Labor participation in corporate policy-making decisions: West Germany's experience with codetermination

If workers are wealth maximizers, codetermination should lead to less risky investments, smaller dividends, reduced firm leverage, higher and more stable salaries, and more capital-intensive production processes. Unless codetermination also increases productivity by raising wokers' morale and satisfaction or reduces information asymmetries within the firm, shareholder wealth and firm value will decline. An analysis of West Germany's case, however, indicates that codetermination has little, if any, effect on corporate operations and performance.

Impairments in an early stage of the decision-making process in patients with ventromedial prefrontal damage: preliminary results

Lesions of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex can result in a deficient decision-making behavior. So far, most experimental results in the neuropsychological decision-making research have been obtained with gambling tasks. Due to their high complexity, it is difficult to evaluate the underlying processes of the decision-making deficits. The aim of this study was to assess if patients with ventromedial prefrontal damage compared to patients with dorsolateral prefrontal damage and controls show a deficit in an early stage of the decision-making process. Nine patients with ventromedial prefrontal damage, three with dorsolateral prefrontal damage, and eleven healthy controls were tested with a newly developed decision task in which they had to search actively for the information they needed for their decisions. Our results show that patients with ventromedial prefrontal damage compared to the brain-lesioned dorsolateral prefrontal control group and healthy controls searched less for information with regard to risk defusing operators or consequences of their decisions indicating impairment already in the early stage of the decision-making process.

Policy Instrument Selection under Uncertainty: The Case of Micropollution Regulation

The paper addresses the question of which factors drive the formation of policy preferences when there are remaining uncertainties about the causes and effects of the problem at stake. To answer this question we examine policy preferences reducing aquatic micropollutants, a specific case of water protection policy and different actor groups (e.g. state, science, target groups). Here, we contrast two types of policy preferences: a) preventive or source-directed policies, which mitigate pollution in order to avoid contact with water; and b) reactive or end-of-pipe policies, which filter water already contaminated by pollutants. In a second step, we analyze the drivers for actors’ policy preferences by focusing on three sets of explanations, i.e. participation, affectedness and international collaborations. The analysis of our survey data, qualitative interviews and regression analysis of the Swiss political elite show that participation in the policy-making process leads to knowledge exchange and reduces uncertainties about the policy problem, which promotes preferences for preventive policies. Likewise, actors who are affected by the consequences of micropollutants, such as consumer or environmental associations, opt for anticipatory policies. Interestingly, we find that uncertainties about the effectiveness of preventive policies can promote preferences for end-of-pipe policies. While preventive measures often rely on (uncertain) behavioral changes of target groups, reactive policies are more reliable when it comes to fulfilling defined policy goals. Finally, we find that in a transboundary water management context, actors with international collaborations prefer policies that produce immediate and reliable outcomes.

A high-resolution map of direct and indirect connectivity of erosion risk areas to surface waters in Switzerland: A risk assessment tool for planning and policy-making

Off-site effects of soil erosion are becoming increasingly important, particularly the pollution of surface waters. In order to develop environmentally efficient and cost effective mitigation options it is essential to identify areas that bear both a high erosion risk and high connectivity to surface waters. This paper introduces a simple risk assessment tool that allows the delineation of potential critical source areas (CSA) of sediment input into surface waters concerning the agricultural areas of Switzerland. The basis are the erosion risk map with a 2 m resolution (ERM2) and the drainage network, which is extended by drained roads, farm tracks, and slope depressions. The probability of hydrological and sedimentological connectivity is assessed by combining soil erosion risk and extended drainage network with flow distance calculation. A GIS-environment with multiple-flow accumulation algorithms is used for routing runoff generation and flow pathways. The result is a high resolution connectivity map of the agricultural area of Switzerland (888,050 ha). Fifty-five percent of the computed agricultural area is potentially connected with surface waters, 45% is not connected. Surprisingly, the larger part of 34% (62% of the connected area) is indirectly connected with surface waters through drained roads, and only 21% are directly connected. The reason is the topographic complexity and patchiness of the landscape due to a dense road and drainage network. A total of 24% of the connected area and 13% of the computed agricultural area, respectively, are rated with a high connectivity probability. On these CSA an adapted land use is recommended, supported by vegetated buffer strips preventing sediment load. Even areas that are far away from open water bodies can be indirectly connected and need to be included in planning of mitigation measures. Thus, the connectivity map presented is an important decision-making tool for policy-makers and extension services. The map is published on the web and thus available for application.

The direct-democratic challenge to evidence-based policy making: Questioning the governmental PISA narrative in Swiss school policy

The democratic deficit of evidence-based policymaking and the little attention the approach pays to values and norms have repeatedly been criticized. This article argues that direct-democratic campaigns may provide an arena for citizens and stakeholders to debate the belief systems inherent to evidence. The study is based on a narrative analysis of Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) reports, as well as of newspaper coverage and governmental information referring to PISA in Swiss direct-democratic campaigns on a variety of school policy issues. The findings show that PISA reports are discursive instruments rather than ‘objective evidence’. The reports promote a narrative of economic progress through educational evidence that is adopted without scrutiny by governmental coalitions in direct-democratic campaigns to justify school policy reforms. Yet, the dominant PISA narrative is contested in two counter-narratives, one endorsed by numerous citizens, the other by a group of experts. These counter-narratives question how PISA is used by an ‘expertocracy’ to prescribe reforms, as well as the performance ideology inherent to. Overall, these findings suggest that direct-democratic campaigns may make more transparent how evidence is produced and used according to existing belief systems. Evidence, on the other hand, may be a stimulus for democratic discourse by feeding the debate with potential policy problems and solution. Thus, direct-democratic debates may reconcile normative positions of citizens with the desire to base decisions on empirical evidence.