What Kind of Justice Today ? Expectations Of 'Good Justice', Convergences And Divergences Between Managerial And Judicial Actors And How They Fit Within Management-Oriented Values

This research aims toward a better understanding of the organizational culture(s) of the judiciary in Switzerland by analysing what 'good justice' means nowadays in this country. It seeks to clarify whether, and to what extent, expectations of 'good justice' of judicial actors (judges without managerial experience) and of managerial actors (court managers) are similar and to describe possible managerial implications that may result from this. As judges are at the heart of the judicial organization and exert a strong influence on other groups of actors (Sullivan, Warren et al. 1994), the congruence of their expectations with those of court managers will be at the centre of the analysis. Additionally, referring to the conceptual worlds of Boltanski and Thévenaut (1991), we analyze how closely these expectations are to management-oriented values. We found that almost half of expectations are common to the two groups examined and the main quoted ones are compatible to new public management (NPM) concepts. On the other hand, those expectations shared exclusively by judges relate to the human side of justice, whereas those specific to court managers focus on the way justice functions.

2006 Drugs estimate refuels debate on governance, Issue 17, Spring 2006

In November 2005 €34.027 million was voted for the Drugs Initiative, which funds the local and regional drugs task forces, and the Young People’s Facilities and Services Fund (YPFSF), in 2006 – an 8 per cent increase on the allocation for 2005 and ‘well in excess of inflation’ according to the government. The community sector strongly criticised this estimate, calling for an additional €8 million to €15 million, to fund the projects identified following the creation of the Emerging Needs Fund in January 2005. In February 2006, the government revised its drugs estimate upwards by a further €8.979 million. As well as criticising the 2006 drugs estimate, the community sector raised a series of concerns with regard to governance – the rules, processes and behaviour that affect the way in which powers are exercised4 – or, in short, decision-making with regard to drugs policy in Ireland.This resource was contributed by The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use.

The Politics of Network Governance in Europe: The Case of Energy Regulation

Networks are considered increasingly important for policy-making. The literature on new modes of governance in Europe suggests that their horizontal coordination capacity and flexible and informal structures are particularly suitable for governing the multilevel architecture of the European polity. However, empirical evidence about the effects of networks on policy-making and public policies is still quite limited. This article uses the case of the European network of energy regulators to explore the determinants of the position of network members and, in turn, the domestic adoption of soft rules developed within this network. The empirical analysis, based on multivariate statistics and semi-directive interviews, supports the expectation that institutional complementarities increase actors' centrality in networks, while arguments based on organisational resources and age are disproved. Furthermore, results show that the overall level of adoption is considerable and that centrality might have a small positive effect on domestic adoption.

A new pathway for the regulation and governance of health research

The Academy's review, 'A new pathway for the regulation and governance of health research' was published in January 2011. The report was prepared by a working group, chaired by Professor Sir Michael Rawlins FMedSci, convened in response to an invitation from Government to review the regulation and governance of UK health research involving human participants, their tissue or their data.The report proposes four key principles that should underpin the regulation and governance framework around health research in the UK, and makes recommendations to:Create a new Health Research Agency (HRA) to rationalise the regulation and governance of all health research. Include within the HRA a new National Research Governance Service to facilitate timely approval of research studies by NHS Trusts. Improve the UK environment for clinical trials.Provide access to patient data that protects individual interests and allows approved research to proceed effectively. Embed a culture that values research within the NHS.

Research Governance Guidance Note 1

HSC Trust Research Governance Permission - Pre-application guidance for applicants

Research Governance Guidance Note 2

HSC Trust Research Governance Permission - Submission of Application

Struggles for meaning and struggles for control: the diffusion of bandwagon technology in two institutional environments

In this thesis, I examine the diffusion process for a complex medical technology, the PET scanner, in two different health care systems, one of which is more market-oriented (Switzerland) and the other more centrally managed by a public agency (Quebec). The research draws on institutional and socio-political theories of the diffusion of innovations to examine how institutional contexts affect processes of diffusion. I find that diffusion proceeds more rapidly in Switzerland than in Quebec, but that processes in both jurisdictions are characterized by intense struggles among providers and between providers and public agencies. I show that the institutional environment influences these processes by determining the patterns of material resources and authority available to actors in their struggles to strategically control the technology, and by constituting the discursive resources or institutional logics on which actors may legitimately draw in their struggles to give meaning to the technology in line with their interests and values. This thesis illustrates how institutional structures and meanings manifest themselves in the context of specific decisions within an organizational field, and reveals the ways in which governance structures may be contested and realigned when they conflict with interests that are legitimized by dominant institutional logics. It is argued that this form of contestation and readjustment at the margins constitutes one mechanism by which institutional frameworks are tested, stretched and reproduced or redefined.