Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Half Title -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Dedication Page -- Contents -- Introduction to the Transaction Edition -- Foreword -- Preface -- The Author -- 1. Experiment in the Application of Survey Research -- 2. Continuous National Survey: Structure and Analysis -- 3. Development and Funding of the Survey Experiment -- 4. Planning and Conducting the Project -- 5. Assessing the Survey Experiment -- 6. Utilization of the Survey Information -- 7. Future of Survey Research for Meeting National Needs -- Appendix A: Questionnaires -- Appendix B: Basic Coding Sheet and Summary Tables -- Appendix C: Agency Memos, I -- Appendix D: Agency Memos, II -- References -- Index

ABSTRACTThe politics of public policy is a vibrant research area increasingly at the forefront of intellectual innovations in the discipline. We argue that political scientists are best positioned to undertake research on the politics of public policy when they possess expertise in particular policy areas. Policy expertise positions scholars to conduct theoretically innovative work and to ensure that empirical research reflects the reality they aim to analyze. It also confers important practical advantages, such as access to a significant number of academic positions and major sources of research funding not otherwise available to political scientists. Perhaps most importantly, scholars with policy expertise are equipped to defend the value of political science degrees and research in the public sphere.

A review essay on books by (1) Lisa Anderson, Pursuing Truth, Exercising Power: Social Science and Public Policy in the Twenty-First Century (New York: Columbia U Press, 2003); (2) David L. Featherman & Maris A. Vinovskis (Eds), Social Science and Policy-Making: A Search for Relevance in the Twentieth Century (Ann Arbor: U Michigan Press, 2001); (3) Peter Szanton, Not Well Advised: The City as Client -- An Illuminating Analysis of Urban Governments and Their Consultants (San Jose, CA: Authors Choice Press, 2001).

This paper seeks to synthesize some of the main conclusions a of those who have thought about or studied the uses and limitations of social science research for public policy. The paper is designed to provide some background for a discussion of social science and public policy by government officials, social scientists, and others who are interested in policy research. We deal with the following factors which appear to have influenced the utilization of social science research results: (1) the validity of the scientific approach to social questions, (2) the individual researcher and policy maker and their attitudes toward each other, (3) the communication between researcher and policy maker, (4) the type of research conducted, (5) the type of research organizations involved, (6) the motivation for the research effort, and (7) the nature of the topic being studied. ; Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources

"Developing countries may not have full-fledged welfare states like those we find in Europe, but certainly they have welfare state systems. For comparative social policy research, the term "welfare state systems" has many advantages, as there are numerous different types/models of welfare state systems around the world. This revised and expanded second edition brings together leading experts to discuss social policy in 32 countries/regions around the world. From the most advanced welfare state systems in Scandinavia and Western Central Europe to the developing powers of Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico and Russia. Country-specific chapters provide in general a historical overview, discuss major characteristics of the welfare state system, analyse country-specific problems, as well as critical current and future trends for further discussions, while also providing one (additional) major focal point/issue for greater in-depth analysis. Including new country case-studies on Mali, South Africa, Iceland, Spain, Italy, Greece, and Vietnam, this book is reframed around urgent contemporary issues including migration and rising social inequalities, LGBTQIA+ rights, universal basic income, and transboundary social policy. It will be of great interest to all scholars and students of social policy, social development, development economists and health economists, experts in public policy, health policy (incl. mental health policy), housing policy, education policy, family policy, cis- and trans-gender policy, migration and population policy, sociology, social work, anthropology, as well as social policy and public policy makers and administrators"--

Political movements and citizens across the globe are increasingly challenging the traditional ways in which political authorities and governing bodies establish and maintain social control. This edited collection examines the intersections of social control, political authority and public policy.Each chapter provides an important insight into the key elements needed to understand the role of governance in establishing and maintaining social control through law and public policymaking. Close attention is paid to the roles of surveillance and dissent as tools for both establishing and disrupting the social control of political institutions. This collection examines the vast implications of increased participation in governance by citizens through dissent, revealing the ways in which this represents both a disruption of social control and a mechanism for increased accountability through surveillance and media. Through its examination of issues such as police militarization, police legitimacy, religion and the state, immigration, mental health policy, privacy and surveillance, and mass media and social control in a post-truth environment, this collection will prove invaluable for researchers, policy makers and practitioners alike

Names such as Armor, Pettigrew, Glazer, Jencks, Herrnstein, Clark and Moynihan have not yet appeared in the pages of Ring magazine, but it seems only a matter of time. It is no secret, after all, that these men, all intellectual heavyweights, are engaged in an ongoing, fierce slugging match over a host of issues related to the "limits of social policy." Their verbal fisticuffs have been characterized by a good deal of fancy footwork, plenty of hard hitting, some low blows and inevitable cries of foul. For some time Public Interest was booking the best cards, but with more than 150 pages of its February, 1973, issue devoted to a detailed critique of Jencks's Inequality, it may be assumed that the Harvard Educational Review became, as it was during the Jensen brawl, the main arena of conflict. The bulk of recent attention was focused on the hard punching of Jencks's critics, but it would be a pity if the brilliant footwork of Kenneth Clark went unnoticed. His performance is simply remarkable.