The Animal Research Debate

Animal rights extremism has encouraged the media to examine the benefits and justification of animal research. There is broad support from the scientific community and government for carefully conducted animal research; however, Parliament is hindered, as many MPs are ill-informed. The recent Nuffield Council on Bioethics investigated the issue and determined that in carefully considered cases animal research is justified, scientifically valid, and has contributed to human health. The great majority of the public accept the need for animal research for medical progress when there is no alternative method available. Arguments used by anti-vivisectionists are discussed, many of which are unfounded and based on misconceptions.     

Issue Attention and Legislative Proposals in the U.S. Senate

This analysis of bill sponsorship across a variety of issues and Congresses shows that committee membership is the single most important factor shaping a senator's level of issue attention. Constituency demand is of secondary importance. Ideology, partisanship, and national conditions play little or no role. Consistent with a theoretical cost‐benefit framework, the results suggest that senators are motivated by the prospect of electoral and policy rewards from successful legislation rather than from mere position taking. The findings attest to the enduring importance of the committee system in a highly individualistic and increasingly partisan Senate.     

THE LIMITS OF JOINED-UP GOVERNMENT: TOWARDS A POLITICAL ANALYSIS

Joined-up government has featured prominently on the agenda of the New Labour government in the UK. However, the politics of joining-up remain under-explored, with disproportionate emphasis on the technical and managerial dimensions of the challenge. This paper argues that political value conflicts form an essential part of the explanation for the replication of 'silos' within city strategic partnerships, the joining-up institution of choice at the local scale. A study of the local politics of social inclusion in the British cities of Dundee and Hull revealed a strong partnership ethos. However, this ethos sustained only a shallow consensus over abstract goals, at the same time legitimating the avoidance of political value conflicts. Thematic partnerships comprising interest group clusters with different political values therefore tended to replicate silo practices. The paper argues, consequently, that the consensual partnership ethos caused the displacement of value conflicts, in turn causing fragmented governance. It concludes with three propositions for further research.     

TESTING SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY USING REINFORCEMENT'S RESIDUE: A MULTILEVEL ANALYSIS OF SELF‐REPORTED THEFT AND MARIJUANA USE IN THE NATIONAL YOUTH SURVEY*

Critics have expressed concerns regarding measurement strategies or analytic techniques often used in social learning research (Horan and Phillips, 2003; Krohn, 1999; Sampson, 1999; Tittle, 2004). In response to these concerns, this study tests the hypothesized causal relationships among reinforcement, general definitions, and self‐reported crime (theft and marijuana use) using a multilevel modeling approach with longitudinal data from the first five waves of the National Youth Survey (NYS), as well as with indirect parent and friend reinforcement measures that incorporate both the assumed products of reinforcement (expected consequences of behavior) and the efficacy of reinforcement (expected influence of the reinforcement source). Within‐subject analyses present a challenge to the theory as social learning variables do not covary significantly over time with criminal offending rates. Between‐subject analyses offer support for the theory as across‐person differences in average parent and friend reinforcement are significantly related to offending rates, and these reinforcement–crime relationships are mediated partially or fully by learned definitions. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

THE IDEA BROKERS: THE IMPACT OF THINK TANKS ON BRITISH GOVERNMENT

Although there are few think tanks in Britain they have been credited with considerable influence on government policies since the late 1970s. This article charts their recent history, distinguishing between larger, 'establishment' bodies like the Policy Studies Institute and smaller, more politically partisan bodies such as the Centre for Policy Studies; generally the latter have enjoyed greater influence. It identifies the distinctive characteristics of these bodies–their ideological orientation, their concentration on élite opinion formers, their short to medium-term horizons, their emphasis on originality and publicity. Think tanks face tactical dilemmas when pressing their views on Britain's comparatively closed system of government, in particular their choice between insider and outsider forms of persuasion; the tension between proximity to ministers and intellectual autonomy; and their advantages to politicians as deniable sources that can float new ideas, which can be counter-balanced by politicians' fluctuating appetite for radical ideas. As a case study the article examines the relations enjoyed by the Institute of Economic Affairs and the Centre for Policy Studies with Mrs Thatcher's government, and particularly the evolution of a potent network of influence embracing ministers, special advisers and backbenchers. Finally it considers the dangers of an overemphasis on novelty at the expense of feasibility, and the danger of burnout in the smaller think tanks dangers mitigated by the continuous turnover that operates in the world of think tanks.