Bureaucratic reforms worldwide seek to improve the quality of governance. In this article, we argue that the major governance failures are political, not bureaucratic, and the first step to better governance is to recognize the underlying political causes. Using illustrations from throughout the world, we contend that political institutions fail to provide clear policy goals, rarely allocate adequate resources to deal with the scope of the problems, and do not allow the bureaucracy sufficient autonomy in implementation. Rational bureaucratic responses to these problems, in turn, create additional governance problems that could have been avoided if political institutions perform their primary functions.
The use of spatial econometric models in political science has steadily risen in recent years. However, the interpretation of these models has generally ignored the important substantive, and even spatial, nature of the estimated effects. This leaves many papers with a (non-spatial) interpretation of coefficients on the covariates and a brief discussion of the sign and strength of the spatial parameter. We introduce a general approach to interpreting spatial models and provide several avenues for an exposition of substantive spatial effects. Our approach can be generalized to most models in the spatial econometric taxonomy. Building on the example of the diffusion of democracy, we elucidate how our approach can be applied to modern political science problems.
Objective. We propose and test a theory that media freedom determines the extent of economic voting in developing democracies. Methods. Building on extant work that suggests economic voting takes place in developing democracies much like it does in established democracies (Lewis-Beck and Stegmaier, 2008), we test our theory using a new collection of aggregate data from elections in 22 developing democracies in Africa Results. Media freedom rather than political freedom may be a bigger determinant of economic voting in developing democracies. Moreover, the threshold of political development needed for economic voting is lower than previously suggested by the literature. Conclusion. Economic voting is alive and well in developing democracies-even those with relatively low levels of economic and political development.
Introduction: Smokeless tobacco (SLT) use continues to be a significant public health challenge in the United States, particularly among young males in rural areas, where use remains disproportionately high. In support of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's first nationwide SLT public education campaign, formative research was conducted to inform campaign strategy development and test creative concepts.Methods: Qualitative research methods were used to inform the strategic direction of the campaign, identify salient message themes, and refine creative concepts. Focus groups were conducted with 252 rural male youth ages 12–17 in seven states. Groups were organized by SLT status (i.e., at-risk for initiating vs. experimenting with SLT) and age group.Results: SLT use is culturally ingrained in rural communities, and rural youth are commonly exposed to SLT through close relationships. Among this group, “dipping” (SLT use) has strong cultural significance and is perceived as safe. Members of the target audience are receptive to straightforward facts delivered by authentic messengers about the potentially harmful consequences of SLT use, specifically those that leverage the progression of short-term consequences (e.g., white patches) to long-term health effects.Conclusions: This study addresses SLT literature gaps related to youth knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs by summarizing audience learnings from formative research that was used to develop the first national SLT public education campaign.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.