Does Governance Matter — And If So,How? Process,Performance, and Outcomes

This article explores the connection between political process, performance, and outcomes. It lays out a set of key analytic distinctions (exogenous versus endogenous effects, micro versus macro level effects and influences, design and chance, and structures versus people) and then looks at conceptual problems in defining governmental outcomes, performance, and process. It gives extended attention to the criteria of effective governance and to the complex relationship of performance, values, and effectiveness, with emphasis on the prospects for improving governmental performance by manipulating modes of governance.     

What Ministers Do

Having been a minister in three different departments for a period of over nine years (1999–2008), during the Blair and, briefly, the Brown governments, I thought it might be useful to reflect on what ministers actually do, their functions and how they spend their days. In thinking about what I did as a minister, I have avoided going back to some of the classic constitutional texts on what ministers supposedly do, how they are accountable and such like. I am sure there is good literature on this from political scientists and constitutionalists, but I have avoided influencing my own views and approach by consulting these texts.     

Civil Servants and Policymakers: Neutral or Responsive Competence?

Competence is a frequently used but complex concept. This article explores various recent uses of the concept, with particular attention to political conditions favoring an emphasis on neutrality or responsiveness. We close with a brief comparative analysis of the quest for responsiveness in administration.     

MINORITY THREAT AND POLICE BRUTALITY: DETERMINANTS OF CIVIL RIGHTS CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS IN U.S. MUNICIPALITIES

The conflict theory of law stipulates that strategies of crime control regulate threats to the interests of dominant groups. Aggregate-level research on policing has generally supported this proposition, showing that measures of minority threat are related to legal mechanisms of crime control. Police brutality (i.e., use of excessive physical force) constitutes an extra-legal mechanism of control that has yet to be examined in this theoretical framework. This study extends research in the area theoretically and substantively by testing the hypothesis that the greater the number of threatening acts and people, the greater the number of police brutality civil rights criminal complaints filed with the U.S. Department of Justice. The findings show that measures of the presence of threatening people (percent black, percent Hispanic [in the Southwest], and majority/minority income inequality) were related positively to average annual civil rights criminal complaints.     

Trustworthiness: the Commentators

Mark Thompson deplores the decline in the public trust of government and of public service institutions such as the BBC. But there has also been a decline in another form of trust: government's trust in the ability of professionals such as doctors and teachers to deliver high quality public services. And, unlike Thompson's type of trust, this decline was inevitable, because it was based on untenable assumptions concerning professional motivation. The author discusses the importance of trust in an unwritten constitution, including trust in the use made of public resources, trust that appointments are being made on merit, trust that the civil service is ‘speaking truth unto power’ behind the scenes and ultimately trust that it retains the ability to serve future governments. In a world where trust in institutions is diminishing, there are still surprising levels of trust in the world of private philanthropy. The public are only too ready to give donations without seeking to question, especially in the wake of major disasters. Yet the nature of aid agencies has changed dramatically in the past thirty years into major global enterprises with sophisticated media and marketing operations. In this case a greater degree of scepticism from those who donate and paradoxically less trust might actually result in better outcomes from aid and better use of funding. Trust is critical to the mission of the FCO. The public needs to trust the competence and sound judgment of the professional diplomats. The diplomats themselves need to be able to rely on the commonsense of their fellow colleagues. Ministers and diplomats need to trust each other. And other governments need to have confidence in the discretion of their British counterparts. This is an increasing challenge in the world of instant news. Trust can be quickly lost by indiscreet or self‐serving revelations. But the key is to be as open and transparent as possible about the processes of diplomacy. A new survey commissioned by the British Journalism Review demonstrates that public confidence in journalism has collapsed over the last five years. This is particularly true for the commercial broadcasters ITV and Channel 4, whose journalism has traditionally commanded as much public esteem as the BBC. Trust in the BBC and print journalists has also declined, and journalism suffered more than any of the other 16 occupational groups being assessed. This is partly due to the cumulative effect of various “fakery” scandals that have afflicted broadcasters over the last 18 months and partly down to a more widespread cynicism directed at those in authority.     

The Paradox of Blackmail

Abstract. The author questions himself about what is known as "the paradox of blackmail," that is, the fact that blackmail is the result of the combination of two ways of behaving which are often both lawful if taken individually, but unlawful once they are connected. The author also examines whether the harm principle typical of liberal orders provides the justification (the rationale) for the assumption of blackmail as a crime, or whether it is instead necessary to turn to another justificatory basis: the exploitation principle. However, as this principle leads to legal moralism, it opposes a liberal ethics. Thus, one is faced with the dilemma of either accepting the harm principle thus decriminalizing blackmail, or accepting the exploitation principle and going against principles of liberalism. To escape this dilemma the author distinguishes between various types (five categories) of blackmail, concluding that only non-paradoxical types fit the common-sense expectation of criminalization.     

“CRACK,” STREET GANGS,AND VIOLENCE*

This investigation considers the connections among street gangs, “crack” cocaine, and violence associated with crack distribution during the initial years of crack proliferation. Data were extracted from the narcotics investigation files and homicide fires of five Los Angeles Police Department and Sheriff's Department areas where both crack and gangs were prominent. The aims were to compare for 1983–1985, when crack first emerged as a significant problem, hypotheses about (1) gang involvement in crack distribution and (2) concomitants of gang involvement, particularly violence. The analyses confirm a dramatic growth in crack sales, an accompanying increase in gang members involved, but a declining rate of involvement, and inconsistent evidence on the impact of gang involvement on sales events. We infer that crack distribution, while including many individual gang members, was not primarily a street gang phenomenon.     

‘And What Good Came of it at Last?’ Press–Politician Relations Post‐Leveson

James Margach famously argued that Prime Ministers from Lloyd George to Callaghan had been intent on exploiting the media in their determination to centralise power. From Margaret Thatcher onwards, however, there is a strong argument that the power relationship has been reversed, and that the Leveson Inquiry—set up in the wake of the phone hacking scandal—exposed a political class which had become deeply fearful of the power and influence of the national press. Citing evidence to Leveson and subsequent recommendations by the inquiry, this article presents two case studies—on data protection and on media ownership—where the public interest clearly demanded political intervention, which would be inconvenient for the major publishers. And yet, despite recommendations by Lord Justice Leveson and despite clear support from leading politicians of all parties, there has been virtually no policy progress in either case. While the Leveson Inquiry was billed as a watershed in press–politician relations and an opportunity to counteract decades of unhealthy press power, political inertia in these two areas suggests that very little has changed.