scholarly journals The Role of the Judiciary in the Public Decision-Making Process

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Albanese ◽  
Marco M. Sorge
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

scholarly journals Evaluate the existing political oversight role of Turkish parliament over the public finance and in this context analyzed the new Turkish Presidential Government System

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 746-761
Author(s):  
Mustafa Biçer
Keyword(s):  
Public Finance ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Constitutional Amendment ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
Audit Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
Allocation Process ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

Turkey changed its 1982 Constitution and adopted a presidential form of government in 2017. This constitutional amendment changed the approval of the budget radically. Along with that, debates may arise in terms of political responsibility for not approved the budget by the Parliament, how the budget will accepted when the president and majority of the Parliament are from different party, and there is not any mechanism being in classical presidential system as public account committee to enhance parliamentary supervision over the executive branch.In this study,- we deliberate the concept of  political power in representative democracy in terms of public decision-making and resource allocation process and then we analyze the existing political oversight role of Turkish Parliament over the public finance on the basis of  democratic legitimacy of public decision-making process and political accountability. - we focus on oversight role of Turkish Parliament over the public finance at the point of using "power of purse after the Constitutional Amendment adopted on April 16, 2017. Within the context of this analysis, the new constitutional structure of Parliament's budget approval and audit process in Turkish Parliament was evaluated.

Analysis of farms characteristics related to innovation needs: a proposal for supporting the public decision-making process

2021 ◽  
Vol 100 ◽  
pp. 104892
Author(s):  
Andrea Arzeni ◽  
Elisa Ascione ◽  
Patrizia Borsotto ◽  
Valentina Carta ◽  
Tatiana Castellotti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

scholarly journals Asymmetric decentralization: distortions and opportunities

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Fiorillo ◽  
Michele G. Giuranno ◽  
Agnese Sacchi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Goods ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Lower Cost ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
The Public ◽  
Optimal Degree ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

AbstractThis paper studies the interplay between central and local governments in defining the optimal degree of decentralization in terms of public goods supply. The choice between full centralization and asymmetric decentralization implies a trade-off between the possibility to provide public goods at a lower cost, wherever this is possible by decentralizing, and the possibility to fully internalize spillovers by full centralization. We find that asymmetric decentralization introduces distortions into the public decision-making process. We also demonstrate that the power to interfere in the central government’s ruling mechanisms should be reduced for the jurisdictions that have decentralized, in order to make their decentralization choice convenient even for the citizens in the less efficient jurisdictions. Finally, we find the conditions under which asymmetric decentralization can be simultaneously advantageous for both rich and poor regions through the design of appropriate equalization transfers.

scholarly journals Wind Power Deployment: The Role of Public Participation in the Decision-Making Process in Ontario, Canada

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anahita A. Jami ◽  
Philip R. Walsh
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Wind Power ◽  
Knowledge Broker ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Energy Investment ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Opposition

A wider use of renewable energy is emerging as a viable solution to meet the increasing demand for global energy while contributing to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. However, current literature on renewable energy, particularly on wind power, highlights the social barriers and public opposition to renewable energy investment. One solution to overcome the public opposition, which is recommended by scholars, is to deploy a collaborative approach. Relatively little research has specifically focused on the role of effective communication and the use of a knowledge-broker in collaborative decision-making. This study attempts to fill this gap through the proposition of a participatory framework that highlights the role of the knowledge-broker in a wind project decision-making process. In this paper, five illustrative wind projects in Ontario are used to highlight the current situation with public participation and to address how the proposed framework could have improved the process. Based on the recommended collaborative framework, perception must shift from the dominant view of the public as “a risk to be managed” towards “a resource that can be tapped”. The developers need to improve sharing what they know and foster co-learning around questions and concerns.

scholarly journals “All this Regulatory Uncertainty in the Air”: The Indispensability of Public Hearings in Guarding and Guiding Public Deliberation

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaclyn Carroll ◽  
Pete Bsumek
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Environmental Communication ◽  
Public Deliberation ◽  
Field Analysis ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Regulatory Uncertainty ◽  
Public Hearings ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

The field of Environmental Communication has often critiqued the shortcomings of public hearings, noting their limitations in bringing about effective and equitable public decision making. While this work has been significant, it has tended to limit the deliberative field to public hearings themselves, sometimes going so far as to assume that public hearings are the only spaces in which significant deliberations occur. Using a field analysis of the “No Coal Plant” campaign in Surry County, Virginia (2008–2013), the authors illuminate some limitations of existing literature. Their analysis suggests that while public hearings can be extremely limiting, even “failed” public hearings can play a critical role in constituting, organizing, and pacing formal and informal deliberative spaces, which are necessary for communities as they manage the stresses and strains of the decision-making process.

The Complexity Surrounding Market Rationale in Public Decision Making in the Twenty-First Century

2018 ◽  
pp. 185-195
Author(s):  
Bakry Elmedni
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Choice Theory ◽  
Public Organizations ◽  
First Century ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Role Of Government ◽  
Market Rationality ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

Applying market rationale to public decision making has been in the center of the debates in both political and academic circles. Theoretically, these debates center on the role of government in society and how that role should be played. This chapters shows that applying market rationality to public decision making is problematic for three reasons. First, in reality, neither market nor individuals can be rational as envisioned in neoclassic economics. Second, public organizations pursue broad social goals that are often not measurable by market indicators. Third, the context within which public decisions are made is governed by legal and constitutional mandates that do not always suit market rationale, i.e. utility maximizations. Notwithstanding this, public choice theory can provide public organizations with alternative methods for maximizing social benefits. In doing so, public organizations have been adopting market-based standards as a method to promote performance and manage for results.

Rome, Religion, and Christian Emperors

2020 ◽  
pp. 107-139
Author(s):  
Mattias P. Gassman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Religious Tolerance ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Role ◽  
Recent Scholarship ◽  
Competing Ideas ◽  
Role Of Religion ◽  
Public Decision

The controversy over the altar of Victory shows how pagans and Christians expressed competing ideas on the public role of religion in an increasingly Christian empire. In 382, Gratian revoked funding from the Roman state priesthoods and removed the altar from the Senate house. Following Gratian’s death in 383, the Senate appealed to his brother, Valentinian II, through the urban prefect, Symmachus, whose communiqué was successfully countered by Ambrose of Milan. Recent scholarship has favoured Symmachus’ account, which it sees as an appeal for religious tolerance, and argued that the affair was decided by the power politics of a child emperor’s unstable court. In response, this chapter argues that Symmachus was actually trying to exclude the emperor’s Christianity from public decision-making. All religions may, for Symmachus, lead to God, but the old cults are Rome’s divinely appointed defence, as well as the bond between Senate and emperors. Ambrose put Valentinian’s duty to God at the heart of his appeal. Ambrose’s Senate contained many Christians, and Ambrose was bound to resist an emperor who endorsed pagan sacrifices (the closest either work comes to explicit political gamesmanship). Together, their works show how malleable Rome’s public religion still was, more than seventy years after Constantine embraced Christianity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document