The national quality framework (NQF) has been implemented to improve the safety and quality of alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment and provide a nationally consistent approach to treatment quality in Australia. At the same time, concerns have been raised that, in the absence of appropriate regulatory structures to support the NQF, the quality and safety of AOD treatment services cannot be guaranteed in Australia. An effective enforcement strategy is critical to the ability of the NQF to provide a nationally consistent approach to the delivery of AOD treatment in Australia. The monitoring and enforcement strategy proposed by the NQF encompasses two different mechanisms. For specialist AOD treatment providers in receipt of government funding, monitoring and enforcement of the NQF will occur via contractual arrangements. For providers not in receipt of government funding, monitoring and enforcement will be managed by regulatory mechanisms as decided by each jurisdiction. This proposed enforcement strategy raises the question of whether contractual arrangements are the most effective mechanism for monitoring and enforcing the NQF in publicly funded specialist AOD treatment providers. This paper considers whether a licensing regime may address the shortcomings that arise from the proposed strategy. It argues that the pluralistic approach to the monitoring and enforcement of the NQF will result in substantive differences in how the NQF is enforced both within individual jurisdictions and on a broader national level. A licensing regime, therefore, would be a more appropriate monitoring and enforcement strategy.
{"title":"Rethinking the national quality framework: Improving the quality and safety of alcohol and other drug treatment in Australia","authors":"Simone M. Henriksen","doi":"10.1111/rego.12554","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12554","url":null,"abstract":"The national quality framework (NQF) has been implemented to improve the safety and quality of alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment and provide a nationally consistent approach to treatment quality in Australia. At the same time, concerns have been raised that, in the absence of appropriate regulatory structures to support the NQF, the quality and safety of AOD treatment services cannot be guaranteed in Australia. An effective enforcement strategy is critical to the ability of the NQF to provide a nationally consistent approach to the delivery of AOD treatment in Australia. The monitoring and enforcement strategy proposed by the NQF encompasses two different mechanisms. For specialist AOD treatment providers in receipt of government funding, monitoring and enforcement of the NQF will occur via contractual arrangements. For providers not in receipt of government funding, monitoring and enforcement will be managed by regulatory mechanisms as decided by each jurisdiction. This proposed enforcement strategy raises the question of whether contractual arrangements are the most effective mechanism for monitoring and enforcing the NQF in publicly funded specialist AOD treatment providers. This paper considers whether a licensing regime may address the shortcomings that arise from the proposed strategy. It argues that the pluralistic approach to the monitoring and enforcement of the NQF will result in substantive differences in how the NQF is enforced both within individual jurisdictions and on a broader national level. A licensing regime, therefore, would be a more appropriate monitoring and enforcement strategy.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164703","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Practices of stakeholder engagement vary widely across voluntary sustainability standard setters. This study examines how the sponsorship structure of standard setters affects the diversity of stakeholders included in consultations and the influence of stakeholder input on standards. I compare six sustainability standard setters through an original dataset of 7945 stakeholder comments submitted during public comment periods between 2012 and 2019 to answer two research questions. First, are some standard setters better at balancing stakeholder representation than others? And second, does stakeholder influence vary across standard setters? I find that industry-sponsored standards tend to attract more industry input than multistakeholder initiatives, but both tend to over-represent legacy stakeholders. I also find that sponsorship is a poor predictor of which comments will be influential. Comments that seek to weaken or clarify the rules in voluntary sustainability standards are more likely to exert influence irrespective of the sponsorship of the standard setter.
{"title":"A comparison of stakeholder engagement practices in voluntary sustainability standards","authors":"Hamish van der Ven","doi":"10.1111/rego.12552","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12552","url":null,"abstract":"Practices of stakeholder engagement vary widely across voluntary sustainability standard setters. This study examines how the sponsorship structure of standard setters affects the diversity of stakeholders included in consultations and the influence of stakeholder input on standards. I compare six sustainability standard setters through an original dataset of 7945 stakeholder comments submitted during public comment periods between 2012 and 2019 to answer two research questions. First, are some standard setters better at balancing stakeholder representation than others? And second, does stakeholder influence vary across standard setters? I find that industry-sponsored standards tend to attract more industry input than multistakeholder initiatives, but both tend to over-represent legacy stakeholders. I also find that sponsorship is a poor predictor of which comments will be influential. Comments that seek to weaken or clarify the rules in voluntary sustainability standards are more likely to exert influence irrespective of the sponsorship of the standard setter.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164698","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What explains the levels and diversity of stakeholder participation in public commenting on bureaucratic policymaking? We examine a novel dataset on a stakeholder engagement mechanism recently introduced by the European Commission containing information about 1258 events organized between 2016 and 2019. We highlight the importance of administrative acts' characteristics and acknowledge the role of policy area type. Acts corresponding to early policy stages, broader in scope, less technical, and more explicit about feedback loop rules, that is, roadmaps, inception impact assessments and delegated acts, generate significantly more comments, from more diverse stakeholders, relative to legislative proposals, and draft implementing acts. Regulatory and distributive policies generate significantly more comments than interior and foreign policies. Diversity is significantly higher in distributive policies but only relative to foreign policies. We contribute by showing the power of administrative acts in influencing stakeholder participation and diversity across decision stages and policy areas and shaping bias in interest representation.
