Search results

This study explains the variation of government responses to the pandemic by focusing on how centralization/decentralization in politics and administration creates conflicts and coordination problems. Specifically, the authors make comparisons between the U.S. and South Korea to reveal differences in macro-level structures and associated responses. One of the key points of comparison is the centralized, hierarchical governance system, which may thwart or facilitate a coordinated response.

This is an in-depth comparative case study of the two countries that showed different trajectories during the initial response to COVID-19. The comparison allows us to highlight the long-standing debate about centralization/decentralization and offers implications for government responses to crises shaped by political systems and administrative structures.

While there are inherent pros and cons to decentralization, the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the institutional limitations in American federalism and the advantages that centralized administrative coordination creates during times of crisis. American federalism has unveiled systematic problems in coordination, along with the leadership crisis in polarized politics. The response from South Korea also reveals several issues in the administratively centralized and politically polarized environment.

While the authors risk comparing apples and oranges, the variation unveils systematic contradictions in polarized politics and offers important implications for government responses in times of crisis. However, this article did not fully account for individual leadership as an independent factor that interacts with existing political/administrative institutions.

There is certainly no one best way or one-size-fits-all solution to mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic in countries under different circumstances. This article demonstrates that one of the essential determining factors in national responses to the pandemic is how the political and administrative dimensions of centralization/decentralization are balanced against each other.

Unlike previous studies explaining the country-level responses to COVID-19, this study focuses on the variance of political and administrative decentralization within each country from the political-administrative perspective and reveals the systematic contradictions in coordination and the leadership crisis in polarized politics.

State environmental agencies have been organized independently with a variety of structural schemes, and are responsible for the bulk of administration of federal environmental policy, such as the Clean Air Act. Using statistical models of air quality outcomes, this research compares three competing typologies for capturing agency differences: Ringquist (1993b), Lester (1990), and Wilson (1989). The findings indicate the most commonly used measure of organization, Ringquist (1993b), may be the weakest in comparison. Additionally, both Lester (1990) and Wilson (1989) show interesting advantages in comparison to each other. The findings provide some interesting insights into the difficult task of measuring organization.

While many states have adopted renewable portfolio standards (RPS), they have employed agencies with very different missions to manage these programs. These organizational differences are important in understanding how agencies are approaching the policy implementation. However, there is little research on the comparative effectiveness of these implementation approaches. This article begins with a background of RPS programs, and presents a typology of RPS implementation agencies. The effectiveness of RPS implementation approaches is tested with a pooled state-level dataset covering 14 years of program adoption and implementation. The results indicate implementation approach is substantively important in explaining policy outcomes and the growth of renewable energy. More specifically, the findings suggest using an economic development approach is the most effective way of producing growth in renewable energy generation.

The federal budgeting process is wrought with conflict that makes it nearly impossible for the budget to be passed on time, or so it seems. One aspect overlooked is the effects of statutory Pay-As-You-Go (PAYGO) rules. The cursory evidence indicates PAYGO may be beneficial under certain circumstances. The analysis relies on an Autoregressive-Moving-Average (ARMA) time series model with data from appropriations bills signed into law from fiscal years 1994 to 2014. The findings indicate mixed effects for PAYGO statutes with a shorter budgeting timeline under the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, but a longer timeline under the Statutory PAYGO Act of 2010. Additional findings suggest substantive relationships between the length of the budgeting process and party polarization, presidential leadership, and the economy.

Since the 1978 adoption of Proposition 13 California’s fiscal conditions have steadily deteriorated. This article questions whether this fiscal deterioration is due to a lack of budget affordability or of institutional ineffectiveness. In examining the institutional ineffectiveness of California’s budget system the article focuses on: (1) general revenue mobilization, (2) expenditure mandates in education, and (3) legislative party divisions in face of supermajority requirements. To this end, the article develops a pre-post regression model that analyzes the factors that influenced the state budget balances. The article finds that California’s deteriorating fiscal conditions are strongly influenced by the declining effective tax rate. The study also finds that increases in education spending are a statistically significant factor, but finds mixed support for the argument that political divisions drive California’s budget deficits.

With digital spaces an increasing feature of our everyday lives, and the internet now a primary means of sourcing IPEDs and information regarding their use, this chapter seeks to understand how digital fitness forum communities shape the dissemination of culturally embedded harm reduction advice. Findings are drawn from two netnographic studies of fitness forums, which identify several key areas in which community norms and structures served to inform harm reduction behaviours. This included embedded forum reputation systems and the ways in which these shaped IPED access, including through elevating ‘expert’ users and encouraging informed discussion regarding product quality, to the emergence of steroid testing services from forums as a community harm reduction tool. Second, forums were observed to often encourage users to conduct research and inform themselves regarding safe use, though limitations to this norm were also documented in relation to poor-quality medical advice, highlighting the issues with IPED users' reliance on anecdotal advice in the contexts of prohibition. Finally, the role of digital fitness forums as ‘digital backstage’ is considered, examining both how this can be harmful to IPED users from excluded or ‘otherised’ groups, but simultaneously offers cultural participants the opportunity for airing vulnerabilities in a space where their masculine identity is not threatened in doing so, thus facilitating harm reduction among cultural ‘insiders’.