This paper describes the use of facilitative moderation strategies in an online rulemaking public participation system. Rulemaking is one of the U.S. government's most important policymaking methods. Although broad transparency and participation rights are part of its legal structure, significant barriers prevent effective engagement by many groups of interested citizens. Regulation Room, an experimental open-government partnership between academic researchers and government agencies, is a socio-technical participation system that uses multiple methods to lower potential barriers to broader participation. To encourage effective individual comments and productive group discussion in Regulation Room, we adapt strategies for facilitative human moderation originating from social science research in deliberative democracy and alternative dispute resolution [24,1,18,14] for use in the demanding online participation setting of eRulemaking. We develop a moderation protocol, deploy it in "live" Department of Transportation (DOT) rulemakings, and provide an initial analysis of its use through a manual coding of all moderator interventions with respect to the protocol. We then investigate the feasibility of automating the moderation protocol: we employ annotated data from the coding project to train machine learning-based classifiers to identify places in the online discussion where human moderator intervention is required. Though the trained classifiers only marginally outperform the baseline, the improvement is statistically significant in spite of limited data and a very basic feature set, which is a promising result.

No abstract

Los gobiernos locales de España han implementado normativas diversas, nacionales y autonómicas, de transparencia en los últimos años. Todo el acervo normativo aprobado establecía principios e imponía obligaciones de índole muy diversa al conjunto de entes públicos, entre ellos los más de 8.000 ayuntamientos. Este trabajo se interesa por el proceso de implementación de la(s) normativa(s) de transparencia en los gobiernos locales españoles de mayor población. Concretamente, se plantea hasta qué punto esta normativa ha impulsado el cambio organizacional e institucional en los entes locales y el nivel de desempeño en términos de publicidad activa. Mediante un cuestionario específico dirigido a los municipios de mayor población y el análisis de las páginas web de los ayuntamientos, obtenemos información sobre el proceso y el nivel de implementación efectiva. En este artículo discutimos sobre dos factores determinantes para comprender el proceso de implementación: la existencia de path dependency interna o el establecimiento de normativa y obligaciones legales. Los resultados apuntan hacia una explicación y efectos combinados de la existencia de normativa específica y la aplicación anticipada de la transparencia, tanto para el nivel de cumplimiento de ésta como para el cambio institucional provocado.

In many countries, the law permits state authorities to detain noncitizens before deportation. Typically judicial decisions about preremoval detention must be made within a short period of time during which deportable noncitizens are held in police premises, and depending on the country detention may last just one month (e.g., France) or up to 18 months (the Netherlands). While previous research has explored various dimensions of noncitizen detention including the legal procedure, health consequences, the condition of detention centers, and the lives of deportable noncitizens, the empirical assessment of the determinants of decisions on preremoval detention are largely unexplored. Using data from court proceedings of police petitions of detention in Spain and a quantitative strategy, in this article we undertake an empirical analysis of noncitizen detention combining personal background of deportable noncitizens, legal factors of the case, and the behavior of different actors involved in the procedure. To do it, we fit models that take into account variation occurred at judicial district levels. Results indicate, on the one hand, that relevant actors involved in the procedure use different informational cues to decide on cases. On the other hand, the role of prosecutors and attorneys during hearings proves also relevant to predict detention.

This paper discusses whether a copyright compensation system (CCS) for recorded music-endowing private Internet subscribers with the right to download and use works in return for a fee-would be welfare increasing. It reports on the results of a discrete choice experiment conducted with a representative sample of the Dutch population consisting of 4986 participants. Under some conservative assumptions, we find that applied only to recorded music, a mandatory CCS could increase the welfare of rights holders and users in the Netherlands by over €600 million per year (over €35 per capita). This far exceeds current rights holder revenues from the market of recorded music of ca. €144 million per year. A monthly CCS fee of ca. €1.74 as a surcharge on Dutch Internet subscriptions would raise the same amount of revenues to rights holders as the current market for recorded music. With a voluntary CCS, the estimated welfare gains to users and rights holders are even greater for CCS fees below €20 on the user side. A voluntary CCS would also perform better in the long run, as it could retain a greater extent of market coordination. The results of our choice experiment indicate that a well-designed CCS for recorded music would simultaneously make users and rights holders better off. This result holds even if we correct for frequently observed rates of overestimation in contingent valuation studies.