Optimal Law Enforcement with a Rent-Seeking Government

This article analyzes public and private law enforcement whenthe government is motivated by rent seeking. A rent-seekinggovernment seeks primarily to maximize revenue. The articleconcludes as follows: (1) if offenders have sufficient wealth,a rent-seeking government is more aggressive than a social-welfare-maximizinggovernment in enforcing laws against minor crimes (such as parkingviolations) but more lax in enforcing laws against major crimes;(2) competitive private enforcement is usually better and neverworse than monopolistic private enforcement; (3) The choicebetween competitive private enforcement and public enforcementdepends on which is cheaper and on the severity of the offense.     

NETWORK REGULATION: THE MANY FACES OF ACCESS

Telecommunications regulation has experienced a fundamentalshift from rate regulation to increased reliance on compelledaccess, perhaps best exemplified by the Telecommunications Actof 1996's imposition of no fewer than four new access requirements.Unfortunately, each access requirement is governed by a separateset of rules for determining both the scope and the price ofaccess. The resulting ad hoc regime has created difficult definitionalproblems and opportunities for regulatory arbitrage. In thisarticle we propose a system inspired by the discipline of mathematicsknown as graph theory that integrates all of the different formsof access into a single analytical framework. This system separatesdifferent access regimes into five categories: (1) retail access,(2) wholesale access, (3) interconnection access, (4) platformaccess, and (5) unbundled access. It also provides insightsinto how each type of access complicates the already difficultproblems of network configuration and management and introducesinefficient biases into decisions about network capacity anddesign. The approach we propose also provides insights intothe transaction cost implications of the different types ofaccess. Drawing on the Coasean theory of the firm, our approachexamines the tradeoffs between internal governance costs andthe external transaction costs of providing access to offera theory of network boundaries. This framework shows how accessregulation distorts networks' natural boundaries and providesa basis for evaluating whether private ordering through marketswould lead to more efficient network design.     

A CRITIQUE OF PROFESSOR CHURCH'S REPORT ON THE IMPACT OF VERTICAL AND CONGLOMERATE MERGERS ON COMPETITION

We discuss Professor Jeffrey Church's report to the EuropeanCommission in 2004 on the effects of vertical restraints andmergers. Although thorough and accurate, the report could bemisinterpreted by practitioners, as it does not emphasize thatmarket power is only a necessary condition for harm to competition,and that most vertical mergers that present the possibilityof competitive harm also present economic efficiencies thatare intrinsic to the integration.     

Book reviews

Turkey in the Middle East By Philip Robins. Pinter for the Royal Institute of international Affairs. 1991.130 pp. £22.50. ISBNO 86187 198 7. PBk £8.95. ISBN 0 86187 1995.

Hitler Slept Late and other blunders that cost him the war By James P. Duffy. London: Praeger. 1991.176pp. £17.50.

Alliance within the alliance: Franco‐German Military Cooperation and the European Pillar of Defense By David G. Haglund. Boulder: Westview Press, 1991. 213 pp.

Homeward Bound? Allied Forces in the New Germany Edited by David G. Haglund and Olaf Mager. Boulder: Westview Press, 1992. 299 pp. £24.95

Avoiding War: Problems of crisis management By Alexander L. George (ed.), Westview Press, 1991. 590 pp. £16.95.

The Future of NATO: Facing an Unreliable Enemy in an Uncertain Environment By S.N. Drew et al. Praeger Publishers, New York, 1991. pp. 206.

Parliament and international relations Edited by Charles Carstairs and Richard Ware. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1991. 195 pp. £12.99 (paperback)     

Aednet: A single-discipline network in a multi-national setting

The computer-mediated network is a moderately expanding phenomenon. A major reason for this growth is the need for transferring technology to developing nations. But because many of these nations are not traditional users of advanced technology and because even the purveyors are not yet fully comfortable with the networks, the medium is not being used as much as perhaps it ought to be. In establishing a multinational network, one should be careful to treat all potential users with equity and not create an informational elite. Part of the challenge of such a system is making it accessible to operatives in the field. An effective way of introducing a network is to blend it with existing technologies, keep the costs down and the quality of information up, provide a usable information-retrieval system, and pay attention to microand macro-ergonomics. The Adult Education Network (AEDNET) of the Kellogg Project at Syracuse University has started working on a next-generation computer-mediated network system. It is proposed that AEDNET involve three action groups in the project: researchers, those interested in social implications, and users.     