{"title":"Understanding patterns of stakeholder participation in public commenting on bureaucratic policymaking: Evidence from the European Union","authors":"Adriana Bunea, Sergiu Lipcean","doi":"10.1111/rego.12551","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12551","url":null,"abstract":"What explains the levels and diversity of stakeholder participation in public commenting on bureaucratic policymaking? We examine a novel dataset on a stakeholder engagement mechanism recently introduced by the European Commission containing information about 1258 events organized between 2016 and 2019. We highlight the importance of administrative acts' characteristics and acknowledge the role of policy area type. Acts corresponding to early policy stages, broader in scope, less technical, and more explicit about feedback loop rules, that is, roadmaps, inception impact assessments and delegated acts, generate significantly more comments, from more diverse stakeholders, relative to legislative proposals, and draft implementing acts. Regulatory and distributive policies generate significantly more comments than interior and foreign policies. Diversity is significantly higher in distributive policies but only relative to foreign policies. We contribute by showing the power of administrative acts in influencing stakeholder participation and diversity across decision stages and policy areas and shaping bias in interest representation.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164699","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Christian Elliott, Amy Janzwood, Steven Bernstein, Matthew Hoffmann
In its 20 years of operation, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) has been enormously successful as a private governor of corporate climate risk disclosure. Despite an influx of potentially competitive government-led disclosure initiatives and interventions, the use of CDP's platform has nonetheless accelerated. To explain this outcome, we argue that public interventions augment the value of private governance for firms when the costs of compliance overlap, benefits of compliance with private rules are undiminished, and normalization helps kickstart positive feedback effects. These conditions of complementarity are made possible by private governors leveraging authority, access, and adaptability as public responses materialize. We illustrate our argument with two cases: the Non-Financial Reporting Directive in the European Union and the G20's Taskforce for Climate-Related Financial Disclosures. In elaborating the conditions for complementarity beyond a functional division of governing labor, our study helps clarify how public and private governance co-evolve in a mutually reinforcing manner.
{"title":"Rethinking complementarity: The co-evolution of public and private governance in corporate climate disclosure","authors":"Christian Elliott, Amy Janzwood, Steven Bernstein, Matthew Hoffmann","doi":"10.1111/rego.12550","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12550","url":null,"abstract":"In its 20 years of operation, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) has been enormously successful as a private governor of corporate climate risk disclosure. Despite an influx of potentially competitive government-led disclosure initiatives and interventions, the use of CDP's platform has nonetheless accelerated. To explain this outcome, we argue that public interventions augment the value of private governance for firms when the costs of compliance overlap, benefits of compliance with private rules are undiminished, and normalization helps kickstart positive feedback effects. These conditions of complementarity are made possible by private governors leveraging authority, access, and adaptability as public responses materialize. We illustrate our argument with two cases: the Non-Financial Reporting Directive in the European Union and the G20's Taskforce for Climate-Related Financial Disclosures. In elaborating the conditions for complementarity beyond a functional division of governing labor, our study helps clarify how public and private governance co-evolve in a mutually reinforcing manner.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164700","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article takes an actor-centered and bottom-up perspective to analyze how private companies shape public responses to migration in Europe. It builds on ethnographic research with top managers and civil servants involved in visa policy, asylum reception, and immigration detention. Drawing on organizational theories about decisions and change, I analyze empirical evidence to put forward processes of international migration governance that take account of private and public actors, the implementation stage of policy-making, the organizational and informal dynamics underpinning decisions and change within and across borders of polity, therefore adopting a transnational lens. I show three interrelated aspects: Personal contacts, informal interactions, and informal exchange that promote private companies' business while affecting change in the delivery of public policies; private companies' involvement in decision-making and their engagement in solution-driven processes of change; the diffusion of organizational responses to migration across national contexts, which contribute to transnational change.
