Process choice

Regulation scholars have long searched for the best tools to use to achieve public policy goals, generating an extensive body of research on what has become known as instrument choice. By contrast, analysis of options for structuring how officials make regulatory decisions – process choice – remains in relative infancy. Notwithstanding the emphasis legal scholars and political economists have placed on administrative procedures, surprisingly little research has investigated why regulators choose among different process options or what value they and the public receive from different choices. In their book, Regulation by Litigation, Andrew Morriss, Bruce Yandle, and Andrew Dorchak make a significant contribution by empirically and normatively examining regulators' choices between notice‐and‐comment rulemaking, negotiated rulemaking, and what they call “regulation by litigation.” This review article considers three central questions about regulation by litigation. First, how if at all does regulation by litigation differ from other uses of litigation to achieve policy goals? Second, why do regulators choose litigation over other process options? Third, is regulation by litigation as bad as Morriss, Yandle, and Dorchak say it is? By addressing these conceptual, empirical, and normative questions, this review article not only reveals the specific strengths and limitations of the book, Regulation by Litigation, but also highlights more general opportunities and challenges for future research on process choice.     

Gault's Promise Revisited: The Search For Due Process

Fifty years ago, due process was introduced into the juvenile courts, but today children still do not have the guiding hand of counsel at every stage of the proceedings. In assessing the pre‐Gault world, Chief Justice Fortas observed that “[a] child receives the worst of both worlds:…he gets neither the protections accorded to adults nor the solicitous care and regenerative treatment postulated for children.” 1 Fortas opined that “Then as now good will and compassion were admirably prevalent. But recent studies have entered with surprising unanimity, sharp dissent to the vitality of this gentle conception. They suggest that the appearance as well as the actuality of fairness‐ impartiality and orderliness‐ in short the essentials of due process may be a more therapeutic attitude so far as the juvenile is concerned.” 2 The prescience of his observation has found resonance and reinforcement with the 2013 publication of Reforming Juvenile Justice: A Developmental Approach 3 which was commissioned by the Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency and Prevention (OJJDP). Reforming Juvenile Justice's emphasis on encouraging not only the perception but the actuality of fairness in all domains 4 connects directly to the essence of Gault's message. “Treating youth fairly and ensuring that they perceive that have been treated fairly and with dignity contribute to positive outcomes in the normal processes of social learning, moral development, and legal socialization adolescence.” 5 The research also demonstrates that public health oriented alternatives to traditional court processing promote social connection and positive youth development. 6 The OJJDP report provides a road map for promoting positive youth development and social engagement by demonstrating that supporting such policies improves public safety outcomes by reducing recidivism. In exploring whether Gault's promise of due process has been realized or is still aspirational, this article suggests that our inquiry requires us to think contextually by considering how children and families are treated in and out of the courtroom. This entails consideration of educational, child welfare and mental health services, as well as the scope of legal entitlements. Equity and fundamental fairness, euphemisms for due process, are what will truly effectuate Gault's promise and should be the benchmark for all courts and systems that engage with children.     

行政程序的和平性价值研究--以民诉程序为考察对象

行政程序法的立法迫在眉睫,行政执法的现状呼唤行政程序法的立法价值程序和平.和平价值作为一个基本价值,有社会学、法理学、经济学的理论作为其理论基础,对行政行为进行事前和事中引导.而程序和平价值的建立需要程序规范和平和程序运作和平的支撑.     

论思想政治教育价值的关系结构

当前 ,在关于思想政治教育价值的中坚核心之一———思想政治教育价值结构的研究中 ,比较缺乏对思想政治教育价值的关系结构的研究 ,即从思想政治教育价值的相关实体中去发现价值生成的一般机理 ,寻求思想政治教育价值何以可能和以何可能的缘起。从一般意义上说 ,思想政治教育价值是由社会和人对思想政治教育的需要程度和思想政治教育在多大程度上能满足社会进步和人的发展的需要决定的 ,而思想政治教育价值关系结构的研究正在于以思想政治教育的价值主体为尺度 ,从价值客体中去发现价值、揭示价值、最终实现价值。     

Putting the Special Case in Its Place: Switzerland and Small‐N Comparison in Policy Research

This research note presents a set of strategies to conduct small‐N comparisons in policy research including the Swiss case. Even though every country can be considered “special” to some extent, the Swiss political system is often viewed as a particularly difficult case for comparison because of the impact of its idiosyncratic institutional features (most notably direct democracy). In order to deal with this problem, our note sets out two possible strategies ‐ the use of functional equivalents and of counterfactual reasoning ‐ and explains how to implement them empirically through process tracing and the establishment of causal chains. As an illustration, these strategies are used for a comparison of the process of electricity market liberalisation in Switzerland and Belgium.     

