Unravelling the ‘devolution paradox’: Citizen preferences for self-rule and for shared rule

Recent survey research has revealed a ‘devolution paradox’: some citizens who favour stronger regional governments inconsistently desire policy uniformity across regions and state-wide intervention in policy provision. It is argued and empirically shown that preferences for regional authority can be broken down into preferences for self-rule – that is, for autonomy for the region – and for shared rule – that is, for collaboration between regional and national governments. Drawing upon the International Constitutional Values Survey, which includes 4,930 respondents from 142 regions in eight countries, it is also shown that preferences for self-rule and shared rule have different impacts. Preferences for self-rule translate into a preference for regional reform that strengthens regional autonomy, whereas preferences for shared rule drive preferences for fiscal transfers from richer to poorer regions. These results are important because they can explain why citizens who are in favour of more regional authority may support an apparently ‘paradoxical’ set of policy outcomes.     

Why Conceptual Models and "Big" Institutions Matter: A Response to David Altheide,Nina Eliasoph,William Gamson,and Todd Gitlin

The two cases analyzed here demonstrate a new journalistic practice of interviewing enemy leaders at times of war. We argue that whereas traditionally journalists had accepted the principle that when the nation is under threat, patriotism precedes professionalism, in the new media environment, with the domestic public exposed to international TV channels, this is no longer an option. As a result, journalists act more independently, even when this entails public resentment and government disapproval. We demonstrate how in interviewing enemy leaders, journalists play the part of politicians once diplomatic negotiations have ceased. Although such interviews provide high ratings and amplify the relevance of journalism at times of war, the irregular settings in which they are conducted undermine the journalists' endeavor. From the interviews we examined, it emerges that the cross pressures on the interviewers lead to a questioning style that deviates significantly from normative news interviews. Interviewers tend to be dragged to one of the extremes of hostility or deference. Finally, we show how the ways in which domestic governments respond to these interviews serve as additional evidence of their controversial character.     

BUREAUCRATIC VALUES AND RESILIENCE: AN EXPLORATION OF CRISIS MANAGEMENT ADAPTATION

The concept of resilience has gained currency as a motif under which governments have sought to improve their responses to crises. At the heart of this agenda is an understanding that crisis management must be adaptable. Yet crises continue to expose the intransigent nature of central bureaucracies. This article addresses this issue by exploring how bureaucratic values can affect the ability of agents to adapt to the challenges of crises. Data are generated from a series of interviews with crisis managers who operate in a policy chain that connects the European Union to the United Kingdom. The data indicate that two well‐entrenched bureaucratic value‐sets, relating to efficiency and procedural rationality, have profound consequences for the resilience agenda.     

POLICY MAKING AND THE DEMONSTRATION EFFECT: PRIVATIZATION IN A DEPRIVED REGION

The aims of public policies are not always clearly articulated by ministers. Further the aims that are stated may not reflect all – or indeed the most important – aims. In some cases declared policy aims bear little relationship to the real intentions of ministers in undertaking an initiative. In other cases policy decisions are intended as symbolic statements, demonstrating government attitudes on a range of issues beyond the specific matter under consideration. These ideas are explored in the context of the privatizations of Harland and Wolff and Shorts, two major industrial government-owned companies in Northern Ireland. The article concludes that government sought to use the privatizations as a symbolic statement, namely to demonstrate that the heavy dependence on the public sector within Northern Ireland had to be reduced.     

DECISION-MAKING IN THE CRIMINAL COURTS:

This article attempts an analysis of the relationship between the guilty-plea bargaining process and presentence investigation reports. It is argued that because plea-bargaining has increasingly come to involve bargaining over sentence. probation officers, as a consequence, have increasingly come to experience encroachment upon their decision-making autonomy. In this predicament they have found little support from judges, who, committed to norms of managerial efficiency will reassert the primacy of the plea-bargain when probation officers refuse to ratify previously negotiated sentence agreements. The policy implications of this for the criminal justice system are discussed.     

Treatment Profiles of Troubled Female Adolescents: Implications for Judicial Disposition

Increasing numbers of girls are entering the juvenile justice system. This growing number of females creates a dilemma for judges concerned with appropriate disposition to treatment and diversion: since current intervention methodologies were developed primarily for males, how effective are they for females? The current paper describes a research process that addressed this issue. A sample of troubled adolescents was selected from a residential treatment facility. Data were collected from 137 youth between the ages of 12 and 17 (65 female [47%] and 72 male [52%]) regarding variables related to twenty-three behavioral and psychosocial problems. These data were then subjected to a cluster analysis. Two distinct treatment profiles were formed, each differing in composition by gender. Based on the results of the cluster analysis, the researchers conducted a literature review to determine the implications of those profiles for successful disposition and treatment.     

THE TRADITION OF MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ITS ROLE IN THE BUREAUCRATIC MANAGEMENT OF CRISES

This article explores the relationship between the United Kingdom's doctrine of ministerial responsibility and bureaucratic efforts to control four contemporary crises. Evidence emerges from a series of interviews with experienced crisis managers, which draws attention to the way in which this convention: (1) tacitly conditioned the thinking and behaviour of bureaucratic crisis actors through their sensitivity to political risk; and (2) was reinterpreted and utilized instrumentally by political and bureaucratic agents in response to the dilemmas posed by each crisis. The analysis of these themes connects governance and crisis literatures together by shedding light on the interaction between governance ‘traditions’, 21st century crisis episodes and the requirements of crisis management.     

Respect for Teachers

<正>September 10 is the Teachers’ Day of China, a special day to honor all teachers for their hard work. On last year’s Teacher’s Day, I received