Social Determinants and E-Disclosure： Empirical Evidence From Spain

In the last few years, new communication tools have been changing the relationship between administration and citizens in order to enhance public accountability that is essential for government transparency. Public accountability and transparency on the web are topics that have attracted the interest of several scholars, who have begun to investigate the determinants of disclosure. The local government＇s websites have become the main channel for communication with stakeholders and the most important disclosure tools. This paper explores the use of websites by local governments; especially, its aim is to find out which social determinants predict the diffusion of e-disclosure in the public sector in light of agency theory and neo-institutional theory. In particular, the paper contributes to increasing the literature on the e-disclosure, moreover, the scoring system for the e-disclosure analysis in public local government is proposed. The analysis is carried out on a sample of local governments （LGs） in Spain during 2012.     

Exploitation in Human Trafficking and Smuggling

This article explores the mechanisms that underpin human smuggling and trafficking. It argues for the continued analytical relevance of the distinction between “trafficking” and “smuggling”, as posited by the 2000 UN Protocols. While this distinction has come under sustained criticism from several authors over the last 15 years, it nonetheless continues to capture the essential features of two distinct phenomena (control over a human being vs. illegal entry into a country), and acknowledges the role of agency in smuggling. The paper goes on to discuss three different scenarios that may emerge as a result of the interplay between smugglers and smuggled persons, and it specifies the role of exploitation in each scenario. In addition, the paper offers empirical evidence of the key building blocks of smuggling — namely the search for reliable information and the reaching of an agreement in regard to the service offered — and of how smuggling can turn into trafficking. This work concludes by drawing out the relevant policy implications.     

Two Meanings of ‘Reasonableness’: Dispelling the ‘Floating’ Reasonable Doubt

The ‘reasonable doubt standard’ is the controlling standard of proof for criminal fact finding in several jurisdictions. Drawing on decision theory, some scholars have argued that the stringency of this standard varies according to the circumstances of the case. This article contends that the standard does not lend itself to the ‘sliding‐scale’ approach mandated by decision theory. This is supported through investigation of the concept of ‘reasonableness’. While this concept has mostly been studied as it operates with reference to practical reasoning, scant attention has been given to the meaning that it acquires when referred to theoretical reasoning. Unlike in the former case, reasonableness does not in the latter depend on the reasoner's attitudes in favour of the outcomes of a decisional process. Therefore, since criminal fact finding is an instance of theoretical reasoning, the question whether in this enterprise a doubt is reasonable is not susceptible to a decision‐theoretic approach.     

Is there a Southern European Healthcare Model?

Is there a typically Southern European model of healthcare? To answer this question it is not enough to find similarities between the Greek, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese health systems: it is also necessary that these similarities be in some way distinctive. For this reason the author compares these Southern European countries with other Western European countries, in particular those which, like the southern countries, have adopted a national health service. Notwithstanding the eccentricities of the Greek case, this comparison shows how the four healthcare systems share certain characteristics which effectively distinguish them from their Northern European counterparts. These traits are particularly evident in the birth of the national health service, the legacy of the previous health insurance system, the composition of healthcare costs, the rule of private hospitals, the entitlements of patients, and patients' level of satisfaction with the healthcare system.     

Altered handwriting suggests cognitive impairment and may be relevant to posthumous evaluation

Judging the validity of a disputed will is complex; however, one of the main issues is what the mental status of the testator was at the time of the will. If the will is handwritten, a handwriting analysis can provide information on the mental status of the testator. We tested how two writing parameters (the "writing score," a novel evaluation scale that we previously described, and the percentage of spelling mistakes) are capable to identify cognitively impaired persons. These parameters are especially helpful because they can be used to evaluate the mental status of a deceased person. We found a significant correlation between either parameter and established scales of neuropsychological evaluation (Mini Mental State Examination and Milan Overall Dementia Assessment scale). Specifically, a poor score on either parameter reliably identified a compromised cognitive status. These may represent helpful additions to existing techniques in posthumously identifying persons with severe cognitive impairment.     

Do Theories of Punishment Necessarily Deliver a Binary System of Verdicts? An Exploratory Essay

Scholars writing on theories of punishment generally try to answer two main questions: what human behaviour should be punished and why? Only cursorily do they concern themselves with the question as to how confident in the occurrence of criminal behaviour we must be prior to punishing—i.e., the question of the criminal standard of proof. Theories of punishment are ultimately theories about choices of action—in particular, about how to treat individuals. If this is correct, it seems that they should not overlook one of the fundamental variables governing human decision-making: the uncertainty about the facts relevant to our acting. Now, the question as to whether existing theories of punishment require a standard of proof as high as ‘proof beyond a reasonable doubt’ is gaining increasing attention in the scholarship. However, scholars working on theories of punishment give little attention to a particular way in which human decision-making handles the problem of uncertainty. In our everyday lives, we often decide in a many-valued, rather than a binary, fashion. Instead of having a single evidential threshold, the satisfaction of which determines whether we act or stay put, we tend to adjust our actions to our degree of confidence in certain states of affairs. In other words, we decide based on a ladder of evidential thresholds: the features of our actions vary according to the evidential threshold that we have satisfied. Notably, criminal trials do not follow this structure and theorists generally take this departure for granted. Why shouldn’t trials work as ‘ex post facto bets,’ whereby the response that the state is willing to ‘wager’ correlates with the fact finder’s confidence in the defendant’s guilt? The paper explores this question; in particular, it assesses whether the main theories of punishment (consequentialist, retributive, and communicative) necessarily deliver a binary system of verdicts. The work is part of a long-term research project on the comparison between the binary and the many-valued models of the system of criminal verdicts.     

The ‘New Right' Vote: An Analysis of the Gender Gap in the Vote Choice for the SVP

Studying the Swiss national elections 2003, we find a pronounced gender gap in the SVP vote ‐ women are significantly less likely to vote for this party than are men. In order to explain this gender gap, this article combines two innovative approaches. On the one hand, it links the literature on gender gaps with research on the New Right. On the other, it makes a distinction between the conditional and compositional effects of explanatory factors. Our analysis reveals that conditional effects are of greater relevance than compositional ones. Explanatory factors regularly applied in research on the New Right have a conditional effect inasmuch as they only have an effect on male voters, but cannot explain the behaviour of women. This, in turn, also highlights the importance of a gender‐specific focus for further research.     

Going It Alone? Strategic Entry under Mixed Electoral Rules

Recent studies on strategic voting and entry in elections that combine plurality or majority and proportional representation (PR) have found candidate placement in single-member district (SMD) races to improve a party's PR performance. The primary implication of the existence of "contamination effects" is that parties have an incentive to nominate candidates in as many single-member districts as possible. Pre-electoral coordination in the majoritarian component of mixed electoral systems, however, is far from uncommon. In this article, we identify a number of institutional incentives that induce political parties to form pre-electoral alliances in spite of contamination effects. By identifying institutions that favor and hamper coordination, we seek to advance the understanding of PR-SMD interactions and to assess their implications for the design, classification, and empirical analysis of mixed electoral rules. Our statistical tests evaluate strategic entry in a diverse sample of countries.