Why Right‐Leaning Populism has Grown in the Most Advanced Liberal Democracies of Europe

Immigration and new class divisions, combined with a growing anti‐elitism and political correctness, are often used as explanations for the strong gains for right‐leaning populist parties in national elections across Europe in recent years. But contrary to what we might assume, such parties have been very successful in the most developed and comprehensive welfare states, in nations—such as the Nordic countries—with the best scores on economic equality and social inclusion and long established political and judicial institutions enjoying a high degree of popular legitimacy. As argued in this article, this seems to happen because a duopoly of the centre‐left and centre‐right political establishment has kept issues such as immigration and new class divisions off the public agenda and hence paved the way for right‐leaning ‘disruptor’ populist parties with an anti‐immigration agenda in times of increasing immigration.     

Closing the Window of Vulnerability: Nuclear Proliferation and Conventional Retaliation

Living with a nuclear-armed enemy is unattractive, but, strangely, states seldom use their military power to prevent the enemy’s entry into the nuclear club. It is puzzling why preventive strikes against nuclear programs have been quite rare. I address this puzzle by considering the role of conventional retaliation, a subfield of deterrence that so far has received scant attention in the literature. I theorize the concept of conventional retaliation and test its explanatory power. First, I explore all historical cases where states struck another state’s nuclear installations and find none occurring when the proliferator threatened conventional retaliation. Second, I explore two cases where a strike was most likely, but the would-be attacker balked and find smoking-gun evidence that the threat of conventional retaliation restrained the would-be attacker. This evidence supports my claim that the threat of conventional retaliation is sufficient to deter a preventive strike against emerging nuclear states.     

The Dark Sides of Artificial Intelligence: An Integrated AI Governance Framework for Public Administration

ABSTRACT

As government and public administration lag behind the rapid development of AI in their efforts to provide adequate governance, they need respective concepts to keep pace with this dynamic progress. The literature provides few answers to the question of how government and public administration should respond to the great challenges associated with AI and use regulation to prevent harm. This study analyzes AI challenges and former AI regulation approaches. Based on this analysis and regulation theory, an integrated AI governance framework is developed that compiles key aspects of AI governance and provides a guide for the regulatory process of AI and its application. The article concludes with theoretical implications and recommendations for public officers.     

Implementation Between Tradition and Management: Structuration and Styles of Implementation

This article presents a diachronic perspective for implementation research. It analyzes implementation practices in relation to their changing institutional context. Therefore, a comparison is made between different styles of implementation.
The relationship between implementation practices and institutional context is analyzed as a structuration process, following Giddens's theory. Four styles of policy implementation are distinguished: a traditional, bureaucratic, professional, and managerial style. These four styles are connected with different phases in the development of the welfare state. This developmental model is illustrated with an analysis of policy implementation in Dutch public assistance between 1950 and the early 1990s.