INTRODUCTION: GREENING THE COUNTRYSIDE? CHANGING FRAMEWORKS OF EU AGRICULTURAL POLICY

In response to wide‐ranging criticism of agricultural policy, especially within Western industrialized countries, new frameworks of justification are emerging and new hybrid policy fields have been established to tackle some of the ‘externalities’ of agricultural support. However, institutional frameworks are proving slower to change, partly because this would require coordinated action across different levels of governance. Nevertheless, previously marginalized environmental concerns have successfully gained entrance to agricultural policy networks, while the intersection of trade liberalization and rural diversification have undermined the dominance of the productivist mindset in government. This gives rise to a plurality of policy actors and actions which defy the conventional categories of analysis of agricultural policy, calling for changing frameworks on the polity of agriculture too.     

The Future of Conservatism*

British Conservatism embodies certain basic, though not always compatible, tenets of belief. They have underpinned the Conservative Party, which has been the most successful political party in the history of western Europe. The party was the ‘in’ party in British politics in the 20th Century; the reasons for that success shifted in the 21st century to it principal opponent party. Attempts by Conservative leaders in the first two parliaments of opposition constituted quick‐fix and ultimately doomed approaches to restoring electoral dominance. The party under David Cameron has shifted to a long‐term, grounded approach, learning the lessons of earlier periods of opposition. Though the process remains incomplete, the Conservative Party is placed for the first time in the 21st century to return to being a party of governance.     

On the Relation between Form and Substance in Law

Abstract. In this paper the author deals with some theoretical aspects of Robert Summers' last book ( Summers 2006 ). In particular, he concentrates on the hazy relationship between form and substance in Summers' theory. In order to analyze some major difficulties entailed in the thesis that form and substance are different and independent things, the author discusses three specific questions: (1) the difference between form and substance; (2) the possibility of a form meant to be value‐neutral; (3) how to distinguish a form‐centered approach from a formalistic approach when one has to interpret a statute. This last question is dealt with through examples taken from two legal decisions. * * Abstract by Marco Goldoni.