Policy analysis in the states

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary VanLandingham
Keyword(s):  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Nonprofit Organizations ◽  
State Level ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Policy Innovation ◽  
The State ◽  
Think Tanks ◽  
State Governments ◽  
State Policymaking ◽  
High Level

State governments have been called the ‘laboratories of democracy’ due to their high level of policy innovation. A great deal of policy analysis occurs at the state level to support this experimentation, including internal legislative and executive branch research offices, university think tanks, and private and nonprofit organizations that generate studies to influence state policymaking. Given the diversity among the states, it is not surprising that their policy analysis organizations and activities also vary widely. While state-level policy analysis has grown rapidly, it has also fragmented, and many policy analysis organizations face important challenges. This chapter discusses these trends and the future of policy analysis in the states.

Policy analysis in state governments in Mexico

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan C. Olmeda
Keyword(s):  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Mexico City ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
State Level ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Mexican State ◽  
Policy Making Process ◽  
Mexican Politics

State governments have acquired a central role in Mexican politics and policy making during the last decades as a result of both democratization and decentralization. Nowadays state governments not only concentrate a significant portion of prerogatives and responsibilities in terms of service delivery but also control a substantial share of public spending. However, no systematic studies have been developed in order to understand how state governments function. This chapter provides an overview on how policies are crafted at the subnational (state) level in Mexico, the main actors taking place in the process and the way in which professional knowledge and advice influence policy makers. As it argues, the central role in the policy making process is played by the executive branch, being the governors the ones who have the final word in most important decisions. In addition, secretaries also concentrate power in particular policy areas. As a result of the lack of a professional civil service, however, a significant portion of policy analysis is performed by non-governmental actors (universities, NGOs and private firms). The chapter applies this framework to analyze a particular Mexican state, namely Mexico City.

Neoliberal reformers: Economics as class warfare

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-262
Author(s):  
Braham Dabscheck
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Nobel Prize ◽  
Business Groups ◽  
Review Article ◽  
The State ◽  
Think Tanks ◽  
State Governments ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
Jel Codes ◽  
Federal Level

This review article discusses MacLean’s study of the ideas of a group of economists and their embracing by an oligarchy of business groups to implement a Neoliberal agenda and its implications for American democracy. It mainly focuses on the Nobel Prize winning economist James McGill Buchanan and the industrialist Charles Koch. Business groups provided funds to Buchanan and others to train right-minded people in the precepts of Neoliberalism, established think tanks and institutes to disseminate their views, and ‘directed’ and/or provided advice and draft legislation for Republican politicians at both the state and federal level. Inspiration for how to achieve this Neoliberal ‘revolution’ can be found in Lenin’s 1902 What is to be Done?. The Neoliberal attack on government and statism is consistent with Orwell’s notion of doublethink. It constitutes a weakening of those parts of the state which are inimical to the interests of a wealthy oligarchy, the federal government and agencies/government departments who are viewed as imposing costs (taxes) on and interfering with (regulating) the actions of the oligarchy, and strengthening other parts such as state governments, the judiciary, at both the state (especially) and federal level and police forces to protect and advance their interests. JEL codes: B10, B22

scholarly journals Understanding Agenda Setting in State Educational Policy: An Application of Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Model to the Formation of State Reading Policy

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara Viola Young ◽  
Thomas V. Shepley ◽  
Mengli Song
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Agenda Setting ◽  
National Level ◽  
State Level ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The State ◽  
Multiple Streams ◽  
Reading Policy ◽  
Achievement Data ◽  
Multiple Streams Model

Drawing on interview data from reading policy actors in California, Michigan, and Texas, this study applied Kingdon's (1984, 1995) multiple streams model to explain how the issue of reading became prominent on the agenda of state governments during the latter half of the 1990s. A combination of factors influenced the status of a state's reading policy agenda, including feedback from parents, teachers, and business groups; student achievement data; political pressure from the state administration; regional and national interest; a pervasive belief that reading is a building block for student success; and a widespread perception that the decline in reading achievement was symbolic of the failure of public schools. In addition, governors promoted reading to high agenda prominence by influencing which issues were placed on the decision agenda (agenda setting) and which alternatives were given serious attention (alternative specification). Finally, the findings suggest that the applicability of Kingdon's national-level model to the state level may depend on both the issue being examined and the participation of the state executive branch.

