Search Results

The book proposes a unifying conception which shows that the differences between ‘majoritarian’, ‘consensus’ and other forms of representative democracy are superficial compared to what unites them. The common element is the empowerment of the median voter by making the party (s)he votes for the median party in the legislature. Comparative evidene covering 21 democracies from 1950-1995 is assembled to check out the descriptive credentials of this idea, in contrast to the government mandate which forms the normal description and justification of democracy as providing ‘a necessary link between popular preferences and public policy’. Although, spontaneous majorities rarely emerge, median voter - median party correspondences do (72% of all governments, 82% under PR). Policy correspondence, distortion, long term bias, and responsiveness are examined in both static and dynamic terms. They reveal that underneath short-term fluctuations, the long-term equilibrium positions of governments and median voters map each other closely. Many other questions about democracy are also raised and investigated — economic and retrospective voting (‘ kicking the rascals out’): policy incrementalism, etc. — giving the book an appeal to different groups of specialists in political science. The comparative data on voting, on electoral party and government preferences, and on actual policy outputs are unsurpassed with regards to comprehensiveness over nations and time.

Why does the regulation of risks to human health and safety vary so dramatically from one policy domain to another? Why are some risks regulated aggressively and others responded to only modestly? Is there any logic to the techniques we use in risk regulation? This book addresses these important questions by systematically examining variety amongst risk regulation regimes across policy domains, analysing the significant driving forces shaping those regimes, and identifying the causes of regulatory failure and success. In order to do so, the book develops a systems‐based concept of a ‘risk regulation regime’, which enables comparative description and analysis of the rules, institutional arrangements, and cultures that are bound up with the handling of risk within and between regimes. Using that framework, the book analyses how regimes and their constituent components are differentially shaped by three major driving forces—namely, the pressures exerted by market failure, by public opinion, and by organized interests inside and outside the state apparatus—and blame‐avoidance responses of regimes in the face of pressures for greater openness. The book applies the method to analyse a range of risk regulation regimes that cross the divide between ‘natural’ and ‘socially created’, state‐created and market‐created, ‘voluntary’ and ‘involuntary’, high‐tech and low‐tech, individually, and corporately produced risks. Those regimes include the release of paedophiles into the community, air pollution, local road safety, radon, pesticides, and dangerous dogs. The analysis reveals both variations and paradoxes that can neither be identified by single case studies, nor be easily explained by macro‐oriented approaches to understanding risk regulation. The Government of Risk shows how such an approach is of high policy relevance as well as of considerable theoretical importance.

When liberal political philosophers talk of equalizing, increasing or maximizing freedom (or liberty), they implicitly assume freedom to be a measurable attribute. Freedom is one of the currencies of a liberal theory of distributive justice, and is therefore assumed to be something that individuals can possess in varying degrees. Yet it is rarely clear what is meant by claims about degrees of freedom. To make sense of such claims, we need to clarify the concept of overall freedom and ask whether its measurement is theoretically possible. This concept is important because freedom has, for liberals, non-specific (or content-independent) value–i.e. value that is independent of the value of being free to do specific things. Liberals prescribe not only that individuals have certain specific freedom-types but also that they have a measure of (overall) freedom. Attempts to make sense of the concept of overall freedom by weighting particular options in terms of their values are erroneous, as these do not account for freedom’s non-specific value. On the other hand, a closer examination of the problems of the individuation of actions and of the various types of constraints on freedom shows overall freedom to be measurable in a way that reflects its non-specific value. To this end, actions need to be individuated in spatio-temporal terms and constraints on freedom need to be characterized in terms of the physical compossibility of actions. The comparative judgements about freedom implied by this analysis (with reference both to individuals and to groups) are more coherent with our intuitive judgements than might at first be expected.

