Not Just Steering but Weaving: Relevant Knowledge and the Craft of Building Policy Capacity and Coherence

相似文献   

Parents' Achievement Goals and Perfectionism in Their Academically Talented Children

Parents of academically talented students have been accused of pushing their children to attain high levels of achievement, as well as fostering performance anxiety and perfectionism in their children. Parents' achievement goals for their children, in terms of the focus on high performance or learning for understanding, were examined in relation to children's perfectionism. Parents (127 sets) and their sixth-grade academically talented children (56% boys) completed the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale and parents reported their achievement goals for their children. Most parents reported learning goals, suggesting that emphasis on meeting external standards is not predominant among parents of talented students. Children of performance goal parents were significantly more likely to exhibit dysfunctional perfectionism than children of learning goal parents, reporting a combination of high concern about mistakes, doubts about actions, parental expectations, and parental criticism. Parents' achievement goals can help predict which students might be at risk for adjustment problems and future underachievement.     

Promise and peril

The size of the federal budget tells only one part of the tale of government's presence in the market economy. The enormous amounts of non-tax dollars government requires to be spent on regulation – estimated at $647 billion per year – powerfully argue for some sort of regulatory scorekeeping. Regulatory costs are equivalent to over one-third of the level of government spending. A regulatory budget can be an effective tool both for spurring reform and monitoring regulatory activity.At bottom, today's rulemaking process is plagued by the fact that agency bureaucrats are not accountable to voters. And Congress – though responsible for the underlying statutes that usually propel those unanswerable agencies – nevertheless can conveniently blame agencies for regulatory excesses. Indeed, Americans live under a regime of Regulation Without Representation.A regulatory budget could promote greater accountability by limiting the regulatory costs agencies could impose on the private sector. Congress could either specify a limit on compliance costs for each newly enacted law or reauthorization of existing law, or Congress could enact a more ambitious full-scale budget paralleling the fiscal budget, a riskier approach. A comprehensive budget would require Congress to divide to a total budget among agencies. Agencies' responsibility would be to rank hazards serially, from most to least severe, and address them within their budget constraint. In either version of a regulatory budget, any agency desiring to exceed its budget would need to seek congressional approval.Regulatory costs imposed on the private sector by federal agencies can never be precisely measured, and a budget cannot achieve absolute precision. Nonetheless, a regulatory budget is a valuable tool. The real innovation of regulatory budgeting is its potential to impose the consequences of regulatory decisionmaking on agencies rather than on the regulated parties alone. Agencies that today rarely admit a rule provides negligible benefit would be forced to compete for the right to regulate. While agencies would be free to regulate as unwisely as they do now, the consequences could be transfer of the squandered budgetary allocation to a rival agency that saves more lives.Budgeting could fundamentally change incentives. Under a budget, adopting a costly, but marginally beneficial, regulation will suddenly be irrational. Congress would weigh an agency's claimed benefits against alternative means of protecting public health and safety, giving agencies incentives to compete and expose one another's bogus benefits. Budgeting could encourage greater recognition of the fact that some risks are far more remote than those we undertake daily. In the long run, a regulatory budget would force agencies to compete with one another on the most important bottom line of all: that their least-effective rules save more lives per dollar spent (or correct some alleged market imperfection better) than those of other agencies.There are clear benefits to regulatory budgeting, but there are also pitfalls. For instance, under a budget, agencies have incentives to underestimate compliance costs while regulated parties have the opposite incentive. Self-correcting techniques that may force opposing cost calculations to converge are only at the thought- experiment stage. However, limitations on the delegation of regulatory power and enhancing congressional accountability can help.Certain principles and antecedents can help ensure that a regulatory budgeting effort succeeds. Explicitly recognizing that an agency's basic impulse is to overstate the benefits of its activities, a budget would relieve agencies of benefit calculation responsibilities altogether. Agencies would concentrate on properly assessing only the costs of their initiatives. Since an agency must try to maximize benefits within its budget constraint or risk losing its budget allocation, it would be rational for agencies to monitor benefits, but Congress need not require it.Other ways to promote the success of a budget are to: establish an incremental rather than total budget; collect and summarize annual report card data on the numbers of regulations in each agency; establish a regulatory cost freeze; implement a Regulatory Reduction Commission; employ separate budgets for economic and environmental/social regulation; and control indirect costs by limiting the regulatory methods that most often generate them.A regulatory budget is not a magic device alone capable of reducing the current $647 billion regulatory burden. Yet a cautious one deserve consideration. Having good information is an aid in grappling with the regulatory state just as compiling the federal fiscal budget is indispensable to any effort to plan and control government spending.     

