scholarly journals The Shadow Effect of Courts: Judicial Review and the Politics of Preemptive Reform

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
TOMMASO PAVONE ◽  
ØYVIND STIANSEN
Keyword(s):  
Welfare Reform ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
American Studies ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Shadow Effect ◽  
International Court ◽  
Judicial Influence ◽  
Good For ◽  
Comparative Theory

We challenge the prevalent claim that courts can only influence policy by adjudicating disputes. Instead, we theorize the shadow effect of courts: policy makers preemptively altering policies in anticipation of possible judicial review. While American studies imply that preemptive reforms hinge on litigious interest groups pressuring policy makers who support judicial review, we advance a comparative theory that flips these presumptions. In less litigious and more hostile political contexts, policy makers may instead weaponize preemptive reforms to preclude bureaucratic conflicts from triggering judicial oversight and starve courts of the cases they need to build their authority. By allowing some preemptive judicial influence to resist direct judicial interference, recalcitrant policy makers demonstrate that shadow effects are not an unqualified good for courts. We illustrate our theory by tracing how a major welfare reform in Norway was triggered by a conflict within its Ministry of Labor and a government resistance campaign targeting a little-known international court.

scholarly journals Exploring interest intermediation in Central and Eastern Europe: is higher education different?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Dobbins ◽  
Brigitte Horváthová ◽  
Rafael Pablo Labanino
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Central And Eastern Europe ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Privileged Access ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Comparative Theory ◽  
Higher Education Organizations ◽  
Political Decisions

AbstractHigher education interest groups remain somewhat understudied from a comparative theory-driven perspective. This is surprising because political decisions regarding higher education must increasingly be legitimized to students, taxpayers, the academic community and society. This article aims to advance our understanding of higher education stakeholders in post-communist Europe. In our view, the region deserves more attention, not least because students and academics were very instrumental in bringing down communism and institutionalizing democracy. First, we draw on Klemenčič’s (EJHE 2(1): 2–19, 2012; SHE 39(3):396–411, 2014) distinction between corporatist and pluralist as well as formalized and informal systems of representation in higher education. Looking at survey data from four countries—Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovenia—we examine to what extent post-communist democracies have established corporatist institutions to facilitate the formal participation of various crucial stakeholder organizations, e.g. students’ unions, academic unions, rectors’ conferences, etc. Then we address whether higher education organizations enjoy privileged access to policy-makers compared to those from other policy areas, while engaging with the argument that higher education is a particular case of “stakeholder democracy” in a region otherwise characterized by weak civic participation and corporatism. To wrap up, we discuss different “mutations of higher education corporatism” in each country.

scholarly journals Military Veterans and Welfare Reform: Bridging Two Policy Worlds through Qualitative Longitudinal Research

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Lisa Scullion ◽  
Katy Jones ◽  
Peter Dwyer ◽  
Celia Hynes ◽  
Philip Martin
Keyword(s):  
Welfare Reform ◽  
Longitudinal Research ◽  
Military Veterans ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Veterans Affairs ◽  
Civilian Life ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Uk

There has been an increasing focus in the UK on the support provided to the Armed Forces community, with the publication of the Armed Forces Covenant (2011), the Strategy for our Veterans (2018) and the first ever Office for Veterans’ Affairs (2019). There is also an important body of research – including longitudinal research – focusing on transitions from military to civilian life, much of which is quantitative. At the same time, the UK has witnessed a period of unprecedented welfare reform. However, research focused on veterans’ interactions with the social security system has been largely absent. This article draws on the authors’ experiences of undertaking qualitative longitudinal research (QLR) to address this knowledge gap. We reflect on how QLR was essential in engaging policy makers enabling the research to bridge the two parallel policy worlds of veterans’ support and welfare reform, leading to significant policy and practice impact.

scholarly journals Conflict of Civil Society Movement and Government in the Process of Developing of The Job Creation Bill

PROPAGANDA ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-22
Author(s):  
M. Masad Masrur
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Job Creation ◽  
Violent Conflict ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Community Groups ◽  
Public Facilities ◽  
The Government

The discussion room for the Work Creation Bill is officially located at the DPR RI Building. The discussion, which involved various interest groups, was deemed insufficient to accommodate the “rejecting” aspirations expressed by various community groups. Several community groups who are members of various civil society movements, held demonstrations outside the DPR RI Building as a venue for discussion of the Job Creation Bill. Demonstrations that also took place in these areas have caused damage to public facilities. According to Habermas's opinion, this condition is the result of structural domination, where the ruling group directs various forms of policy with instrumental communication that will not create understanding. In agreement with Gramsci, in this case, there is a political hegemony between one group against another. The government, which has an interest in immediately completing the deliberation of the Job Creation Bill, through the power of political domination, seeks to exercise hegemony against the civil society movement, causing violent conflict. Conflict resolution in the discussion of the Work Creation Bill is structurally carried out by using the state law approach in accordance with the prevailing laws and regulations. In accordance with the mandate of the constitution, all matters relating to regulations, a judicial review can be carried out at the Constitutional Court.

13. Environmental Policy

2020 ◽  
pp. 297-320
Author(s):  
Andrea Lenschow
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Coordination ◽  
Historical Evolution ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Environmental Interest Groups ◽  
The Eu

This chapter focuses on the European Union’s environmental policy, the development of which was characterized by institutional deepening and the substantial expansion of environmental issues covered by EU decisions and regulations. Environmental policy presents a host of challenges for policy-makers, including the choice of appropriate instruments, improvement of implementation performance, and better policy coordination at all levels of policy-making. The chapter points to the continuing adaptations that have been made in these areas. It first considers the historical evolution of environmental policy in the EU before discussing the main actors in EU environmental policy-making, namely: the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, the European Parliament, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and environmental interest groups. The chapter also looks at the EU as an international actor.

Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
James Thuo Gathii
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
First Generation ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Political Mobilization ◽  
International Courts ◽  
International Court ◽  
Litigation Process ◽  
Political Dispute ◽  
Central Claim

This Introduction summarizes the book’s major arguments. The central claim is that Africa’s international courts have important impacts that have so far been underemphasized or entirely ignored. The chapters show that litigation in Africa’s international courts is part of a broader strategy to pursue the agenda of interest groups, litigants, and opposition political parties and politicians. The book shows that by bringing a domestic political dispute to an international court, litigants internationalize their dispute. In so doing, they mobilize law and capitalize on the litigation process to advance and promote their commitment to their ideals and immediate goals. These actors use the opportunity to enforce treaty commitments relating to human rights, the rule of law, and democracy to mobilize against those in control of dominant and authoritarian party regimes and to seek public support. The chapters therefore put the users of Africa’s international courts and their broader strategies at the center of the analysis. In addition, this book takes scholarship on Africa’s international courts a step further through in-depth case studies of how litigation in these international courts impacts political, legal, and social mobilization. It delves into the messy world of legal and political mobilization and the organizational choices made by activists, litigants, and opposition parties who bring litigation before these international courts. The book complements the attention to legal and doctrinal questions as well as the challenges of compliance with decisions of these courts that the first generation of scholarship on Africa’s international courts emphasized.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document