This paper investigates cost-share program attributes that would affect producers' willingness to enroll in a cost-share program to fund the adoption of best management practices to improve water quality and decrease water use. Through a survey administered to Florida agricultural producers, we conducted choice experiments to assess farmers’ preferences for cost-share programs using five attributes: contracting agency, length of contract, annual verification process, costs included, and percent of costs covered. Results suggest that producers prefer cost-share programs with shorter contract lengths, self-monitoring, and administration by agricultural (as opposed to environmental) agencies. Our findings suggest the importance of an existing trust between the local communities and the contracting agencies for higher enrollment rates in cost –share programs. Our results can inform policymakers on ways to increase enrollment rates that move towards long-term environmental goals.

No abstract

No abstract

This article compares the legislative practices of two socialist revolutions in Russia (the Bolshevik revolution) and Finland in late 1917 and in 1918. Notwithstanding the considerable differences in the social, political and economic conditions in Finland and Russia, the revolutionaries in both countries had similar legislative strategies. The revolutionary legislative policies had the same ends: to secure the success of the revolutions, and, eventually, to build a new and better society. This article seeks to demonstrate the history of revolutionary law-making as a juncture of two main tendencies: the emergence of new 'revolutionary' features of legislative politics and the preservation of pre-revolutionary law. We argue that the pre-revolutionary practices of law-making on which the revolutionaries relied shaped their strategies and, to some extent, the criteria by which they judged the ultimate success of their revolutions. We argue that the performative effect of revolutionary slogans should be perceived, at least in part, as a continuity of pre-revolutionary legal and administrative practices. Our comparative analysis of revolutionary law-making provides a more complex understanding of the role of revolutions in modern state empowerment.

The article describes and analyses the competing approaches to codification in Russia during the first decades of the nineteenth century following Napoleon (and his Code Civil) and its evaluation in the late nineteenth century. Based on recent methodology—the history of notions (Begriffsgeschichte)—this article presents the history of codification through the perspective of the emergence and development of the Russian legal terms 'svod' (compilation/digest) and 'ulozhenie' (system/code). These terms represented the 'battle flags' of the two parties: on one hand, those whom one might characterize as rationalist, universalist, Enlightenment-oriented, based on the French Revolution and inspired by the Code Napoleon; and, on the other, those who might better be described as history-oriented, traditionalist, romantic, nationalist. Speranskii, initially the prime representative of the first tendency, was ultimately successful as the leader of a Russian codification movement by claiming an original national approach to codification, while in practice combining the two elements. The article seeks to demonstrate that the categories of 'national', 'traditional', 'original'—as well as their opposites, 'universalistic', 'rationalist'—which were used in the political and academic discourse on codification in nineteenth-century Russia, may be analyzed as a rhetorical means of argument skillfully applied by the ambitious drafters of new codes (as well as by their opponents). Contextual analysis of both the Russian and European political background of codification discussions are applied in this work, which leads to conclusions on the construction (and deconstruction) of a national mythology of legal traditions. My view of the creation of a new code of laws (ulozhenie)—during the first three decades of the nineteenth century—is one of the completion of a Russian national project. It became such rather suddenly in the spring of 1812 as a result of both major forces and of chance circumstances, the movement of armies, global ideas and the passions of historical figures. The combination of a number of factors resulted in a situation whereby the political struggle over the new code was conducted through the language of nationalism by contrasting the 'national spirit of the law' with 'foreign principles'. In the struggle for a new code, the opposing sides not only used 'national rhetoric' introduced from outside but, also, changed the Russian language, inventing new 'national' meanings for legal concepts.