Suchergebnisse

Legislative solutions to pressing problems like balancing the budget, climate change, and poverty usually require compromise. Yet national, state, and local legislators often reject compromise proposals that would move policy in their preferred direction. Why do legislators reject such agreements? This engaging and relevant investigation into how politicians think reveals that legislators refuse compromise - and exacerbate gridlock - because they fear punishment from voters in primary elections. Prioritizing these electoral interests can lead lawmakers to act in ways that hurt their policy interests and also overlook the broader electorate's preferences by representing only a subset of voters with rigid positions. With their solution-oriented approach, Anderson, Butler, and Harbridge-Yong demonstrate that improving the likelihood of legislative compromise may require moving negotiations outside of the public spotlight. Highlighting key electoral motives underlying polarization, this book is an excellent resource for scholars and students studying Congress, American politics, public policy, and political behavior.

Legislative solutions to pressing problems like balancing the budget, climate change, and poverty usually require compromise. Yet national, state, and local legislators often reject compromise proposals that would move policy in their preferred direction. Why do legislators reject such agreements? This engaging and relevant investigation into how politicians think reveals that legislators refuse compromise - and exacerbate gridlock - because they fear punishment from voters in primary elections. Prioritizing these electoral interests can lead lawmakers to act in ways that hurt their policy interests and also overlook the broader electorate's preferences by representing only a subset of voters with rigid positions. With their solution-oriented approach, Anderson, Butler, and Harbridge-Yong demonstrate that improving the likelihood of legislative compromise may require moving negotiations outside of the public spotlight. Highlighting key electoral motives underlying polarization, this book is an excellent resource for scholars and students studying Congress, American politics, public policy, and political behavior.

BACKGROUND: Previous Australian workforce analyses revealed a small orthotist/prosthetist workforce with a low number of practitioners per 100,000 Australians. In recent years, initiatives were implemented to increase relative workforce size, including a government-led change in immigration policy to facilitate entry of experienced internationally trained orthotist/prosthetists into the Australian workforce. Given these changes, this project aimed to compare demographics of the orthotist/prosthetist workforce in Australia and each state/territory between 2007, 2012 and 2019. METHODS: This quasi-experiment analysed data from the Australian Orthotic Prosthetic Association (AOPA) database of certified orthotist/prosthetists, to compare changes in the absolute number of practitioners and the number of practitioners per 100,000 population, as well as practitioner age, gender and service location (i.e., metropolitan, regional/remote) across three time points, with a breakdown by each Australian state and territory. RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2019, the number of orthotist/prosthetists per 100,000 population increased 90%. Average age reduced significantly between 2007 (41.5 years) and 2019 (35 years) (p = 0.001). While the proportion of female practitioners increased significantly between 2007 (30%) and 2019 (49%), and between 2012 (38%) and 2019 (49%) (p < 0.05); only 22% of the female workforce is over 40 years of age. The proportion of practitioners servicing a regional/remote location did not change over time (range 13–14%). CONCLUSIONS: Between 2007 and 2019, the national orthotist/prosthetist workforce increased at a rate that exceeded Australia's population growth, became younger, and more female. However, the number of practitioners per 100,000 population remains below international recommendations; particularly in states outside of Victoria and Tasmania, and in regional/remote areas. In addition, low numbers of mid-late career female practitioners suggest challenges to retention of this particular cohort. ...

Environmental managers face major challenges related to project implementation and communicating the significance of those projects to the public. Effective communication can mitigate public opposition or increase support for specific projects and increase public and political support for environmental management more generally. In this study, we evaluate which types of benefits or losses environmental managers should communicate and how to frame those attributes to achieve greater public support. To do so, we field a survey experiment that presents the benefits of an invasive species management project, utilizing a two (economic, ecological) by two (gain, loss) factorial design as well as a control message. Ecological messages lead to significantly more support for invasive species management than economic messages, and loss frames are more effective than gain frames. We also find that treatment responses differ across several covariates including political ideology and environmentalism. These results indicate that the public is more concerned with managing invasive species for intrinsic environmental worth than economic benefit and that preventing further environmental degradation is more motivating than promoting additional environmental gains.

IntroductionThe new WHO guidelines recommend offering pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to people who are at substantial risk of HIV infection. However, where PrEP should be prioritised, and for which population groups, remains an open question. The HIV landscape in sub‐Saharan Africa features limited prevention resources, multiple options for achieving cost saving, and epidemic heterogeneity. This paper examines what role PrEP should play in optimal prevention in this complex and dynamic landscape.MethodsWe use a model that was previously developed to capture subnational HIV transmission in sub‐Saharan Africa. With this model, we can consider how prevention funds could be distributed across and within countries throughout sub‐Saharan Africa to enable optimal HIV prevention (that is, avert the greatest number of infections for the lowest cost). Here, we focus on PrEP to elucidate where, and to whom, it would optimally be offered in portfolios of interventions (alongside voluntary medical male circumcision, treatment as prevention, and behaviour change communication). Over a range of continental expenditure levels, we use our model to explore prevention patterns that incorporate PrEP, exclude PrEP, or implement PrEP according to a fixed incidence threshold.ResultsAt low‐to‐moderate levels of total prevention expenditure, we find that the optimal intervention portfolios would include PrEP in only a few regions and primarily for female sex workers (FSW). Prioritisation of PrEP would expand with increasing total expenditure, such that the optimal prevention portfolios would offer PrEP in more subnational regions and increasingly for men who have sex with men (MSM) and the lower incidence general population. The marginal benefit of including PrEP among the available interventions increases with overall expenditure by up to 14% (relative to excluding PrEP). The minimum baseline incidence for the optimal offer of PrEP declines for all population groups as expenditure increases. We find that using a fixed incidence benchmark to guide PrEP decisions would incur considerable losses in impact (up to 7%) compared with an approach that uses PrEP more flexibly in light of prevailing budget conditions.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that, for an optimal distribution of prevention resources, choices of whether to implement PrEP in subnational regions should depend on the scope for impact of other possible interventions, local incidence in population groups, and total resources available. If prevention funding were to become restricted in the future, it may be suboptimal to use PrEP according to a fixed incidence benchmark, and other prevention modalities may be more cost‐effective. In contrast, expansions in funding could permit PrEP to be used to its full potential in epidemiologically driven prevention portfolios and thereby enable a more cost‐effective HIV response across Africa.

