“The Business of Missing Children”

2020 ◽  
pp. 171-189
Author(s):  
Paul M. Renfro

Chapter 6 chronicles how the Reagan administration lauded the role of the private sector in protecting American children. The celebration by Reagan, other conservatives, and neoliberals of private sector (and especially business sector) efforts to “save” certain American youngsters and promote “family values” cleared the way for a more expansive child safety regime pieced together at the turn of the twenty-first century. Such private sector solutions enlisted the American public in the increasingly punitive, pervasive, and invasive project of child safety. Liberally deploying the image of endangered childhood, private sector programs and products surrounded Americans with evidence of stranger danger and called on them to police and prevent predatory behavior against the nation’s children.

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-187
Author(s):  
PAUL MOKRZYCKI RENFRO

This essay investigates the ways in which child safety became an enterprise during the child protection crusade of the 1980s. Americans clamored for an increased federal presence in “the battle for child safety,” but they made such calls in a climate of intense governmental distrust. The federal governmentdidassume a larger role on the issue of missing and exploited children with the passage of the Missing Children and Missing Children’s Assistance Acts of 1982 and 1984, respectively. But, as this essay demonstrates, the state also stressed the primacy of the private sector—and specifically for-profit companies—in protecting American children. The celebration by President Ronald Reagan and others of private sector efforts to raise awareness about and “save” American youngsters laid the groundwork for a broaderchild safety apparatusthat took hold in the final decades of the twentieth century.


2020 ◽  
pp. 143-170
Author(s):  
Paul M. Renfro

The fifth chapter shows how the child safety issue further splintered federal juvenile justice and youth policy along racial fault lines. Tracing the movements of rightwing luminary Alfred S. Regnery, chapter 5 illustrates how public fears about stranger danger served to lengthen the punitive, policing arm of the federal welfare state, to undercut the children’s rights gains of the 1960s and 1970s, and to bolster the politics of “family values.” As OJJDP director, Regnery used the child safety scare to “toughen” juvenile justice policies targeting working-class, nonwhite youth, while simultaneously embellishing the severity of moral threats facing “innocent” children (coded as white and middle-class). To that end, Regnery employed racialized language that cast virtually all juvenile offenders as nonwhite. The “typical candidate for juvenile arrest,” he claimed, was “most likely black, possibly Hispanic.” Such rhetoric prefigured the “superpredator” discourse that crystallized in the 1990s and helped exacerbate racialized mass incarceration.


1998 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
R.V. Shahi

The new economic policy initiated by the government in 1991 which led to liberalisation, end of license system, private sector involvement in economic development and disinvestment of public sector has given rise to increased expectations for greater accountability and effective functioning of organisations. The degree of expectation varies, depending on the nature of organisation, whether public or private sector, but nevertheless the requirement is common to all. It is in this context that corporate governance and the role of Board of Directors in the governance of organisations is receiving increased attention. The National Task Force set up by the Confedration of Indian Industry (CII) evolved in 1998, the “Desirable Corporate Governnance Code” which lays down the basic guidelines on issues concerning board of directors, desirable disclosures, capital market issues, creditors rights and financial institutions and nominee directors. In the case of public sector undertakings a novel scheme called “Navaratna” was introduced whereby the boards of nine central public sector companies were restructured with lesser number of officials from government and more professionals from outside. Reduced ownership of the government through disinvestment by more than 50 per cent seems to be the only answer to provide the PSUs with the requisite autonomy.


1998 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Glewwe ◽  
Harry Anthony Patrinos
Keyword(s):  

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 34-66
Author(s):  
Joyce Valdovinos

The provision of water services has traditionally been considered a responsibility of the state. During the late 1980s, the private sector emerged as a key actor in the provision of public services. Mexico City was no exception to this trend and public authorities awarded service contracts to four private consortia in 1993. Through consideration of this case study, two main questions arise: First, why do public authorities establish partnerships with the private sector? Second, what are the implications of these partnerships for water governance? This article focuses, on the one hand, on the conceptual debate of water as a public and/or private good, while identifying new trends and strategies carried out by private operators. On the other hand, it analyzes the role of the state and its relationships with other actors through a governance model characterized by partnerships and multilevel networks.Spanish La provisión del servicio del agua ha sido tradicionalmente considerada como una responsabilidad del Estado. A finales de la década de 1980, el sector privado emerge como un actor clave en el suministro de servicios públicos. La ciudad de México no escapa a esta tendencia y en 1993 las autoridades públicas firman contratos de servicios con cuatro consorcios privados. A través de este estudio de caso, dos preguntas son planteadas: ¿Por qué las autoridades públicas establecen partenariados con el sector privado? ¿Cuáles son las implicaciones de dichos partenariados en la gobernanza del agua? Este artículo aborda por una parte, el debate conceptual del agua como bien público y/o privado, identificando nuevas tendencias y estrategias de los operadores privados. Por otra parte, se analizan el rol y las relaciones del Estado con otros actores a través de un modelo de gobernanza, definido en términos de partenariados y redes multi-niveles.French Les services de l'eau ont été traditionnellement considérés comme une responsabilité de l'État. À la fin des années 1980, le secteur privé est apparu comme un acteur clé dans la fourniture de certains services publics. La ville de Mexico n'a pas échappé à cette tendance et en 1993, les autorités publiques ont signé des contrats de services avec quatre consortiums privés. À travers cette étude de cas, nous nous interrogerons sur deux aspects : pourquoi les autorités publiques établissentelles des partenariats avec le secteur privé ? Quelles sont les implications de ces partenariats sur la gouvernance de l'eau ? Cet article s'intéresse, d'une part, au débat conceptuel sur l'eau en tant que bien public et/ou privé, en identifiant les tendances nouvelles et les stratégies menées par les opérateurs privés. D'autre part y sont analysés le rôle de l'État et ses relations avec d'autres acteurs à travers un modèle de gouvernance, défini en termes de partenariats, et des réseaux multi-niveaux.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document