Rethinking crises and the accretion of executive power: the “War on Terror” and conditionality evidence from seven political systems

External shocks to democratic systems are likely to threaten the stability of relations between the executive and the representative assembly. This article investigates the impact of the so-called “war on terror” on executive-assembly relations in comparative perspective. We analyze data from seven countries, which varied in terms of form of government, level of democracy, culture, social structure, and geographic location, to evaluate its effects. We find that whereas in some systems the “war on terror” altered the balance of power between the executive and the assembly, in other cases the extant balance of power was preserved. We postulate various conditions under which the constitutionally sanctioned balance of power is most likely to be preserved in times of crisis.

The Big Society and the conjunction of crises: Justifying welfare reform and undermining social housing

This article considers the idea of the ‘Big Society’ as part of a long-standing debate about the regulation of housing. Situating the concept within governance theory, the article considers how the idea of the Big Society was used by the UK coalition government to justify a radical restructuring of welfare provision. The fundamental rationale for this transformation was that the UK was forced to respond to a conjunction of crises in morality, the state, ideology and economics. Representing a fundamental departure from earlier attempts at welfare reform, the government has undertaken a reform programme which has had a severe effect on the social housing sector. The article argues that the result has been a combination of libertarianism and authoritarianism, alongside an intentionally more destructive combination of stigmatization and fatalism. The consequence is to undermine the principle of social housing which will not only prove detrimental for residents but raises significant dilemmas for those working in the housing sector.

Do financial distress and liquidity crises affect value and size premiums?

This study investigates the impact of liquidity crises on the relationship between stock (value and size) premiums and default risk in the US market. It first examines whether financial distress can explain value and size premiums, and then, subsequently, aims to determine whether liquidity crises increase the risk of value and size premium investment strategies. The study employs a time-varying approach and a sample of US stock returns for the period between January 1982 and March 2011, a period which includes the current liquidity crisis, so as to examine the relationship between default risk, liquidity crises and value and size premiums. The findings indicate that the default premium has explanatory power for value and size and premiums, which affect firms with different characteristics. We also find that liquidity crises may actually increase the risks related to size and value premium strategies.

‘The Party’s Over’: Critical Junctures, Crises and the Politics of Housing Policy

The key argument set out in this article is that historical and comparative forms of investigation are necessary if we are to better understand the ambitions and scope of contemporary housing interventions. To demonstrate the veracity of our claim we have set out an analysis of UK housing polices enacted in the mid 1970s as a basis for comparison with those pursued forty years later. The article begins with a critical summary of some of the methodological approaches adopted by researchers used to interpret housing policy. In the main section we present our critical analysis of housing policy reforms (implemented by the Labour government between 1974 and 1979) noting both their achievements and limitations. In the concluding section, we use our interpretation of this period as a basis to judge contemporary housing policy and reflect on the methodological issues that arise from our analysis.

Introducing Corporate Reputation Continuity to Support Organizational Resilience Against Crises

As Corporate Reputation (CR) evolves into an important asset for organizations, crises and disasters stand as threats to the preservation of the reputation capital since they usually result to negative projections to their audiences and to problematic evaluations by their stakeholders. Viewing CR as the accumulated trust and positive evaluations of the stakeholders, this paper proposes a conceptual and normative framework for Reputation Continuity, which enhances the ability of organizations to preserve their reputation, instead of working for its recovery in the post-crisis period. In our approach, we propose a process of maintaining trusted links, instead of restoring them and establishing a reputation resilient organization, instead of one struggling to recover from reputation losses, after the crisis has emerged. Working closely with stakeholders during the crisis, injecting a sense of normality continuity through effective leadership and mitigating image problems are seen as critical concerns, alongside a set of managerial practices to be followed. Ultimately, it is argued that, the value-based and strategically integrated view of Business Continuity must be enhanced and supported by Reputation Continuity activities.

Introduction: the impact of the 'War on Terror' on executive–legislative relations: a global perspective

In democratic polities, constitutional equilibria or balances of power between the executive and the legislature shift over time. Normative and empirical political theorists have long recognised that war, civil unrest, economic and political crises, terrorist attacks, and other events strengthen the power of the executive, disrupt and threaten constitutional politics, and damage democratic institutions: crises require swift action and executives are thought to be more capable than parliaments and legislatures of taking such actions. The terrorist attacks on New York and Washington on 11 September 2001 and the ensuing so-called 'war on terror' declared by President Bush clearly constituted a crisis, not only in the United States but also in other political systems, in part because of the US's hegemonic position in defining and shaping many other states' foreign and domestic policies. Dicey, Schmitt, and Rossiter suggest that critical events and political crises inevitably trigger the concentration of (emergency) powers in the hands of the executive. Aristotle and Machiavelli questioned the inevitability of this process. This article and the articles that follow in this Special Issue utilise empirical evidence, through the use of case studies of the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, Australia, Israel, Italy and Indonesia, to address this debate. Specifically, the issue explores to what extent the external shock or crisis of 9/11 (and other terrorist attacks) and the ensuing 'war on terror' significantly changed the balance of executive-legislative relations from t (before the crisis) to t+1 (after the crisis) in these political systems, all of which were the targets of actual or foiled terrorist attacks. The most significant findings are that the shock of 9/11 and the 'war on terror' elicited varied responses by national executives and legislatures/parliaments and thus the balance of executive-legislative relations in different political systems; that, therefore, executive-legislative relations are positive rather than zero-sum; and that domestic political contexts conditioned these institutional responses.

Unnoticed apocalypse: the science fiction politics of urban crisis

The slogan ‘capitalism is crisis’ is one that has recently circulated swiftly around the global Occupy movement. From Schumpeter to Marx himself, the notion that the economic cycles instituted by capitalism require periodic crises as a condition of renewed capital accumulation is a commonplace. However, in a number of recent texts, this conception of crisis as constituting the very form of urban capitalist development itself has taken on a more explicitly apocalyptic tone, exemplified by the Invisible Committee's influential 2007 book The Coming Insurrection, and its account of what it calls simply ‘the metropolis’. ‘It is useless to wait’, write the text's anonymous authors, ‘for a breakthrough, for the revolution, the nuclear apocalypse or a social movement.… The catastrophe is not coming, it is here.’ In considering such an apocalyptic tone, this paper thus situates and interrogates the text in terms both of its vision of the metropolis as a terrain of total urbanization and its effective spatialization of the present as itself a kind of ‘unnoticed’ apocalypse: the catastrophe which is already here. It does so by approaching this not only apropos its place within contemporary debates surrounding leftist politics and crisis theory but also via its imaginative intersection with certain post-1960s science fiction apocalyptic motifs. What, the paper asks, does it mean to think apocalypse as the ongoing condition of the urban present itself, as well as the opening up of political and cultural opportunity for some speculative exit from its supposedly endless terrain?

Britain and the threat to stability in Europe 1918-45

After the horrors of the First World War a dialogue began between European statesmen seeking some form of European integration as a way of achieving lasting peace. During the inter-war period this idea started to attract support in Britain even though Britain's strategic and economic interests remained focused outside Europe. This book explores Britain's relations with the continent between 1918 and 1945, focussing on diplomatic and military responses to the major crises and examining attitudes to the idea of Europe in the broader context of relations with the Empire, Commonwealth and the USA.