Arbitrary Arbitration: Diverting Juveniles Into the Justice System

Abstract Considerable research has examined the effects of diverting juveniles away from the juvenile justice system. These studies have seldom investigated the possibility that diversion may inadvertently “widen the net.” This article assesses the relationship between diversion and net-widening by evaluating a leading Florida-based diversionary program, and this program's capacity to “create a clientele” in order to justify its very existence. The diversionary program under evaluation herein boasts a 98% nonrecidivist rate among its clients, and is touted as a prototype diversionary program for the nation. The current study results, however, indicate that a majority of youths diverted by this program have committed such trivial acts that entrance into any aspect of the juvenile justice system—even under the guise of a diversionary program—seems unwarranted. The results further suggest that among youths who have committed serious juvenile crimes, most are terminated unsuccessfully from this program, and are returned to the justice system for prosecution.     

Electoral equilibria with entry: Some simulations

The objective of this paper is to investigate by means of simulation the impact of third-party entry on the spatial separation of candidates. Specifically, we do real-time simulations of Palfrey's (1984) model of electoral equilibria with entry after relaxing some of its assumptions. Our finding that the threat of third-party entry can induce virtually the same spatial separation of the major-party candidates as entry with certainty is both a strong and interesting result.     

The Discursive Demolition of the Asian Development Model

I demonstrate the constitutive effects of discursive strategies and explore the discursive conditions in which changing ideas generate these effects. I perform an extensive analysis of the discursive strategies generated by three key actors in the Asian financial crisis. I argue that all three, U.S. Treasury, the International Monetary Fund, and the Kim Dae-jung South Korean administration, represented key practices associated with the Asian model as "cronyism" and as "corruption," thereby normatively delegitimating these practices, thereby effecting the demise of the Asian model of development in Korea. I argue that these discursive practices generate narrative structures that have a constitutive effect on the subsequent discursive and economic practices of actors. The manner in which the narratives represent "causes" of the crisis constitute and reconstitute the social meanings by which past and current social and economic practices are legitimated or de-legitimated. The structures constituted by these social meanings re-create and reconstitute the present and future conditions for strategic action. I conclude with a demonstration of how these narratives institutionalize the discourses they construct through changes in Korean state and commercial institutions.