Comparative Public Policy

On the basis of research of legislative, judicial, and doctrinal approaches to public policy and 'good morals' in national and international perspective in England, USA, France, Germany, Malta, CIS  countries  I make guidelines for Russian law-makers and judges about applicability of these doctrines in civil law.

LIBEAC - LIBERALISM IN BETWEEN EUROPE AND CHINA

The LIBEAC project is among the few elite projects selected by the Research Executive Agency (REA) of the European Commission inside the Seventh Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development (FP7-PCRD).

Inside the 2007-2013 50 billion euros FP7-PCRD, LIBEAC belongs to the category PEOPLE-IRSES project.

This International Research Staff Exchange Scheme aims at improving international mobility of researchers among the world and especially between European countries and Third Countries partners in order to foster the emergence of multidisciplinary and multicultural research network.

This 588,000.00 IRSES project called LIBEAC officially started the 1st January 2013 and will finish the 31th December 2016.

PROJECT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Since their inception in 1998 in London to the most recent meeting in Brussels in October 2010, EU-China Summits demonstrate the importance of European and Chinese partnerships based on mutual understanding and joint efforts to overcome global problems ranging from ecological risks to economic crisis to social inequalities.

Reflecting on the issues of EU-China relationships, the project “Liberalism In Between Europe And China” (LIBEAC) aims at developing a new understanding of liberalism in its economic, political and social dimensions.

It involves a comparative analysis of the cultural differences in its interpretation and of the political discrepancies in its enforcement, in particular with respect to economic, social and environmental rights in China and Europe in Modern times. It is a multidisciplinary project based on a comparative study of European and Chinese political philosophy and political economy, legal practice and philosophy of right.

PROJECT RESEARCH BACKGROUND

Liberalism has, since earlier than the Enlightenment, implied at least the following two components: a component of economics and one of politics. Economic liberalism (at least in some of its most representative brands) assumes that the less the economy is controlled by the state, the more efficient auto-regulated free markets can be in terms of production and distribution of goods. Political liberalism, again at least most generally, assumes that the more citizens are free from control by the state, the more creative, responsible and auto-disciplined those free individuals can be in terms of production and diffusion of ideas and innovation.

Economic liberalism may therefore, under given circumstances, equate to “Capitalism”; Political Liberalism may, also under given circumstances,equate to “Democracy”.

Inasmuch as some regard Liberalism as indeed being a Western Ideology, some structural correlation is often assumed between Economic Liberalism and Political Liberalism, as well as between Capitalism and Democracy: it goes at a par with the assumption that the more developed the economy in one country, the freer the persons living in this country. Now, does Liberalism truly work as a Western Ideology? And, in any case, is this correlation stable, in particular in the case of non-Western economies? Japan has been the first example, in the Meiji times, to face this dilemma. South Korea and Taiwan followed. And China is the most significant example in our times. If Liberalism works both at the level of expected economic welfare for the people and of political rights that it endows people with, shall we expect to observe such correlation in China as well? Is China an exception to the general “rule”, regarding its peculiar cultural background (notably its Confucian heritage) or is China a counter-example demonstrating that there is nothing as such a Rule, i.e. that the correlation between economic and social liberty purported by Liberalism is merely a matter of belief?

That dual line of thought ends up equating Liberty to Creativity both in economic (scientific discoveries leading to technological innovations and leadership assumed by free entrepreneurs) and in political terms (the “rule of law” in an open society). Yet, a major economic, social and environmental issue emerges *in the face of the inequalities that Liberalism also seems to inevitably generate.* It may thus be possible and/or useful to distinguish between a Liberalism of expected welfare (on the economic side) and a Liberalism of civil and political liberties and rights on the political side. As we differentiate those, tension surfaces which is intrinsic to what some name the ‘Western Ideology of Liberalism’. This project tests this upon the course of past and present history in between Europe and China, as the European Union seeks to shape a new understanding of that relationship for the future.

