Suchergebnisse

The rise & fall of states has traditionally been explained either by random factors specific to each state, or as the life cycle through which all states eventually proceed. Neither approach can account for systematic historical patterns, eg, the tendency toward smaller political units 400-1400 AD, & the tendency in the opposite direction since 1400. By applying a theory of agency to the question of the role & size of the state, a simple model is able to predict the directions of change in territorial boundaries & the tax share of income for eight major historical transformations in the scale economies of information processing & military control. Moreover, evidence is presented suggesting that innovation was responsible for initiating change in political & economic structures. 2 Tables, 1 Figure, 1 Appendix, 49 References. Adapted from the source document.

DESPITE INCREASED INTEREST IN THE POLITICAL ROLE OF THE STATE, ATTENTION IS CURRENTLY SHIFTING AWAY FROM THE STATE'S CONTRIBUTION TO POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT IN WILHELMINE GERMANY. THERE ARE, HOWEVER, A NUMBER OF UNRESOLVED QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE WILHELMINE STATE BUREAUCRACY'S ROLE IN GERMAN POLITICS THAT MAKE THE ABANDONMENT OF POLITICAL ANALYSES OF THE STATE PREMATURE. EARLIER APPROACHES TO THE WILHELMINE ADMINISTRATION HAVE ARGUED THAT IT WAS EITHER INSULATED FROM SOCIETY OR SUBORDINATE TO DOMINANT SOCIAL CLASSES. SUCH MONOLITHIC ANALYSES ARE UNABLE TO ACCOUNT FOR BUREAUCRATIC COMMITMENTS TO COMPETING, SUBSTANTIVE INTERESTS AND GOALS AS WELL AS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONFLICT OVER SUCH COMMITMENTS. THIS PROBLEM CAN BE AVOIDED THROUGH HYPOTHESES THAT EXPLAIN BUREAUCRATIC POLITICAL BEHAVIOUR IN TERMS OF CLASS, ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE, OR IDEOLOGY. THESE HYPOTHESES MAY BE OF GENERAL USE FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ON ADMINISTRATIVE POLITICS IN OTHER SOCIETIES AS WELL AS IN WIHELMINE GERMANY.

THE ARTICLE FOCUSES ON THE INTERACTION BETWEEN LOCAL-NATIONAL RELATIONS AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF WELFARE POLICY IN ISRAEL. THE ADMINISTRATIVE LINKAGES BETWEEN DIFFERENT LEVELS OF GOVERNMENTAL JURISDICTIONS INVOLVED IN POLICY IMPLEMENTATION ARE EXAMINED IN AN ATTEMPT TO UNDERSTAND THEIR IMPACT ON THE ORIGINAL GOALS AND PROGRAMS OF THE GOVERNMENT AND THE ACTUAL SERVICES PROVIDED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.

PURPOSE OF THIS ESSAY IS TO OFFER SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT HOW A DEVELOPMENTAL PROCESS OPERATES TO INFLUENCE FEDERAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND WHY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS & THEIR REPRESENTATIVES ARE IMPORTANT POLITICAL PARTNERS IN THIS PROCESS. THE ESSAY LOOKS AT FACTORS SUCH AS THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL SETTING, THE NECESSITY OF CONSENSUS BUILDING.

A FRAMEWORK IS PRESENTED FOR EXAMINING OBSTACLES TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF HUMAN SERVICES DELIVERY PROGRAMS. 3 BASIC SOURCES ARE IDENTIFIED: OPERATIONAL DEMANDS; SCARCITY OF RESOURCES; AND PROGRAM MANAGER/BUREAUCRATIC RELATIONS. THE FRAMEWORK IS OFFERED AS COMPARATIVE INSTRUMENT FOR RESOURCE ALLOCATION & AS AN AID TO DECISION-MAKING WITHIN PROGRAMS & ACROSS PROGRAMS.