Attributing Policy Influence under Coalition Governance

Author(s):  
DAVID FORTUNATO ◽  
NICK C. N. LIN ◽  
RANDOLPH T. STEVENSON ◽  
MATHIAS WESSEL TROMBORG

Abstract Coalition governance divides policy-making influence across multiple parties, making it challenging for voters to accurately attribute responsibility for outcomes. We argue that many voters overcome this challenge by inferring parties’ policy-making influence using a simple heuristic model that integrates a number of readily available and cheaply obtained informational cues about parties (e.g., their roles in government and legislative seat shares)—while ignoring other cues that, while predictive of real-world influence, are not suitable for heuristic inference (e.g., median party status and bargaining power). Using original data from seven surveys in five countries, we show that voters’ attributions of parties’ policy-making influence are consistent with our proposed inferential strategy. Our findings suggest that while voters certainly have blind spots that cause them to misattribute policy responsibility in some situations, their attributions are generally sensible and consistent with the academic research on multiparty policy making.

2003 ◽  
Vol 93 (4) ◽  
pp. 1132-1151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohini Pande

A basic premise of representative democracy is that all those subject to policy should have a voice in its making. However, policies enacted by electorally accountable governments often fail to reflect the interests of disadvantaged minorities. This paper exploits the institutional features of political reservation, as practiced in Indian states, to examine the role of mandated political representation in providing disadvantaged groups influence over policy-making. I find that political reservation has increased transfers to groups which benefit from the mandate. This finding also suggests that complete policy commitment may be absent in democracies, as is found in this case.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 18-35
Author(s):  
Brendan O'Hallarn ◽  
James Strode

As sport management pedagogy has evolved, an effort has been made to incorporate popular and innovative social media technologies into classroom instruction. Academic research has suggested how the technology can be utilized to provide real-world skills for students and develop proficiencies in an area where many sport management graduates find employment. Notable among the recommendations about social media use by sport management scholars is a lack of research testing the efficacy of these tools in improving curricula. The current study relied on the recommendations of Sanderson and Browning (2015) to use the social media site Twitter to create online partnerships, testing the perceived benefits of such an arrangement through end-of-semester surveys with student participants. While the survey data show a true partnership may be difficult to realize—particularly during a single semester—the benefits of such an assignment were clearly articulated.


2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 329-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Provost ◽  
Brian J. Gerber

AbstractEnvironmental justice (EJ) has represented an important equity challenge in policymaking for decades. President Clinton’s executive order (EO) 12898 in 1994 represented a significant federal action, requiring agencies to account for EJ issues in new rulemakings. We examine the impact of EO 12898 within the larger question of how EO are implemented in complex policymaking. We argue that presidential preferences will affect bureaucratic responsiveness and fire alarm oversight. However, EJ policy complexity produces uncertainty leading to bureaucratic risk aversion, constraining presidential efforts to steer policy. We utilise an original data set of nearly 2,000 final federal agency rules citing EO 12898 and find significant variation in its utilisation across administrations. Uncertainty over the nature of the order has an important influence on bureaucratic responsiveness. Our findings are instructive for the twin influences of political control and policy-making uncertainty and raise useful questions for future EJ and policy implementation research.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Marcus Larsson ◽  
Magnus Jonsson ◽  
Fredrik Warg ◽  
Kristian Karlsson

We propose a broadcast message forwarding algorithm for V2V communication in a platooning scenario for heavy duty trucks. The algorithm utilizes link information, which is piggybacked on the original data packet, to estimate which nodes are best suited to forward the packet. The aim is to reach all nodes in the platoon with as few forward messages as possible in order to avoid channel congestion. The algorithm is evaluated by simulation using real world V2V measurement data as input. We show that the algorithm performs almost as good as two ETSI standardized forwarding algorithms with respect to keeping the data age for the entire platoon at a low level. But when it comes to keeping the message intensity low, our algorithm outperforms the better of the ETSI algorithms by 35%.


2003 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-6
Author(s):  
Deborah Saunt

Is the subject of ‘gender difference’ an appropriate subject for a research journal? Perhaps it is only in the realm if architecture that this question could possibly arise at all. Elsewhere, in the real world, we know gender difference is accorded the seriousness and consequent academic research status it deserves as it is understood as a fundamental component within our culture.


2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (14) ◽  
pp. 1995-2000
Author(s):  
Oliver J. Kim

The author comments on how academic research on white space could be utilized in policy making. Through this discussion, the author explores the intersection between academic and political advocacy. Sociologists should consider, but not be limited by, the work of practitioners and advocates in determining how their research can be useful in influencing public policy.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 969-982 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Hicks ◽  
Kimberley R. Isett

Much scientometric research aims to be relevant to policy, but such research only rarely has a notable policy impact. In this paper, we examine four exemplary cases of policy impact from quantitative studies of science. The cases are analyzed in light of lessons learned about the use of evidence in policy making in health services, which provides very thorough explorations of the problems inherent in policy use of academic research. The analysis highlights key dimensions of the examples, which offer lessons for those aspiring to influence policy with quantitative studies of science.


2013 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd Allee ◽  
Clint Peinhardt

Although many features of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) are consistent from one agreement to the next, a closer look reveals that the treaties exhibit considerable variation in terms of their enforcement provisions, which legal scholars have singled out as the central component of the treaties. An original data set is compiled that captures three important treaty-design differences: whether the parties consent in advance to international arbitration, whether they allow treaty obligations to be enforced before an institutionalized arbitration body, and how many arbitration options are specified for enforcement. Drawing upon several relevant literatures on international institutions, three potentially generalizable explanations for this important treaty variation are articulated and tested. The strongest support is found for the theoretical perspective that emphasizes the bargaining power and preferences of capital-exporting states, which use the treaties to codify strong, credible investor protections in all their treaties. Empirical tests consistently reveal that treaties contain strong enforcement provisions—in which the parties preconsent to multiple, often institutionalized arbitration options—when the capital-exporting treaty partner has considerable bargaining power and contains domestic actors that prefer such arrangements, such as large multinational corporations or right-wing governments. In contrast, there is no evidence to support the popular hands-tying explanation, which predicts that investment-seeking states with the most severe credibility problems, due to poor reputations or weak domestic institutions, will bind themselves to treaties with stronger investment protections. likewise, little support is found for explanations derived from the project on the rational design of international institutions, which discounts the identities and preferences of the treaty partners and instead emphasizes the structural conditions they jointly face. In sum, this foundational study of differences across investment treaties suggests that the design of treaties is driven by powerful states, which include elements in the treaties that serve their interests, regardless of the treaty partner or the current strategic setting.


2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Hallsworth
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document