Urban poverty in India: Issues and perspectives in development

Social Change ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 30 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 8-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amitabh Kundu
Keyword(s):  
Credit Rating ◽  
Urban Poverty ◽  
Rural Poverty ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Amendment ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Rural And Urban ◽  
Urban Settlements ◽  
The Government

The present paper examines the trends in rural and urban poverty, analyses the interstate variations and explains these in terms of socio-economic factors. It shows that rural poverty declines smoothly with economic development, which unfortunately is not the case with urban poverty. The availability of water supply, toilets and electricity, that are not explicitly incorporated in the official definition of poverty, has also been analysed at the state level as also across size class of urban settlements. It is argued that the small and medium towns have a weak and unstable economic base. As a consequence, most of these are not in a position to generate funds to provide civic services to all sections of population. These towns, particularly those located in less developed states, should, therefore, be the major concern of government policy. Further, overviewing the changing system of governance, it argues that the seventy-fourth Constitutional Amendment, has not succeeded in genuine empowerment of civic bodies. The power now seems to have shifted from the state governments to the financial institutions, international donors and credit rating agencies. Finally, the capacity of the government to generate employment directly through anti-poverty programmes would remain limited. The paper, therefore, recommends that the anti-poverty programmes should primarily be focussed on provision of basic amenities.

scholarly journals Development of domestic tourism in the context of a pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 128 ◽  
pp. 01004
Author(s):  
E.G. Efimova ◽  
N.A. Levochkina ◽  
B.E. Khabibullina
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Life Expectancy ◽  
State Level ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Tourism Industry ◽  
The State ◽  
Important Indicator ◽  
Domestic Tourism ◽  
High Level

Preserving the health of the population occupies a special place at the legislative level, in the socio-economic strategies for the development of regions and the country as a whole. The preservation of human health depends not only on one’s own desire to preserve it, including the current state of the state and the development of the country’s tourism industry. Recreation and recreation for modern people, who mainly live in cities and megacities characterized by a high level of pollution due to the intensity of economic activity, are of particular importance for maintaining health and life expectancy. An increase in people’s life expectancy is considered at the state level as an important indicator of people’s well-being, improving the level and quality of life. Russia has created unique conditions and opportunities for the development of domestic tourism, which, with reasonable organization, investments, including the creation of public-private partnerships, and improving the efficiency of services provided, allow us to carry out our activities in the field of preserving and maintaining public health, increasing the duration and quality of life. Domestic Russian tourism can be considered as the basis for the socio-economic development of territories at any level, as well as as an industry whose contribution to the country’s GDP can be significant.

scholarly journals Evaluation of US state pollinators using 3 evidence-based policymaking frameworks

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaitlin Stack Whitney ◽  
Briana Burt Stringer
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Environmental Protection Agency ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Conservation Policies ◽  
The Us ◽  
State Policymaking ◽  
Us Federal Government

After the US federal government created a national pollinator protection plan in 2015, many states followed with their own. Since their goal is to promote pollinating insect conservation, we wanted to know whether the state plans are using best practices for evidence-based science policy. In early 2019 we found and downloaded every existing, publicly available US state pollinator protection plan. We then used content analysis to assess the goals, scope, and implementation of state-level pollinator protection plans across the US. This analysis was conducted using three distinct frameworks for evidence-based policymaking: US Department of Interior Adaptive Resources Management (ARM), US Environmental Protection Agency management pollinator protection plan (MP3) guidance, and Pew Trusts Pew-MacAthur Results First Project elements of evidence-based state policymaking (PEW) framework. Then we scored them using the framework criteria, to assess whether the plans were using known best practices for evidence based policymaking. Of the 31 states with a state pollinator plan, Connecticut was the state with the lowest total score across the three evaluation frameworks. The state with the highest overall scores, across the three frameworks, was Missouri. Most states did not score highly on the majority of the frameworks. Overall, many state plans were lacking policy elements that address monitoring, evaluation, and adjustment. These missing elements impact the ability of states to achieve their conservation goals. Our results indicate that states can improve their pollinator conservation policies to better match evidence-based science policy guidance, regardless of which framework is used.

scholarly journals Abolitionist John Brown's Treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia: A Lesson for State Governments about the Culpability of Non-Residents for Treason against the State

