ADHD among incarcerated youth: An investigation on the congruency with ADHD prevalence and correlates among the general population

The limited literature on the topic speculates that the rate of ADHD would be higher among incarcerated youth than found in the general population. However, to our knowledge no such published figures exist for juveniles in the United States. This study investigates the likelihood of ADHD diagnosis among 453 incarcerated youth and compares and contrasts a variety of demographic, social, educational, psychological, and criminal characteristics to the general literature on ADHD. Both similarities and differences are reported. This project was supported by Grant #99-RT-VX-K020 awarded by the National Institute of Justice. Points of view in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. An early version of the paper was presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Science in Chicago, Illinois.     

Symposium on Implementing Public Policy: Learning from Theory and Practice

The initiative for this symposium issue arose out of a series of five ESRC seminars called 'Implementing Public Policy: Learning from Each Other'. The aim of the seminars was to revitalize interest amongst public policy researchers about implementation studies, to advance the development of ideas about public policy implementation and to assess the relevance of academic models of public policy implementation to those who deliver public services.     

The effects of decentralization on special interest groups

Public Choice - It is well established in the literature that the number of interest group organizations varies across countries and states, with economic freedom and other institutional factors...     

Underinvestment in Public Good Technologies

Although underinvestment phenomena are the rationale for government subsidization of research and development (R&D), the concept is poorly defined and its impact is seldom quantified. Conceptually, underinvestment in industrial R&D can take the form of either a wrong amount or a suboptimal composition of R&D investment. In both cases, R&D policy has not adequately modeled the relevant economic phenomena and thus is unable to characterize, explain, and measure the underinvestment. Four factors can cause systematic underinvestment in R&D-intensive industries: complexity, timing, existence of economies of scale and scope, and spillovers. The impacts of these factors vary in intensity over the typical technology life cycle, so government policy responses must be managed dynamically. In addition to understanding the causes of underinvestment in R&D, the magnitude of the deficiency relative to some “optimum” must be estimated to enable a ranking of technology areas with respect to expected net economic benefits from a government subsidy. Project selection criteria must therefore be based on quantitative and qualitative indicators that represent the nature and the magnitude of identified market failures. The major requirement for management of R&D policy therefore is a methodology that regularly assesses long-term expected benefits and risks from current and proposed R&D portfolios. To this end, a three-stage process is proposed to effectively carry out R&D policy analysis. The three stages are (1) identify and explain the causes of the underinvestment, (2) characterize and assess the investment trends and their impacts, and (3) estimate the magnitude of the underinvestment relative to a perceived optimum in terms of its cost to the economy. Only after all three stages of analysis have been completed can the underinvestment pattern be matched with the appropriate policy response.