Introduction to the Baby Jane Doe papers

A conference was held at the State University of New York at Stony Brook in October 1984 to discuss the controversy concerning treatment of a newborn with severe congenital defects that became known as the Baby Jane Doe case. Fox provides some background information on the case to introduce a set of of six articles consisting of papers delivered at the conference. These articles deal with historical aspects of the treatment debate (Stanley J. Reiser), problems of clinical decision making (John M. Freeman), the legal issues involved (John A. Robertson), coverage of the case by the media (Stephen Klaidman and Tom L. Beauchamp), federal efforts to regulate the treatment of handicapped newborns (Lawrence D. Brown), and the alliance that arose between opponents of abortion and advocates of the rights of the handicapped (Constance Paige and Elisa B. Karnofsky).     

On evaluating mediators

Conclusion Evaluating mediators is a complex process, but not an impossible one. While no single solution is likely to be found, a set of options is emerging. Any new refinement, admittedly, brings with it new difficulties, and the options laid out here are themselves complex to administer. An adroit program management may be able to put together relatively quickly a workable, efficient, and fair approach to evaluation that is tailored to its own circumstances. But most likely, the process of developing evaluation tools will require sustained effort, justified partly by recognition that only trial and error will eventually produce a result keyed to the program's, the parties', and the mediators' diverse needs.Nevertheless, it should be apparent that avoidance of the problems is no longer an acceptable strategy. In an era when rational standards for judging the elements of mediators' effectiveness are becoming more refined, and when mediation itself is becoming an increasingly common option for resolving all kinds of disputes, retaining public confidence in any program will demand that the program devote time and effort to evaluating and strengthening its most important resources. Christopher Honeyman has played a variety of dispute resolution roles including mediator, arbitrator, and administrative law judge in cases involving labor and environmental issues, for the State of Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (P.O. Box 7870, Madison, Wis. 53707-7870) and for other programs.An earlier version of this article was presented under the title Problems in Evaluating Mediators, at the North American Conference on Peacemaking and Conflict Resolution, Montreal, Quebec, March, 1989.Christina Sickles Merchant, Byron Yaffe, Stephen Goldberg, Jeanne Brett and Martha Askins offered detailed and helpful critiques of earlier drafts of this work. I am particularly grateful to the mediators of Maine's Court Mediation Service and to its directors, Jane Orbeton and the late Lincoln Clark, for their willingness to take the risks of applying an untried theory and their help in developing it. And once again, my colleagues at the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission provided numerous and significant comments and criticisms which have corrected my thinking on a number of points. However, the opinions expressed here are the author's, and do not necessarily reflect the policy of the WERC.     

The courts,interest groups,and public opinion about abortion

Public preferences about the availability of abortion under various circumstances have remained fairly stable over time. Yet a standard CBS/New York Times abortion question indicates that a significant shift in opinion occurred during the 1980s, whereby the public became increasingly supportive of legalized abortion as it is now. These very different patterns of public opinion about abortion suggest that the public perceived a shift in the abortion status quo, toward more restricted access, over time, and became more supportive of current abortion policy.A model of support for legalized abortion as it is now is developed that incorporates the influences of court activities and interest-group behavior. The analysis indicates that the public reacted directly to the activities of the courts, becoming more supportive of current abortion policy in response to media coverage of court cases that challenged the abortion status quo and Supreme Court nominations and confirmations. Although absolute preferences remained largely unchanged, it appears the public perceived an increasing threat to the status quo and became correspondingly less enamored with further restrictions on the availability of abortion.