‘Obligations of good faith’: on the difficulties of building US-style EU federalism

The sovereign debt crisis has exposed the weaknesses of the regulative and institutional arrangements of the European Monetary Union. A number of American scholars have highlighted that there are lessons on federalism for Europe to learn from the USA. But to what extent can the US model of fiscal federalism be transferred to the European context? Our general assumption is that besides the differences of the historically developed institutions, structures and economic concepts, it is the different logic that has and is driving the two integration processes that would impede such a transfer. Basing the argument on Oates’ theory of two generations of fiscal federalism, we see that the USA – building on a firm constitutional framework – provided for a crucial role of central government in macro-economic stabilization, whereas the European Union (EU) style of fiscal federalism remains contractual. Although transfers are inevitable, the EU shuns the logic of financial solidarity as economic divergencies cannot be harmoniously accommodated by a commitment to a common constitutional framework. As crisis management largely relies on an intergovernmental decision-making process, it enhances the power of creditor states vis-à-vis the debtor states and follows the logic of ‘surveillance and punishment’. The European emphasis is on controlling the moral hazard and the most likely outcome of the crisis will be differentiated integration.     

Hardening and softening of country-specific recommendations in the European Semester

Abstract

This article conceptualises and illustrates hardening and softening trends in country-specific recommendations (CSRs) that are part of the European Semester. It proposes an analytical framework that meets the specific characteristics of CSRs: its adaptable and non-uniform norms, which are co-determined by actors operating across governance levels. It proposes three elements to analyse hardening and softening of CSRs, adding the degree of ‘centralisation’ to the often used elements of ‘obligation’ and ‘enforcement’. Then it illustrates the framework with trends in CSRs given to Belgium and the Netherlands on pensions and wages. Both countries and topics show hardening as well as softening trends regarding the degree of obligation, enforcement and centralisation. The article suggests that a complete analysis of hardening and softening of CSRs requires assessing the degree of centralisation as well. Looking at obligation and enforcement alone could misinterpret the hardness or softness of CSRs.     

Urgent issues and prospects at the intersection of culture,memory, and witness interviews: Exploring the challenges for research and practice

The pursuit of justice increasingly relies on productive interactions between witnesses and investigators from diverse cultural backgrounds during investigative interviews. To date, the role of cultural context has largely been ignored by researchers in the field of investigative interviewing, despite repeated requests from practitioners and policymakers for evidence-based guidance for the conduct of interviews with people from different cultures. Through examining cultural differences in human memory and communication and considering specific contextual challenges for investigative interviewing through the lens of culture, this review and associated commentaries highlight the scope for considering culture and human diversity in research on, and the practice of, investigative interviewing with victims, witnesses, and other sources. Across 11 commentaries, contributors highlight the importance of considering the role of culture in different investigative interviewing practices (e.g., rapport building, questioning techniques) and contexts (e.g., gender-based violence, asylum seeking, child abuse), address common areas of cultural mismatch between interviewer–interviewee expectations, and identify critical future routes for research. We call for an increased focus in the investigative interviewing literature on the nature and needs of our global community and encourage constructive and collaborative discussion between researchers and practitioners from around the world to better identify specific challenges and work together towards evidence-based solutions.     

Gouvernance métropolitaine et démocratie: l'exemple des politiques de lutte contre la drogue

Cet article discute le thème de la gouvernance métropolitaine dans le contexte helvétique, sur la base d'une étude du cas de la politique de la drogue. La première partie montre l'émergence de mécanismes de gouvernance métropolitaine en matière de toxicomanie, en réponse à la fragmentation institutionnelle importante des agglomérations helvétiques. Il s'agit de réseaux associant acteurs publics et privés avec des horizons territoriaux divers, permettant un pilotage politique relativement indépendant du découpage territorial institutionnel. Deux types différents de gouvernance métropolitaine en matière de drogue sont identifiés. La deuxième partie de l'article aborde la question de savoir si ces mécanismes de gouvernance métropolitaine ne contribuent pas à dissocier les territoires de l'action publique et l'espace de la participation démocratique. Les résultats de l'analyse montrent que l'imputation de l'action aux élus est toujours possible, et que le contrôle exercé par les citoyens lors de votes populaires reste important. De plus, les mécanismes de gouvernance métropolitaine ont donné lieu à de nouvelles plates‐formes de débat, favorisant l'émergence d'une optique d'agglomération dans le débat politique surle thème de la drogue.     