Over the last decade, the neo-institutionalist literature on comparative capitalism has developed into an influential body of work. This book assesses this literature and proposes a major re-orientation of the field. It critiques many aspects of this work and finds a way of modelling how creative actors trying to achieve change — institutional entrepreneurs — tackle these constraints. Central to the account is the concept of governance, as it is by recombining governance mechanisms that these entrepreneurs must achieve their goals. In seeking how to analyse the spaces in which they operate, the book criticises and deconstructs some dominant approaches in socio-political analysis: to typologies, to elective affinity and complementarity, to path dependence. It develops a theory of governance modes, which includes potentially decomposing them into their core components. Finally, it proposes a reorientation of the neo-institutionalist research programme to take more account of detailed diversity and potentiality for change. The book is primarily theoretical, but it makes liberal use of examples, particularly from studies of local economic development and politics.

Zen Masters contains ten articles by prominent scholars about the most significant “product” of the Zen tradition—the life and teachings of the masters or patriarchs who have made this kind of Buddhism the most renowned in the world. In contrast to most other forms of Buddhism, sacred literature in Chan or Zen primarily consists of religious biographies, or stories about the lives of Zen masters. The emergence of these narratives, often in anecdotal style, concerning the practices and teachings of the patriarchs in the late Tang and early Song dynasties in China provided new and vivid models for what it meant to be awakened. Iconic images of these often irreverent, blasphemous patriarchs spread quickly, and became the basis of a new school that rose to prominence throughout East Asia. The focus of these collected essays is a critical examination of the “image” of the Zen master as it has been projected over the past millennium, in both classic literature and the lives of modern examples, in order to capture a sense of the history and evolutionary quality of narratives about Zen patriarchs. What it means to be a Zen master is something that changes over time and is related to social context. The masters are selected from different historical periods and geographical areas, ranging from medieval China to early modern Japan and contemporary America. Essays in this volume highlight which elements of Zen identity came into focus during various periods of history, and attempt to show how each of these factors stands in relations to earlier and later Zen personalities. The audience for this volume will include both specialists and more general readers. The potency of the Zen master’s image is so far-reaching that there will be an enthusiastic readership from all quarters of interest in Buddhism and in the image of sainthood more generally. Teachers of comparative religion, those analyzing diverse images of spiritual practice, and instructors of the history of the Buddhist tradition will be able to use this volume for classroom purposes. Practitioners of Zen will find the volume particularly helpful in their efforts to imagine and engage what Zen enlightenment means for understanding human behavior and comportment.

Teaching the Daode Jing (DDJ) was written for non‐specialist faculty who are including the DDJ in a widening group of courses in Asian studies, religion, philosophy, history, humanities and political science. It provides up‐to‐date information on contemporary scholarship and detailed discussion of classroom strategies that have been successfully employed in a variety of teaching environments. Contributors include well‐known scholars of Daoism such as Livia Kohn, Norman Girardot, Robert Henricks, Russell Kirkland, Hans‐Georg Moeller and Michael LaFargue. In addition, there are essays by Eva Wong (Daoist practitioner), David Hall (philosophy), Gary DeAngelis (mysticism), and a jointly written essay on pedagogical strategies by Judith Berling, Geoffrey Foy, and John Thompson (Chinese religion). Their essays address questions such as: Should we capitalize on popular interest in the DDJ in our classrooms? Which, among the many translations and scholarly approaches ought we to use? Is it appropriate to think of the DDJ as a religious text at all? There are several times in many of the essays where the attention to concrete classroom practice is brought clearly into focus. Thus, readers will find several specific tips that can be used in their own classrooms.

The analysis in this book disputes entrenched interpretations of the comparative political economy of industrialized democracies. It questions, in particular, the widely-held assumption that social democratic governments will defend the interests of labour. The evidence shows that labour has become split into two clearly differentiated constituencies: those with secure employment (insiders) and those without (outsiders). The book focuses on three policy areas: employment protection (representing the main concern of insiders), and active and passive labour market policies (the main concern of outsiders). The main thrust of the argument is that the goals of social democratic parties are often best served by pursuing policies that benefit only insiders. The implication of the book's insider-outsider model is that social democratic government is associated with higher levels of employment protection legislation but not with labour market policy. The book also argues that there are factors that can reduce insider-outsider differences and weaken their influence on social democratic governments. These hypotheses are explored through the triangulation of different methodologies. The book provides an analysis of surveys and macrodata and a detailed comparison of three case-studies: Spain, the UK, and the Netherlands.