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
James A. Beckman
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
State Government ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Southern States ◽  
The North ◽  
John Brown ◽  
North And South

Abstract This article analyzes the specific issue of whether an individual could be tried for treason by a State government if that individual is not a resident or citizen of that State. This issue is analyzed through the prism of the landmark case of John Brown v. Commonwealth of Virginia, a criminal prosecution which occurred in October 1859. Brown, a resident of New York, was convicted of treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia, insurrection, and murder after he attempted to overthrow the institution of slavery by force on October 16–18, 1859. After a prosecution and trial which occurred within a matter of weeks following Brown's crimes, Brown was executed on December 2, 1859. To this day, John Brown's trial and execution remains one of the leading examples of a State government exercising its power to enforce treason law on the State level and to execute an individual for that offense. Of course, the John Brown case had a major impact on American history, including being a significant factor in the presidential election of 1860 and an often-cited spark to the powder keg of tensions between the Northern and Southern States, which would erupt into a raging conflagration between the North and South in the American Civil War a short eighteen months later. However, in the legal realm, the Brown case is one of the leading and best-known examples of a state government exercising its authority to enforce its laws prohibiting treason against the State. The purpose of this article is not to discuss treason laws generally or even all the issues applicable to John Brown's trial in 1859. Rather, this article focuses only on the very specific issue of the culpability of a non-resident/non-citizen for treason against a State government. With the increased array of hostile actions against State governments in recent years, and criminal actors crossing state lines to commit these hostile acts, this article discusses an issue of importance to contemporary society, namely whether an individual can be prosecuted and convicted for treason by a State of which the defendant is not a citizen or resident.

scholarly journals The COVID States Project #20: Public opinion around federal and state reactions to COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Lazer ◽  
Alexi Quintana ◽  
Jon Green ◽  
Katherine Ognyanova ◽  
Hanyu Chwe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
State Government ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Prefer State ◽  
Consistent Picture

In every month, April through October of 2020, we surveyed individuals in every state about how federal and state governments are reacting to the pandemic. We found a remarkably consistent picture of public opinion: respondents prefer state governments over the federal government when it comes to COVID-19. Out of 8 waves in 50 states & DC − a total of 408 surveys at the state level − in 402 state-level surveys more people in the state felt the state government was reacting “about right” to the COVID-19 outbreak as compared to the federal government; and only 6 times did people in a state choose the federal government over their state government.

scholarly journals Tsars, Task Forces and Standards: The New “IRS”?

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Casey
Keyword(s):  
State Level ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Institutional Processes ◽  
Task Forces ◽  
Substantial Growth ◽  
Relationship Systems ◽  
Communication And Coordination ◽  
High Level ◽  
Industry Associations

AbstractInstitutional processes for regulating government-nonprofit relations in the U.S. are experiencing substantial growth, particularly at the state level. First, cabinet-level nonprofit “tsars” are being appointed by state governments as point persons for communication and coordination with nonprofits. Second, high-level cross-sector task forces are being established to examine the current relations between the sectors and to recommend reforms in regulatory and oversight processes. Third, nonprofit industry associations are developing statements of operating standards that seek to promote greater discipline in operations. These processes are potentially harbingers of the creation of new institutionalized relationship systems (IRS). This paper examines the emergence of these new institutional arrangements, analyzes their short-term impacts and speculates about their durability.

The Political Economy of Public Universities in the United States: A Review Essay

2007 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 303-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert C. Lowry
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Nonprofit Organizations ◽  
Public Universities ◽  
Public Services ◽  
State Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Public Higher Education ◽  
The Public ◽  
Trade Offs

Scholars of state politics and policy have devoted little attention to the public universities where so many of them work. Public higher education is organized at the state level, and its funding and governance have been debated at length in many states in recent years. Moreover, these universities provide opportunities for contributions to a variety of theoretically-grounded research, including the decision to make or buy public services, principal-agent issues and institutional arrangements for governance, the politics of institutional reform, the determinants of government appropriations and budgetary trade-offs, and internal decisionmaking in state-owned enterprises, public bureaucracies, and nonprofit organizations. Research on these issues could not only generate insights relevant to many types of institutions and public services but also contribute to ongoing policy debates over relations between state governments and higher education.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document