Data: Environment Prosecutions Decline Under Obama

From TRAC:

The number of federal prosecutions for environment-related offenses continues to fall. The latest available data from the Justice Department show that during the first nine months of FY 2014, the government reported 271 new prosecutions in this category. If such prosecutions continue at the current rate, there will be a total of 361 environment prosecutions for the full year. This would represent a decrease of 19.6 percent from the 449 reported in FY 2013, which was already a marked drop from the 612 defendants prosecuted in FY 2012.

Data: Prisoners in 2013

September 16, 2014
Bureau of Justice Statistics

U.S. prison population increased for first time since 2009

U.S. state and federal prisons held about 1,574,700 inmates on December 31, 2013, an increase of 4,300 prisoners over yearend 2012. This was the first increase in the prison population since 2009. BJS updated its dynamic online Corrections Statistical Analysis Tool for prisoners with 2013 data.

Read more in Prisoners in 2013 (NCJ 247282) and access prisoner data now at the CSAT home page. Also see corrections to Prisoners in 2012: Trends in Admissions and Releases (NCJ 243920).

CFP: ‘The public’ and ‘the private’ in global governance

Apologies for formatting.

‘The public’ and ‘the private’ in global governance
Call for Papers
Guiding Questions and Debates

The 2015 edition of the Barcelona Workshop on Global Governance asks how ‘the public’ and ‘the private’ are related in current structures of global governance. Key questions involve:
· Does it make sense to maintain a distinction between public and private authority, and if so, how ought “publicness” to be reformulated for the global sphere? What could take the place of the public/private distinction for structuring accounts of legitimacy and accountability in global governance?
· Do the authority and legitimacy of global governance, both normatively and sociologically, depend on the “publicness” of its institutions?
· How do institutions (including privately-created ones) generate, or seek to generate, “publicness” in their rhetoric, procedures and accountability mechanisms, and with what success?
· How do private actors, both national and transnational, participate in global governance regimes? What patterns of interaction exist between privately- and publicly-created institutions?
· What success can the construction of a “global public law” as a law of global governance have?

Contributions from all related disciplines are welcome.

Read more

CFP: 4th Global Conference on Transparency Research

CALL FOR PAPERS: 4th Global Conference on Transparency Research Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano: 4‐6 June

The Global Conference on Transparency Research assembles for the fourth time academics, policy makers, and interest group representatives to analyze and discuss the ever-growing reach and impact of the logic of transparency and openness: policies on access to information held by public entities, transparency relationships between organizations, transparency relationships between governments, private and non‐profit entities and citizens.

Read more

CFP: Social Policy: Formulation and Design in Comparative Perspective

In the mail. Apologies for formatting.

CFP: Social Policy: Formulation and Design in Comparative Perspective

by Michael Howlett
National University of Singapore
12-13 February 2014

Social problems are complex, with a variety of economic, social, and
political causes and consequences. Social policy design thus needs to be
correspondingly sophisticated if it is to address the different, often
contradictory, policy goals, requiring policy makers to employ a variety of
tools in intricate combinations.

Yet too much of the scholarly discussion on social policy is conducted at
very high levels of abstraction – dealing with issues such as state versus
market orientations; Eastern communitarianism versus Western welfarism;
social democratic versus neo-liberal welfare regimes, and so on – which do
not translate easily into policy designs considerations and knowledge. This
workshop focuses specifically on the latter issues: on the consequences and
significance of different design features of programs that are already in
place and the lessons and principles these provide to policy makers engaged
in developing new programs to address social problems.

The purpose of the workshop is thus to apply the concepts of policy
formulation and policy design thinking to the social policy sphere. Papers
at the workshop will apply the central concerns in public policy evaluation
‑ effectiveness, efficiency, equity, security, sustainability etc – to
different policy tools configurations in order to understand their
potential use and limitations across problems and socio-economic contexts.
In addition, papers will examine the manner in which policymakers and
client groups learn from past experiences, or not, in their design,
creation and enactment of social policy.

Papers are encouraged to examine questions such as:

· What is the range of policy tools available to policy makers for
addressing contemporary social problems? What sorts of policy tools are
appropriate for what policy problems? What are the predictable and actual
consequences of the choices?

· How are policy mixes constructed in social policy sectors and how
effective are they?

· How does public policy theory inform the understanding of public
policy making? What role does evaluation play in designing appropriate
policy tools for specific social problems, and influencing social policy

Proposals for papers of and entirely theoretical nature or
theoretically-grounded comparisons of social policies, especially social
protection in Asia, are particularly encouraged and welcome. The
comparisons may be cross-sector or cross-national in focus.

A small number of accepted papers will be eligible for economy-class
airfare to Singapore and hotel accommodation. The selection will be on the
basis of the quality of abstracts and their fit with the workshop theme.

Paper proposals (approximately 500 words) are due 15 Nov 2014. Decisions
on program composition and travel subsidy will be made in the first week of
Dec 2014. Final papers must be received by 1 February 2015.

Please send your proposals to

Workshop Conveners: M Ramesh, Michael Howlett, Namrata Chindarkar

Public Policy Position at the University of Georgia

Assistant Professor

Public Policy

The University of Georgia’s School of Public & International Affairs, Department of Public Administration and Policy invites applications for a tenure-track, assistant professor position in public policy. Appointment begins in August 2015. Candidates should demonstrate a substantive policy specialization, but the area of specialization is open. A Ph.D. in public policy, economics, public administration, political science, or other appropriate discipline is required. Teaching is predominately at the graduate level (2 courses per semester) and includes courses in quantitative methods, policy analysis, policy process, or program evaluation, and other substantive policy courses. Successful candidates will contribute to both our MPA and Ph.D. programs with a commitment to quality teaching, and evidence of research productivity. Applications should include a cover letter, a curriculum vitae, and three letters of recommendation.

