‘Hoisted with our own petard’: evidence and democratic deliberation on obesity

Key actors engaged in debate on obesity in Australia and the UK subscribe to radically different narratives about the nature, extent and even existence of this public health problem. Yet there is a common thread to these clashing narratives: evidence. All are emphatic that their story is ‘evidence-based’. In this paper, I seek to examine this state of affairs by looking at how actors think about, use and interpret evidence across a range of sites of policy debate on this issue. In doing so, I contribute to academic inquiry about the place of evidence in democratic deliberation. Firstly, I find that there is a high degree of consensus among actors who promote differing interpretations of the issue on what evidence means and entails in the abstract. Secondly, I find that the differing narratives on obesity are underpinned by different interpretations of the evidence, but that internal inconsistencies affect each of these competing narratives as well. As such, I argue that policy actors should not be seen just as strategically marshalling convenient evidence to support a preconceived cause. Overall, I suggest that these findings have mixed implications for democratic deliberation on the issue, enhancing the deliberative side of the equation but undermining the democratic. I then point to ways in which the goals of evidence-based and democratic policymaking on this issue may be further reconciled.     

The parole hearing: Decision or justification?

A detailed content analysis of tape-recordings of 100 randomly selected California parole hearings revealed that these hearings take the form of short, unstructured diagnostic interviews in which the hearing officers ask questions of the prisoners who respond in a very minimal way. Different patterns of questioning and prisoner response occurred for hearings where the eventual decision was to grant parole as opposed to deny parole, and this decision outcome could be predicted with a high degree of accuracy by discriminant function analyses. In general, the hearing officers made their own psychological assessments of the prisoners, even though they lacked knowledge and training in this diagnostic skill. According to the results of this study, the parole decision-making process appears to be a reliable one, but nevertheless its validity is questionable.     

The Implications of National Competition Policy

The Competition Policy Reform Bill 1995 is part of a national policy package which aims to free up competition in Australian markets. The objective is to systematically remove anti-competitive behaviour so that efficiency is improved to the public benefit.
While one can endorse the concept that economic efficiency is best served in a purely competitive market, where businesses can get on with their responsibilitiy to maximise profits, concerns exist as to whether it is possible to impose legislatively and unilaterally an economic principle or philosophy on a nation that will achieve its lofty objectives.
These proposals were developed before the 1996 federal election.     

Assessing Pretrial Publicity Effects: Integrating Content Analytic Results

When a case has received pretrial publicity which has the capacity to bias potential jurors in the trial venue, a change of venue is one means of attempting to ensure that the defendant receives a fair trial. Content analysis of the pretrial publicity surrounding a case can provide the court with important information to consider when determining whether prejudice in the relevant community is too great for the defendant to receive a fair trial. This paper presents an approach to content analysis of pretrial publicity that draws upon both legal commentary and past empirical social science research. It is a systematic approach that could be employed by both the prosecution and defense when presenting arguments to the court about whether a change of venue should be granted. Information gleaned from content analysis of the publicity surrounding a specific case fills the gap between information provided by experimental research which has examined pretrial publicity effects and public opinion polls concerning the public's perception of the defendant in a particular case. Results from a content analysis can serve to validate public opinion survey data gathered from the same locales. To exemplify this content analytic approach, a content analysis conducted by the authors in preparation for the change of venue hearing in the case of Timothy McVeigh is presented.     

DON'T SHUT UP: AUSTRALIA'S FIRST PAID PARENTAL LEAVE SCHEME AND BEYOND

Through the perspective of women's conflicting roles, this paper examines the capacity of the Australian Paid Parental Leave scheme to assist Australian families negotiate paid work and parenthood. Drawing on comparisons with other nation-state policies and interview data with Western Australian women, this paper argues that women's choices remain limited despite the introduction of the Paid Parental Leave scheme. I suggest that while Paid Parental Leave is an important reform for gender equality and improving work/life balance for many Australian families, it is not sufficient. The policy and culture of Australian workplaces need improvement.