{"title":"How do private companies shape responses to migration in Europe? Informality, organizational decisions, and transnational change","authors":"Federica Infantino","doi":"10.1111/rego.12549","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12549","url":null,"abstract":"This article takes an actor-centered and bottom-up perspective to analyze how private companies shape public responses to migration in Europe. It builds on ethnographic research with top managers and civil servants involved in visa policy, asylum reception, and immigration detention. Drawing on organizational theories about decisions and change, I analyze empirical evidence to put forward processes of international migration governance that take account of private and public actors, the implementation stage of policy-making, the organizational and informal dynamics underpinning decisions and change within and across borders of polity, therefore adopting a transnational lens. I show three interrelated aspects: Personal contacts, informal interactions, and informal exchange that promote private companies' business while affecting change in the delivery of public policies; private companies' involvement in decision-making and their engagement in solution-driven processes of change; the diffusion of organizational responses to migration across national contexts, which contribute to transnational change.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164701","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Over the last decade, there has been increased interest in understanding the design (i.e., content) of regulation as a basis for studying regulation formation, implementation, and outcomes. Within this line of research, scholars have been particularly interested in investigating regulatory dynamics relating to features and patterns of regulatory text and have engaged a variety of methodological approaches to support their assessments. One approach featured in this research is the Institutional Grammar (IG). The IG supports syntactic and semantic analyses of institutional statements (e.g., regulatory provisions) that embed within regulatory text. A recently revised version—called the IG 2.0—further supports robust analyses of regulatory text by offering an expanded feature set particularly well-suited to extracting and classifying content relevant for the study of regulation. This paper (i) provides a brief introduction to the IG 2.0 and (ii) discusses theoretical and analytical advantages of using the IG 2.0 to study regulation.
{"title":"Understanding regulation using the Institutional Grammar 2.0","authors":"Saba Siddiki, Christopher K. Frantz","doi":"10.1111/rego.12546","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12546","url":null,"abstract":"Over the last decade, there has been increased interest in understanding the design (i.e., content) of regulation as a basis for studying regulation formation, implementation, and outcomes. Within this line of research, scholars have been particularly interested in investigating regulatory dynamics relating to features and patterns of regulatory text and have engaged a variety of methodological approaches to support their assessments. One approach featured in this research is the Institutional Grammar (IG). The IG supports syntactic and semantic analyses of institutional statements (e.g., regulatory provisions) that embed within regulatory text. A recently revised version—called the IG 2.0—further supports robust analyses of regulatory text by offering an expanded feature set particularly well-suited to extracting and classifying content relevant for the study of regulation. This paper (i) provides a brief introduction to the IG 2.0 and (ii) discusses theoretical and analytical advantages of using the IG 2.0 to study regulation.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164702","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Arnoltz, J. (2023) The embedded flexibility of Nordic labor market models under pressure from EU-induced dualization—The case of posted work in Denmark and Sweden. Regulation & Governance, 17, 372–388.
The article listed above, intended for publication in the Special Issue,”Grand challenges and the Nordic model: regulatory responses and outcomes Symposium for Regulation & Governance”, volume 17, Issue 3, was inadvertently published in a regular issue, volume 17, Issue 2. This article should be cited as shown above.
{"title":"Jens Arnoltz, The embedded flexibility of Nordic labor market models under pressure from EU-induced dualization—The case of posted work in Denmark and Sweden","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/rego.12547","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12547","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Arnoltz, J. (2023) The embedded flexibility of Nordic labor market models under pressure from EU-induced dualization—The case of posted work in Denmark and Sweden<i>. Regulation & Governance</i>, 17, 372–388.</p>\u0000<p>The article listed above, intended for publication in the Special Issue,”Grand challenges and the Nordic model: regulatory responses and outcomes Symposium for <i>Regulation & Governance</i>”, volume 17, Issue 3, was inadvertently published in a regular issue, volume 17, Issue 2. This article should be cited as shown above.</p>\u0000<p>We apologise for the error.</p>","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164704","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Lotem Perry-Hazan, Netta Barak-Corren, Gil Nachmani
How do ultra-religious schools respond to state regulations that conflict with deep-rooted cultural norms? This study investigates this question in the context of Haredi boys schools' decisions regarding Israel's core-curriculum regulations. It draws on a first-of-its-kind dataset of interviews and school data collected from a representative sample of 82 principals and teachers in schools serving 18,000 students and six government inspectors overseeing dozens of schools. We identify isomorphic structures of compliance and noncompliance and analyze the law's role among the competing sources of schools' decisions. These sources include rabbis, nongovernmental network supervisors, private consultants, models set by other schools, resource constraints, parents, and personal opinions. The findings reveal a tension between the law's overarching role in setting the baseline for schools' decisions and its under-enforcement. We conceptualize this tension as a manifestation of coupled institutional maintenance, whereby ultra-religious schools and government inspectors collaborate to maintain schools' noncompliance and autonomy.
