledge of what is involved, thus providing a better basis for cumulative research. The process of theoretical evaluation and assimilation is illustrated here with two original theories of voting and party competition.     

Vicarious liability and criminal prosecutions for regulatory offences

The parameters of vicarious liability of corporations for the conduct of their employees, especially in the context of provisions that criminalise breaches of regulatory provisions, are complex. The decision of Bell J in ABC Developmental Learning Centres Pty Ltd v Wallace [2006] VSC 171 raises starkly the potential unfairness of an approach which converts criminal liability of corporations too readily into absolute liability, irrespective of the absence of any form of proven culpability. The author queries whether fault should not be brought back in some form to constitute a determinant of criminal liability for corporations.     

Children, women, and substance abuse: a look at recovery in a communal setting

This study explored the sense of community among women (n = 21) and women with children (n = 30) living in Oxford Houses, with emphasis on how the presence of children might affect the household. Sense of community did not vary between participants with more or less than three months residence. Residents reported very high levels of satisfaction with the home, possibly because of a ceiling effect of little room for increases in their sense of community over time. Participants reported that they were getting along with the children in the home, that mothers could count on babysitting help, and that the children had a positive effect on the household and their own recovery process. This effect did not differ between mothers and non-mothers, suggesting that non-mothers might view the children in the home with a sense of responsibility and sensitivity comparable to that of the mothers. Implications are discussed.     

Cultivating and maintaining effective action research partnerships: the DePaul and Oxford House collaborative

In this paper, we review the result of research conducted in the context of a 13-year collaborative partnership between DePaul University and a community-based, self-run, residential substance abuse recovery program called Oxford House. This collaborative effort highlights several examples of the research and action activities fostering a positive alliance that benefited both the research team and the Oxford House community. It also proposed practical guidelines for developing effective action research collaboratives that may be helpful to others who desire to cultivate and maintain similar mutually beneficial partnerships; including such processes as the development of trust, respecting the personal experiences of the community members and group, commitment to serving the community, validating findings with organization members, and accountability.     

THE ASSETS TEST: A CASE STUDY IN THE POLITICS OF EXPENDITURE CONTROL*

Abstract: The assets test episode provides a case study in the difficulties modern governments face when confronted by numerous and powerful interest groups. The assets test decision was made somewhat hastily and without extensive consultation, resulting in a major outcry from interest groups. The government reacted by setting in train a process of “consultation” and subsequently announced a series of concessions. Opposition continued and further modifications were made to the scheme, reducing considerably its impact and the proposed savings. Several lessons can be drawn. Governments must attempt to consult affected interests seriously in the process of formulating proposals and, if necessary, mobilise countervailing interests against a dominant coalition. Joint discussions can help to moderate sharp differences. The private, bureaucratic worlds of policy making, particularly in the budget cycle, must be opened up. Fundamental changes to the “culture” of policy making may be necessary, in particular greater efforts to encourage bipartisanship and to use Parliament constructively, if expenditure control and program reconstruction are to be achieved.