This comparative lexicographical account of Latin suffixes in English explores the rich variety of English loanwords formed by the addition of one or more Latin-derived suffixes, such as -ial, -able, -ability, and -id. It traces the histories of over 3,000 words, revealing the range of derivational patterns in Indo-European, Latin, and English. It describes the different kinds of suffixes, shows how they entered English via different channels at different times (especially French and Anglo-French), and considers the complexity of competition between native Germanic and borrowed forms. The Proto-Indo-European ancestry of each formative is discussed, if known. The information that etymological dictionaries supply for root origins is thus provided for suffixes. This is followed by a sketch of the suffix’s synchronic status in Latin, and a statement concerning its relative productivity in English word formation. Finally, the book contains a list of the Indo-European roots cited.

This book explains the perceptual knowledge involved in aesthetic judgements. It does so by linking Kant's aesthetics to a critically upgraded account of his theory of knowledge. This upgraded theory emphasizes conceptual and imaginative structures, which Kant terms respectively, ‘categories’ and ‘schemata’. By describing examples of aesthetic judgement, it is shown that these judgements must involve categories and fundamental schemata (even though Kant himself, and most other commentators, have not fully appreciated the fact). It is argued, in turn, that this shows the aesthetic to be not just one kind of pleasurable experience amongst others, but one based on factors necessary to objective knowledge and personal identity, and one, indeed, which plays a role in how these capacities develop. The explanation of how individual aesthetic judgements claim universal validity, and the aesthetic basis of art, however, requires that the Kantian position is developed further. This is done by exploring his ideas concerning critical comparisons in the cultivation of taste, and art's relation to aesthetic ideas and genius. By linking earlier points to a more developed account of comparative critical factors, the Kantian approach offers a satisfying and comprehensive explanation of aesthetic experience and fine art. It is shown to also encompass some kinds of avant-garde work that were previously thought to limit its relevance.

Hindu God, Christian God, an exercise in comparative theology, proposes that theology today is an interreligious discipline and illustrates this with reference to Christianity and Hinduism. Thinkers in many religious traditions share similar theological questions and problems in their quest to understand their faith, and so too use comparable methods for seeking right answers. However, much traditions emphasize their uniqueness and the necessity of faith, their thinkers usually teach, and often such teachings are recorded and become available as books that can be read and understood, and even translated. Religions are partially intelligible to outsiders; reasoning inquirers, in beginning to understand various beliefs and practices, cross even the most firmly fixed religious boundaries. In the process, they learn from the new tradition and also see their own tradition anew, by a comparative reading process. The best theology is therefore not only interreligious but also comparative, well versed in how different traditions have dealt with the same concerns.

It is also dialogical, since authors must explain their ideas in ways that at least make sense to thinkers in the other traditions being discussed; they also need to be willing to learn from the critiques and responses of those other thinkers. Lastly, the discovery of common ground and shared concerns does not mean agreement; believers can still disagree and continue to hold views at odds with what others believe. Apologetics remains an issue.

Hindu God, Christian God argues these points by bringing into conversation Christian theological beliefs – exemplified by the writings of Richard Swinburne, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Karl Rahner, and Karl Barth — and beliefs from some major Hindu traditions, including Nyaya [Logic], Vaisnavism [devotion to Visnu], and Saivism [devotion to Siva], as expressed in classic Sanskrit‐ and Tamil‐language texts. Issues discussed include Hindu and Christian views of God's nature; proofs for God's existence; the true religion; incarnation or divine embodiment; revelation as offering definitive knowledge of religious truth.