Democracy promotion in EU enlargement negotiations: more interaction,less hierarchy

ABSTRACT

In the integration literature, the relationship of the European Union (EU) as a donor and the (potential) candidates for EU membership as recipients of democracy promotion is described as asymmetrical. The donor is portrayed to have full whereas recipients have moderate or even no leverage over democratic reform what brings a hierarchical notion of active donors versus passive recipients into the analysis. Taking the local turn into consideration, however, this contribution argues that democracy promotion, is better conceptualized as a dynamic interplay between external and domestic actors. It reveals the toolbox of instruments that both sides dispose of, traces the dynamic use of these instruments, and systematizes the structural and behavioural factors that constrain the negotiation interplay. A case study of negotiations over public administration reform in Croatia in the context of EU enlargement shows that domestic actors dispose of leverage that counterweights external leverage and mitigates the implied hierarchy.     

Navigating Get-Tough and Support-Oriented Philosophies for Improving School Safety: Insights from School Administrators and School Safety Staff

American Journal of Criminal Justice - Schools in the United States are increasingly faced with the challenge of navigating two seemingly contradictory approaches to school safety. On the one hand,...     

Remittances,Bonds and Bridges: Remittances and Social Capital in Burundi

This study explores the effects of remittances on households’ structural social capital in urban Burundi. Distinctions are made between bonding and bridging social capital, referring to intra- versus inter-network ties of family members and friends. The results demonstrate that remittance-receiving households invest more in bridging social capital by participating in organisations (donating time), but make fewer monetary contributions, compared to non-receiving households. Remittances have mixed effects on bonding social capital: receiving households give significantly less gifts to family members and friends, but are more likely to send internal remittances, compared to non-receivers. The implications of these findings for post-conflict development are discussed.     

Are Just-World Beliefs Compatible with Justifying Inequality? Collective Political Efficacy as a Moderator

Previous research demonstrates that the belief in a just world is often accompanied by the justification of social inequality and by low socio-political participation (e.g., Jost and Hunyady, Curr Direct Psychol Sci 14:260–265, 2005). However, studies provide evidence that the relations may be moderated by individual differences such as a person’s self-efficacy expectations to promote justice and equality (Mohiyeddini and Montada, Responses to victimization and belief in a just world, 1998). At the societal level, collective political efficacy has consistently been found to foster political participation (cf. Lee, Int J Public Opin Res 22:392–411, 2010). In our study, we tested whether collective political efficacy may attenuate the negative social impact of the belief in a just world: It is predicted that when collective political efficacy is low, a strong belief in a just world would increase the motivation to justify inequality. By contrast, when collective political efficacy is high, the belief in a just world would not increase, but potentially decrease the motivation to justify inequality. In turn, justification of inequality is expected to negatively affect socio-political participation. Data from 150 university students were analyzed using moderated structural equation modeling. In our study, the expected moderating effect of collective political efficacy on the relation between belief in a just world and justification of inequality was established empirically. When collective political efficacy was high, justification of inequality did not inevitably increase with the belief in a just world. In addition, the impact of belief in a just world on justice-promoting behavior was mediated by justification of inequality. Implications for theory and future research are discussed.     

Individual Differences in the Deterrence Process: Which Individuals Learn (Most) from Their Offending Experiences?

Objectives

To test whether individuals differ in deterrability by studying whether the effect of criminal experiences on perceived detection risk varies by criminal propensity.

Methods

Data from the British “Offending, Crime and Justice Survey”, a four-wave panel study on criminal behavior and victimization, are analyzed. Two subsamples for analyses are constructed: one of non-offenders at first measurement, to analyze the effect of gaining first offending experiences during the time of study (n = 1,279) and one sample of individuals who have committed offenses within the past year (n = 567), to analyze the effect of police contact among active offenders. Fixed-effects regressions of perceived detection risk on criminal experiences and interactions between criminal experiences and measures of criminal propensity (risk-affinity, impulsivity) are estimated.

Results

Analyses support learning models for the formation and change of risk perceptions, but individual differences by criminal propensity are present in the deterrence process: After gaining first offending experiences, impulsive individuals as well as risk-averse individuals are more likely to lower their perceptions about the probability of detection than less impulsive or risk-affine individuals are. A positive effect of police contact on expected detection risk is restricted to risk-averse individuals.

Conclusions

Findings support claims that deterrence works differently for crime-prone individuals. The differential effects of impulsivity and risk-affinity underline the importance of not combining constituent characteristics of criminal propensity in composite indices, because they might have differential effects on deterrence.