Suchergebnisse

Chapter 1: Introduction: Richard Rose: Connections Over Sixty Years -- Part I: Governing at Multiple Levels -- Chapter 2: Politics in England -- Chapter 3: The United Kingdom as an Intellectual Puzzle -- Part II: Parties and Elections -- Chapter 4: Must Labour Lose? -- Chapter 5: Studying the Interplay of Party Support and Turnout -- Part III: Institutions and Governing -- Chapter 6: Presidents and Prime Ministers: Then and Now -- Chapter 7: The Problem of Party Government -- Chapter 8: Understanding Big Government -- Part IV: Public Policy -- Chapter 9: Learning Across Time and Space: Richard Rose's Work on Lesson-Drawing -- Chapter 10: Inheritance Before Choice -- Chapter 11: The Ordinary People Perspective: Coping at the Grass-Roots -- Chapter 12: Governments and Citizens Under Stress -- Part V: Trust and Legitimacy -- Chapter 13: Democracy and its Alternatives -- Chapter 14: Northern Ireland: Searching for Consensus -- Chapter 15: Reflections.

Professional influence in policy‐making is generally believed to rest on professionals successfully laying claim to access to expertise – knowledge, understanding or experience – not available to others, above all politicians. On the basis of a 2005 survey of nearly 800 lawyers serving in local authorities in England and Wales, this article explores the relationship between specialization and political influence. Lawyers who shape policy use conventional routes for political influence, establish contacts with political officeholders, tend to identify less with the profession at large and are less likely to see themselves as specialists in any field of law. This means that the relationship between expertise and political power is complex and that the notion that professionals use their expertise to shape policy should be treated with some caution.

Do governments lean on researchers who evaluate their policies to try to get them to produce politically useful results? Do researchers buckle under such pressure? This article, based on a survey of 205 academics who have recently completed commissioned research for government, looks at the degree to which British government departments seek to produce research that is designed to provide 'political ammunition', above all making them 'look good' or minimizing criticism of their policies. Looking at different stages in the research process -- from deciding which policies to evaluate, shaping the nature and conduct of inquiry, and writing the results -- the article finds evidence of government sponsors making significant efforts to produce politically congenial results. For the most part, researchers appear to resist these efforts, though the evidence base (researchers' own accounts of their work) suggests that this conclusion be treated with some caution. Adapted from the source document.