Applications received by November 15, 2014 are guaranteed full consideration. Applications should be sent either as email attachments to or by mail to: Public Policy Recruitment Committee, Department of Public Administration & Policy, School of Public & International Affairs, 204 Baldwin Hall, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-1615.

The University of Georgia is ranked 4th among Public Affairs schools by U.S. News & World Report. For more information, visit

The University of Georgia is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, or protected veteran status.

JCPA Special Issue on “Policy Change in Comparative Contexts: Applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework Outside of Western Europe and North America”

Please note the release of the JCPA Special Issue on “Policy Change in Comparative Contexts: Applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework Outside of Western Europe and North America,” now available through Taylor & Francis Online. More information is listed below on individual articles, including direct links.

Kind Regards,

Iris Geva-May, Professor of Policy Studies, Baruch College
Founding President, International Comparative Policy Analysis Forum
Founding Editor-in-chief, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, Routledge, UK

Special Issue Alert: Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis

Policy Change in Comparative Contexts: Applying the Advocacy Coalition
Framework Outside of Western Europe and North America

You can view the issue table of contents at

This new issue contains the following articles:

Policy Change in Comparative Contexts: Applying the Advocacy Coalition
Framework Outside of Western Europe and North America
Adam Douglas Henrya, Karin Ingoldb, Daniel Nohrstedtc & Christopher M.
Pages: 299-312
DOI: 10.1080/13876988.2014.941200

Policy Advocacy Coalitions as Causes of Policy Change in China?
Analyzing Evidence from Contemporary Environmental Politics
Heejin Hana*, Brendon Swedlowb & Danny Ungerb
Pages: 313-334
DOI: 10.1080/13876988.2013.857065

State versus Indigenous Peoples’ Rights: Comparative Analysis of
Stable System Parameters, Policy Constraints and the Process of
Marvin Joseph F. Montefrioa*
Pages: 335-355
DOI: 10.1080/13876988.2014.938912

A Comparative Policy Analysis of Coalition Strategies: Case Studies of
Nuclear Energy and Forest Management in India
Kuhika Guptaa*
Pages: 356-372
DOI: 10.1080/13876988.2014.886812

Comparative Strategic Behavior of Advocacy Coalitions and Policy
Brokers: The Case of Kenya’s Biosafety Regulatory Policy
Ann Njoki Kingiria*
Pages: 373-395
DOI: 10.1080/13876988.2014.942569

Charles Conteh, Policy Governance in Multi-level Systems: Economic
Development and Policy Implementation in Canada
Daniel Henstraa*
Pages: 396-397
DOI: 10.1080/13876988.2014.928472

Sanjeev Khagram, Archon Fung and Paolo de Renzio, Open Budgets: The
Political Economy of Transparency, Participation, and Accountability
Dechao Suna*
Pages: 397-400
DOI: 10.1080/13876988.2014.942566

CFA: Accountability in the Health Care Sector – Beyond the ‘Blame Game’

In the mail:

Dear Colleagues,

we are pleased to invite submissions to the call for abstracts for the XIX IRSPM Conference Panel E.102:

Accountability in the Health Care Sector – Beyond the ‘Blame Game’

Chairs / Affiliations
Birgit Grüb, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Institute of Management Accounting
Christopher Klinger, University of Ottawa, Department of Medicine, Division of Palliative Care
Sebastian Martin, University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health and Social Management

Panel themes

Changing relationships among the public, private and not-for-profit sectors alongside financial constraints often lead to a call for governments to be more ‘strategic’ in their approach to health care and to ensure greater ‘accountability’ toward system performance and ‘transparency’ in public reporting. Within the complex health care system, ‘accountability’ covers multiple ‘domains’ from political, financial and managerial to professional and ‘concepts’ from loci to procedures and evaluation. ‘Models’ of ‘accountability’ reach from the political to the economic and professional and ‘mechanisms’ from public reporting to citizen engagement and ‘governance’. Furthermore, ethics require health care funders, provider organizations and professionals to work as co-fiduciaries to promote and protect the health-related interests of the population.
In line with the overall theme of the conference to shape the future and showcasing IRSPM’s new Special Interest Group on Healthcare Management (SIG HM), this traditional panel will explore the implications for public management and move beyond the ‘blame game’ by promoting ‘accountability’-enhancing strategies such as assuring compliance with procedures and standards, and the identification of connections among individual improvement interventions.

Proposals toward case studies or other empirical work on ‘accountability’ in the local, regional, national and international context are welcomed. What is the role of ‘governance’? How can ‘accountability’ and ‘transparency’ be effective measured? Quality indicators – the ‘good’, the ‘bad’ and the ‘ugly’. What (and where) are potential innovative approaches to ‘accountability’ within the health care field?

Panel Format:

This panel on accountability in the health care sector is geared toward a broad audience base, encouraging scholarly discourse, showcasing of international management technologies and collaborative generation of solutions. A traditional panel approach of paper presentations with a discussant is envisioned to showcase current case studies and to generate high quality, lively and critical dialogue. Furthermore, one of the Co-Chairs brings a practitioner perspective from performance measurement and accountability management in the end-of-life care realm.

Submission of the Abstract on

Closing date for paper proposals is October 15th.

Kind regards
Birgit Grüb

Recent books in the field of public management