Trade union behaviour and inter-regional variations in unemployment rates

An important problem in the political economy of the UK is that the disparity of unemployment rates across its regions is much more marked than the corresponding dispersion of wage rates. One possibility is that this is due to the attitude of trade unions to their members in different regions. If unions wish to preserve parity between members in different regions then they will value wage equality between regions over and above wage levels. This may then persuade them to overlook inter-regional productivity differences in setting wages. The price that low-efficiency regions will then pay for this desire for wage equality is higher unemployment rates.Much of the research for this paper was carried out while the author was visiting the Trade Union Economics Research Institute (FIEF), Stockholm in 1989. An earlier version of this paper was presented at a seminar there and the author is gratefully to Villy Bergstrom, Paul Chen, Douglas Hibbs, Eva Udden-Jondal and other institute members for several useful comments. Comments from Kevin Lee, John Spencer and an anonymous referee have also substantially improved the paper. The usual disclaimer applies.     

A Test of Generalizability of the Social Development Model Across Gender and Income Groups with Longitudinal Data from the Elementary School Developmental Period

The social development model (SDM) is a theory of behavior that has proven useful in explaining the etiology of delinquency, violence, and substance use among adolescents as well as early antisocial behavior among pre-adolescents. A further test of the model is its generalizability across population groups. A section of the SDM representing prosocial influences in the etiology of problem behavior was compared for boys and girls and for children from low- and non low-income families using three waves of child, parent and teacher survey data on a sample of 851 elementary school students. Multiple group structural equation modeling was used to assess differences across groups in both measurement of model constructs and hypothesized structural paths between constructs. The results indicate overall similarity in the reliability of measurement models and validity of structural models.     

General systems theory and criminal justice

Criminal justice agencies are organized sequentially — “output” from one agency is “input” to the next — but most scholars argue that criminal justice is not a system in a theoretical sense. In this article, it is argued that general systems theory (GST) reveals important insights into criminal justice structures and functions. Specifically, it is argued that the criminal justice system processes “cases” rather than people, and that the common goal of criminal justice processing is to “close cases so that they stay closed.” It also is argued that processing capacity progressively declines, in that at each system point the subsequent agency cannot input as many cases as the previous agency can output. Each agency therefore experiences “backward pressure” to close cases in order to reduce input to the next agency. Overall, this article highlights that criminal justice agents and agencies are best understood as operating in the context of the larger whole, thus it is concluded that criminal justice is a system in the sense of general systems theory.