Public accountability: Effectiveness, equity, ethics

This article tests a wide range of government activities against requirements for public accountability. The article explores the incentives for ethical behaviour by public officials; the need for more outcome focused performance indicators, tensions between parliamentary and managerial accountability; the standards of accountability applied to public providers of services can be applied to private providers; the utility of spelling out service requirements in advance; the impacts on accountability of the convergence of the public and private sectors; the need, where responsibility for programs is collaborative, for a clear governance framework, tensions between representative and participative democracy, and trends towards more participative and collaborative leadership.     

Enforcing labour rights of irregular migrants in Indonesia

The multi-directional nature of labour migration flows has resulted in an increasing number of countries having become both senders and receivers of regular and irregular migrants. However, some countries continue to see themselves primarily as senders and so ignore their role as a receiving country, which can have negative implications for the rights of migrants in their territory. Using the example of Indonesia, which is State Party to the 1990 UN Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Their Families, this article demonstrates that irregular migrant workers in this country have the legal right to protection against labour exploitation even when they work despite the government’s prohibition on employment. The article discusses the ‘right to work’ and how international human rights law has translated it into the ‘right to protection from labour exploitation’ for irregular migrants in Indonesia. By way of two case studies about the Indonesian government’s handling of irregular migrants, it shows how it prioritises enforcement of the employment immigration law over labour and employment laws much like countries that have not ratified the ICRMW. It also draws attention to legal protection gaps that emerge for asylum seekers when they are recognised to be genuine refugees.     

Mitochondrial DNA sequencing of beetle larvae (Nitidulidae: Omosita) recovered from human bone

The isolation, amplification, and characterization of human DNA from hematophagous (blood feeding) and necrophagous (carrion feeding) arthropods have been advanced significantly by the development of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) DNA sequencing methodologies. Historically, DNA technology has been successfully utilized to identify individual hosts upon which species of hematophagous arthropods have fed. The analysis of hematophagous insects' gut content blood meals has led to major advances in medical entomology and vector-borne disease epidemiology. In the forensic arena, the ability to apply similar techniques to insects recovered from badly decomposed remains has been greatly enhanced through the advent of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) techniques. Mitochondrial DNA analyses have been utilized to identify both the human remains upon which fly larvae (maggots) have fed and the species of the larvae themselves. The preliminary work detailed here demonstrates, for the first time, the successful application of mtDNA sequencing techniques to the analysis of necrophagous beetle larvae. A small sample of sap beetle larvae, Omosita spp. (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae), was collected from human skeletal remains during anthropological examination and analyzed for human DNA using mtDNA sequencing. The beetle larvae yielded mtDNA matching that of the host human bone. The results detailed here further demonstrate the robust nature of human mtDNA and the ability to recover valuable mtDNA evidence from forensically important, late decompositional stage insect species.     

Concentrations of unconjugated morphine, codeine and 6-acetylmorphine in urine specimens from suspected drugged drivers

Concentrations of unconjugated morphine, codeine and 6-acetylmorphine (6-AM), the specific metabolite of heroin, were determined in urine specimens from 339 individuals apprehended for driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) in Sweden. After an initial screening analysis by immunoassay for 5-classes of abused drugs (opiates, cannabinoids, amphetamine analogs, cocaine metabolite and benzodiazepines), all positive specimens were verified by more specific methods. Opiates and other illicit drugs were analyzed by isotope-dilution gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). The limits of quantitation for morphine, codeine and 6-AM in urine were 20 ng/mL. Calibration plots included an upper concentration limit of 1000 ng/mL for each opiate. We identified the heroin metabolite 6-AM in 212 urine specimens (62%) at concentrations ranging from 20 ng/mL to > 1000 ng/mL. The concentration of 6-AM exceeded 1000 ng/mL in 79 cases (37%) and 31 cases (15%) were between 20 and 99 ng/mL. When 6-AM was present in urine the concentration of morphine was above 1000 ng/mL in 196 cases (92%). The concentrations of codeine in these same urine specimens were more evenly distributed with 35% being above 1000 ng/mL and 21% below 100 ng/mL. These results give a clear picture of the concentrations of unconjugated morphine, codeine and 6-acetylmorphine that can be expected in opiate-positive urine specimens from individuals apprehended for DUID after taking heroin.