中间层级何以保障政府运转? ——政府过程中的副职领导研究

【问题】中国副职领导官员通过怎样的机制介入政府过程?作为中间层级的政府群体,他们如何处理政府运行中的组织目标和执行能力的关系?副职领导官员对于理解政府治理有着怎样的理论与实践意义?【方法】论文基于田野调查和访谈,重点关注政府中的互动“事件”,依据“条条—块块”“上层—下层”“重要—日常”维度获得了19个案例,并进行了扎根理论分析。【发现】副职领导官员凭借分管、集体化和复杂性特征成为兼顾组织目标和执行能力的“保障性耦合枢纽”,并表现出三种机制:其一,方案转化机制,即结合价值目标和能力水平议定行动方案;其二,激励统率机制,即在上级授权之下动员、组织和引导下属官员;其三,调适纠偏机制,即对组织运行的潜在问题进行调节。这些机制使政府过程富有层层过渡的弹性,把压力化指标不断转化,并将激励链条贯穿于组织网络之中。【贡献】组织不会一直保持均衡结构,而中国情境中的副职领导官员能够使政府组织实现动态平衡,启示了中间层级研究的价值。论文审视了副职领导官员群体的重要性,揭示了他们在中国科层组织中的独特作用:作为积极的集体性行动者,副职领导官员串联协同各个层级,将政府有效运转起来。     

制度摩擦何以影响中国预算变迁? ——基于1992—2019年的中国预算变迁数据的实证研究

【问题】间断-均衡预算理论通过美国、欧洲等不同国家的联邦、州与地方政府的预算变迁得到检验,该理论对于中国政策过程和预算过程的适用性如何?制度摩擦假设是否能解释预算变迁的间断性?政治周期是否为替代性假设?【方法】论文通过利用1992—2019年的全国、中央和地方预决算数据,利用正态性检验、L-K值等计算方法实证分析了中国预决算变迁的间断性情况。除此之外,论文还采用了固定效应模型分析了政治周期对预算变迁间断性的影响。【发现】研究发现中国预算变迁遵循间断性逻辑,制度摩擦也是导致间断性差异的重要变量,其中所得税收入分享改革作为制度摩擦的代理变量对中央政府预算间断性的影响更为显著。为了检验间断性的政治周期替代性假设,通过比较党代会周期和中央领导人更替周期的间断性,发现政治周期对预算变迁并没有太明显的影响。【贡献】中国的预算变迁为间断-均衡预算理论提供了新的经验证据,这进一步证明了“一般间断假设”和“公共预算的一般经验法则”,从而为理论的外部有效性提供了更多证据。而制度摩擦和政治周期假设的检验为中国预算变迁的间断性提供了更明确的解释。     

Policy Transfer and Discursive De-Europeanisation: Higher Education from Bologna to Turkey

Abstract

This article analyses Turkey’s integration into the Bologna Process, concentrating on the questions of why and how Turkey is transferring norms in the area of higher education. As an example of policy transfer, the Bologna Process provides important insights into the question of why states choose to voluntarily adopt norms where there is no top-down pressure for change. Focusing on Turkey as a case study, the article identifies the narratives of the agents of change responsible for the reform process. The agents are the intermediaries in the Europeanisation process – they construct the discourses and they are the ones responsible for transmitting the process to the society at large. The article concludes that while institutional Europeanisation is taking place in the area of higher education, discursive Europeanisation is lacking.     

论《内保条例》实施过程中应解决的几个问题

《企事业单位内部治安保卫条例》是我国第一部全面系统地规范单位内部保卫工作制度的行政法规。为了更好地贯彻和实施《内保条例》,我们必须认真解决实施过程中出现的一系列认识性和操作性问题,包括单位治安保卫工作的标准问题、责任问题、管理问题、成本问题及其专业化与社会化的问题。     

学生惩戒的行政法规制——兼对《普通高校学生管理规定》关于惩戒规定的反思

学生的惩戒分为事实上的惩戒、法纪上的惩戒和学业上的惩戒。由于惩戒对学生利益有着重大影响,必须加以制约。首先确立比例原则从宏观上保障惩戒的必要性,其次通过正当程序制约惩戒过程的恣意性,最后通过申诉与诉讼方式排除惩戒的违法性。目前,我国《普通高校学生管理规定》在惩戒程序、申诉范围、复议方式、惩戒的可诉性等诸多方面存在缺漏,有待修正。