In recent decades, the share of service employment has increased greatly across Europe, fundamentally changing the structure of European labour markets and the nature of the economic risks that individual workers face. This book explores how far reforms to unemployment protection systems, which were introduced and consolidated in a very different labour market context, are responding to the particular challenges of post-industrial labour markets. It argues that adapting traditional systems of unemployment protection to the risk profiles of service-based economies requires a profound policy realignment, which can be summarized with reference to three overlapping processes of institutional change; the homogenization of unemployment benefit rights for different categories of the unemployed; the erosion of the institutional boundaries between benefit provisions for the unemployed and for other groups of working-age people reliant on state support; and the ever-closer operational integration of income maintenance policies and other forms of labour market support. Systematically comparing across twelve European welfare states over a period of twenty years, the book traces how these reform dynamics have played out in the context of political conflicts, institutional constraints, and changing macroeconomic conditions. While the book highlights that many differences continue to set the unemployment protection arrangements of different European countries apart, it also points to an emergent process of contingent convergence in conceptions of the risk of unemployment and of appropriate ways of regulating it.

Theorizing Feminist Policy intersects empirical feminist policy analysis with non‐feminist policy studies to define and contribute to the new field of Feminist Comparative Policy. The book first identifies this new area of study, showing how it dialogues with Gender and Politics, Comparative Public Policy, Comparative Politics, and Public Policy Studies. Next, the book seeks to strengthen one of the weakest links of this new area, the study of explicitly feminist government action. In the remaining nine chapters, feminist policy is mapped out as a relatively new public policy sector, with eight sub‐sectors—blueprint, political representation, equal employment, reconciliation, family law, reproductive rights, sexuality and violence, and public service delivery. A qualitative and comparative framework is developed to analyse the profiles and styles of feminist policy in post‐industrial democracies in 27 different cases of feminist policy formation across 13 different countries. The initial empirical study makes the case for feminist policy as a new sector of state action, concluding tentatively that successful feminist policy formation is a subtle combination of feminist strategic partnerships, non‐feminist allies, institutions, culture, and international influences. These tentative findings also shed new light on the perennial questions of Comparative Politics and Policy: do politics, institutions, national policy style, sector, institutions, or culture matter the most in determining policy processes and outcomes? The book finishes by suggesting the next steps in developing comparative theories of feminist policy formation. Theorizing Feminist Policy, therefore, goes beyond just describing the dimensions of feminist policy from existing literature, it seeks to systematically contribute to comparative theories of how the contemporary post‐industrial state has taken on social change at the beginning of the twenty‐first century.

This book offers a comprehensive account of the role of religion within the public order of the European Union. It examines the facilitation and protection of individual and institutional religious freedom in EU law and the means through which the Union facilitates religious input and influence over law. In addition, the book identifies the limitations on religious influence over law and politics that have been identified by the Union as fundamental elements of its public order and prerequisites to EU membership. It demonstrates that the Union seeks to balance its predominantly Christian religious heritage with an equally strong secular and humanist movement by facilitating religion as a form of cultural identity while limiting its political influence. Such balancing takes place in the context of the Union's limited legitimacy and its commitment to respect for Member State cultural autonomy. Deference towards the cultural role of religion at Member State level enables culturally-entrenched religions to exercise a greater degree of influence within the Union's public order than ‘outsider’ faiths that lack a comparable cultural role. The book places the Union's approach to religion in the context of broader historical and sociological trends around religion in Europe and of contemporary debates around secularism, equal treatment, and the role of Islam in Europe.

What is the federal philosophy inspiring the structure of European law? The federal principle stands for constitutional arrangements that find “unity in diversity”. The two most influential manifestations of the federal principle emerged under the names of “dual” and “cooperative” federalism in the constitutional history of the United States of America. Dual federalism is based on the idea that the federal government and the State governments are co-equals and each is legislating in a separate sphere. Cooperative federalism, on the other hand, stands for the thought that both governments legislate in the same sphere. They are hierarchically arranged and complement each other in solving a social problem. Can the European Union be understood in federal terms? The book’s General Part introduces three constitutional traditions of the federal idea. Following the American tradition, the European Union is defined as a Federation of States as it stands on the “middle ground” between international and national law.