{"title":"Noncompliance with the law as institutional maintenance at ultra-religious schools","authors":"Lotem Perry-Hazan, Netta Barak-Corren, Gil Nachmani","doi":"10.1111/rego.12545","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12545","url":null,"abstract":"How do ultra-religious schools respond to state regulations that conflict with deep-rooted cultural norms? This study investigates this question in the context of Haredi boys schools' decisions regarding Israel's core-curriculum regulations. It draws on a first-of-its-kind dataset of interviews and school data collected from a representative sample of 82 principals and teachers in schools serving 18,000 students and six government inspectors overseeing dozens of schools. We identify isomorphic structures of compliance and noncompliance and analyze the law's role among the competing sources of schools' decisions. These sources include rabbis, nongovernmental network supervisors, private consultants, models set by other schools, resource constraints, parents, and personal opinions. The findings reveal a tension between the law's overarching role in setting the baseline for schools' decisions and its under-enforcement. We conceptualize this tension as a manifestation of <i>coupled institutional maintenance</i>, whereby ultra-religious schools and government inspectors collaborate to maintain schools' noncompliance and autonomy.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The “revolving door” between those at the top of public and private organizations has given rise to questions about the “pull” and “push” factors influencing public servants' switching into lucrative posts with companies they previously regulated. In this study, we investigate the departmental attributes associated with the movement of senior British civil servants into potentially controversial corporate jobs. To do so, we develop a configurational analysis of revolving door activity in UK government departments for 2015–2018 using panel-based fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). We identify a series of alternative departmental conditions' based pathways for taking up, or not taking up, a role in the private sector. In particular, more prestigious departments with high levels of pay and low levels of agencification are associated with revolving door activity, while departments with low levels of pay, high levels of agencification, and low levels of capital procurement tend to be associated with an absence of such activity.
{"title":"The revolving door in UK government departments: A configurational analysis","authors":"Rhys Andrews, Malcolm J. Beynon","doi":"10.1111/rego.12544","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12544","url":null,"abstract":"The “revolving door” between those at the top of public and private organizations has given rise to questions about the “pull” and “push” factors influencing public servants' switching into lucrative posts with companies they previously regulated. In this study, we investigate the departmental attributes associated with the movement of senior British civil servants into potentially controversial corporate jobs. To do so, we develop a configurational analysis of revolving door activity in UK government departments for 2015–2018 using panel-based fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). We identify a series of alternative departmental conditions' based pathways for taking up, or not taking up, a role in the private sector. In particular, more prestigious departments with high levels of pay and low levels of agencification are associated with revolving door activity, while departments with low levels of pay, high levels of agencification, and low levels of capital procurement tend to be associated with an absence of such activity.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164706","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article addresses a key political question regarding the relationship between states and their citizens: how harsh are judicial systems in their punishment of those who deviate from the law? Punitiveness is a fraught concept in the existing literature and robust measurement methods maximizing conceptual complexity are lacking. Here I develop a functional approach to punitiveness through a revised conceptualization and operationalization of this key variable while cautioning against the solitary use of incarceration rates to measure state intention. Punitiveness is conceptually disaggregated into three main components: (1) a commitment to punishment over rehabilitation, (2) the degree of harshness of response to crime (i.e., a longer sentence in prison), and (3) the lack of a logical progression of punishment based on the severity of crime committed or intent of the offender. These axes are further disaggregated into measurable indicators to build a novel index of punitiveness (P-Index) from the legal codes of 26 countries. Ultimately, this rules-as-data measure offers researchers purchase on the puzzling variation in punitiveness across contexts, which persists regardless of current and historical crime levels, offering particular utility for supply-side political-economic explanations.
{"title":"Conceptualizing and measuring “punitiveness” in contemporary advanced democracies","authors":"Elizabeth Gordon Pfeffer","doi":"10.1111/rego.12533","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12533","url":null,"abstract":"This article addresses a key political question regarding the relationship between states and their citizens: how harsh are judicial systems in their punishment of those who deviate from the law? Punitiveness is a fraught concept in the existing literature and robust measurement methods maximizing conceptual complexity are lacking. Here I develop a functional approach to punitiveness through a revised conceptualization and operationalization of this key variable while cautioning against the solitary use of incarceration rates to measure state intention. Punitiveness is conceptually disaggregated into three main components: (1) a commitment to punishment over rehabilitation, (2) the degree of harshness of response to crime (i.e., a longer sentence in prison), and (3) the lack of a logical progression of punishment based on the severity of crime committed or intent of the offender. These axes are further disaggregated into measurable indicators to build a novel index of punitiveness (P-Index) from the legal codes of 26 countries. Ultimately, this rules-as-data measure offers researchers purchase on the puzzling variation in punitiveness across contexts, which persists regardless of current and historical crime levels, offering particular utility for supply-side political-economic explanations.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164707","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：