We were delighted to be asked to respond to Richard Spark's paper. We are encouraged by the themes and issues highlighted, and feel passionately about many of the areas of future research identified in the piece. Indeed, many of the areas of scholarship (such as research with the Global South, practices and experiences of crime and punishment, violence in all its forms, crime and technology, socio-legal research, and political discourses around crime) are areas with which we – as a collective group of early career researchers (ECRs) – are currently engaged, often in collaboration with other ECRs within and outwith the United Kingdom. We commend both Prof. Sparks and the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) for this important and timely reflection on the direction and possible futures of criminology.

AbstractCentral governments face compliance problems when they rely on local governments to implement policy. In authoritarian political systems, these challenges are pronounced because local governments do not face citizens at the polls. In a national‐scale, randomized field experiment in China, we test whether a public, non‐governmental rating of municipal governments' compliance with central mandates to disclose information about the management of pollution increased compliance. We find significant and positive treatment effects on compliance after only one year that persist with reinforcement into a second post‐treatment year. The public rating appears to decrease the costs of monitoring compliance for the central government without increasing public and media attention to pollution, highlighting when this mode of governance is likely to emerge. These results reveal important roles that nonstate actors can play in enhancing the accountability of local governments in authoritarian political systems.

Pivotal legislators' positions are critical to legislative outcomes, but does this heightened importance in policymaking translate into heightened electoral accountability or voter knowledge? Arguments about clarity of responsibility suggest that pivotal legislators, who are decisive in determining legislative outcomes, may be held to higher standards, while perspectives rooted in electoral incentives for position taking suggest they may not. Two survey experiments show that voters do not respond more strongly to pivotal legislators' votes on policy. Moreover, observational data analysis rejects the expectation that constituents have more knowledge about the votes of pivotal moderate legislators compared to non-pivotal moderate legislators. These results suggest that pivotal legislators face similar, if not lower, accountability for their votes. Combined with the policy-concessions pivotal legislators can secure, these patterns point to the benefits that accrue to pivotal legislators from institutional rules that give them key veto power over policy.

Abstract
Concerns about polarization and the difficulty moderate candidates have in winning primary elections have driven several electoral reform efforts in recent decades. In this article, we leverage reforms prior to the 2022 elections in Alaska to assess whether the top-four primary is likely to help moderate candidates succeed. We evaluate three mechanisms by which the top-four might help moderates: by allowing them to advance from the primary and compete for votes from the more moderate general electorate, by changing the composition of the primary electorate and/or by facilitating crossover voting during the primary. Our analysis suggests that the top-four primary creates opportunities for cross-party voting that can enhance the electoral prospects of moderate candidates.

AbstractIntroductionSetting and monitoring progress towards targets for HIV control is critical in ensuring responsive programmes. Here, we explore how to apply targets for reduction in HIV incidence to local settings and which indicators give the strongest signal of a change in incidence in the population and are therefore most important to monitor.MethodsWe use location‐specific HIV transmission models, tailored to the epidemics in the counties and major cities in Kenya, to project a wide range of plausible future epidemic trajectories through varying behaviours, treatment coverage and prevention interventions. We look at the change in incidence across modelled scenarios in each location between 2015 and 2030 to inform local target setting. We also simulate the measurement of a library of potential indicators and assess which are most strongly associated with a change in incidence.ResultsConsiderable variation was observed in the trajectory of the local epidemics under the plausible scenarios defined (only 10 of 48 locations saw a median reduction in incidence of greater than or equal to an 80% target by 2030). Indicators that provide strong signals in certain epidemic types may not perform consistently well in settings with different epidemiological features. Predicting changes in incidence is more challenging in advanced generalized epidemics compared to concentrated epidemics where changes in high‐risk sub‐populations track more closely to the population as a whole. Many indicators demonstrate only limited association with incidence (such as "condom use" or "pre‐exposure prophylaxis coverage"). This is because many other factors (low effectiveness, impact of other interventions, countervailing changes in risk behaviours, etc.) can confound the relationship between interventions and their ultimate long‐term impact, especially for an intervention with low expected coverage. The population prevalence of viral suppression shows the most consistent associations with long‐term changes in incidence even in the largest generalized epidemics.ConclusionsTarget setting should be appropriate for the local epidemic and what can feasibly be achieved. There is no one universally reliable indicator to predict future HIV incidence across settings. Thus, the signature of epidemic control must contain indications of success across a wide range of interventions and outcomes.