How Welfare States Shape the Democratic Public: Policy Feedback, Participation, Voting and Attitudes

This crucial volume significantly advances the study of policy feedbacks. With contributions from many subfields and methodological approaches, it offers both sophisticated theorizing and new empirical examples that show how policies make politics in a variety of ways. Innovative research designs provide more convincing inference than ever. And the normative questions engaged about welfare performance, evaluation, participation, and accountability could not be more important or timely in this era of austerity and discord over the future of welfare states.’

Rezension zu: Inge Govaere and Hanns Ulrich (eds.): Intellectual Property, Public Policy and International Trade

The contemporary intellectual property rights (IPR) system is not a simple, smoothly working block of rules but is complex and full of ambiguities, and as many argue, imperfections. Some deficits relate on the one hand to the inherent centrality of authorship, originality and mercantilism to the ‘Western’ IP model, which leaves numerous non-Western, collaborative or folkloric modes of production outside the scope of protection. On the other hand, some imperfections stem from the way IPR are granted, whereby creators acquire a temporary monopoly over their works and thus exclude the public from having access to them. In this sense, it is often uncertain whether the existent IPR model appropriately reflects the precarious balance between private and public interests, and whether the best incentives to promote creativity and innovation - the initially stated objectives of intellectual property protection - are offered. The matter becomes still more complicated when one considers that the IPR system is not domestically contained but is globalised and strongly affected by rules at the regional and international levels. The question of whether the balance between private interests and public values is sustained within the international legal framework, epitomised by the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) of the World Trade Organization (WTO), is precisely the topic of the book reviewed here. Review of Intellectual Property, Public Policy, and International Trade, edited by Inge Govaere and Hanns Ullrich, P.I.E. Peter Lang, 2007.

Does a reference to evaluations contribute to discourse quality? The case of Swiss direct-democratic campaigns on school policy: a conceptual framework

This article examines how references to evaluations in school policy debates contribute to discourse quality. The article consists of two parts: First, it presents a descriptive overview of the references to evidence in direct-democratic campaigns. These results are based on a quantitative content analysis of the newspaper coverage and governmental information documents of 103 direct-democratic Swiss school policy votes. In a second step, it discusses these findings in view of the question of whether the incorporation of evaluation results in policy debates contributes to discourse quality. It presents a conceptual framework, including hypotheses and a research design to answer this question.

European Union Trade Policy after Enlargement: Larger Crowds, Shifting Priorities and Informal Decision-Making

The article focuses on the effects of Eastern enlargement on EU trade policy-making. On interest constellation, the article makes a case that protectionist forces have been strengthened relative to liberal forces. This slight protectionist turn is mostly witnessed in the area of anti-dumping and with respect to the Doha trade round. On preference aggregation, guided by a principal–agent framework, it is argued that the growth in the number of actors (principals and interest groups) has not constrained the role of the European Commission (agent). However, it has led to an increase in informal processes and has empowered large trading nations vis-a`-vis smaller and less ‘comitology-experienced’ member states.

Controlling New Media (without the Law)

The purpose of this paper is to explore some emerging modes of control that are evolving wholly or partially outside conventional media law. We focus in particular on the entirely novel mechanisms of control enabled through code and technology in general. We compare these new models with traditional regulatory bodies and their decision-making processes and, making reference to the values and interests that are embedded in the design of mediating technologies, ask whether the new tools of control are appropriate for achieving public policy objectives in a complex new-and-old media landscape, or whether in fact they introduce some dangers.