PROJECT TRENDS

The project stands at the confluence of two major issues for the European Union, in terms of internal policies as well as external actions:

1) the position and role of the European Union in the World and
2) the present and future of Human Rights.

The first issue, on liberal civil society and the various types of market-enhanced economies, brings concerns such as the World Trade Organization put forth recently when rebuking China’s application to be reckoned as a “market economy”. It relates to the new partnerships that the European Union is building with China in the globalized World and in the aftermath of the sovereign debt crisis. Our project is comparative as it focuses both on relationships between the European Union and China in particular, and accommodates viewpoints from China’s neighbor Japan.

The second issue, involving the present enforcement and future potential implementation and/or revision of Human Rights concepts, is addressed by focusing principally on the political, legal and economic aspects of the concept of Liberalism, regarded as made of several traditions, from social liberalism to liberal theories of economics. The project thus aims at disclosing cultural and political differences in terms of interpretation and of enforcement of “Liberalism” in Europe and in China today. We discuss in detail theories called “liberal”, building conceptual tools and types of criterion useful for that comparison.

Discussing those issues is all the more urgent that the recent global economic crisis has enhanced earlier temptations, on both sides of the Atlantic, to incriminate third parties. Globalization is often identified as the culprit for allowing competitive Asian companies to slow down European growth and for having created unemployment in Europe while Chinese counterparts affirm that European social benefits are responsible for European debt crisis and need a severe readjustment. Both the European Union and China will benefit from a better understanding of each other and from revising some of their mutual assumptions. New economic, political and juridical realities call for such an assessment, provided that the adequate evaluating criteria are presented.

WORK PACKAGE TITLE: LEGAL ASPECTS OF LIBERALISM

Work package n°4 | Start month: 4 | End month: 44

Objectives

To define the interactions between the implementation of the rule of law and economic development
To survey the enforcement of social, labor and civil rights in China in the frame of China’s participation to WTO
To propose a comparative study of Environmental Rights in Europe and China and their connection to Human Rights in the context of globalization

Description of the Work

Task 4.1 Rule of Law and Rule by Law in China and Europe: the research aims to assess the differences in the perception of law in China and Europe. Through a comparative study of the history of law, the cultural implications of the Confucian and Aristotelian traditions for the current elaboration of law will be addressed. The consequences of such conceptual differences will be assessed regarding the problem of the definition of the Rule of Law in international organizations.

T.4.2 China’s integration to the WTO: liberalization of economy and good governance: the research aims to define the opportunities and challenges of China’s accession to the WTO. While China’s accession to the WTO is a condition for WTO rules universalization, it could also change the rules and role of WTO itself. Integrating a market with strong structural, behavioral and cultural constraints such China raised numerous questions. The challenges of the real implementation of WTO provisions throughout the territory of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) must be assessed to evaluate China’s WTO compliance and China’s TRIPs (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) compliance.

T.4.3. The Good Governance perspective will be also part of our analysis. The good governance could be a term of reference to rebalance the excessive risks of liberalization of the economy. It can gain even more importance and be seen under a new light in such a time of economical crisis.  The concept of good governance is part of the broader meaning of non-trade concerns (such as sustainable development, cultural rights, labour rights, public health, social welfare, national security, food safety, access to knowledge, consumer interests and animal welfare). Good Governance in particular is important when we refer to the general stability of the markets, to good faith and other key principles which are at the roots to build up a fair market in favour of both the governments and the citizens.

Higher education accountability and quality assurance systems not only affect the internal operations of higher education institutions (HEIs), but also impact public perception and political support, student access and affordability, and arguably but most importantly, student outcomes. What structures led to adoption of different types of accountability systems in higher education, and what are the implications of those differences? The purpose of this study is to examine higher education quality assurance systems across the globe. Understanding the development of quality assurance systems, how those systems have evolved over time, and the resulting impact on political and educational outcomes can also provide valuable insight into the future of higher education.

Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, 72nd Annual Conference, Chicago, IL, April 3-6, 2014.

The 2012 ICRPS Summer Institute was held from June 21 to July 6, 2012 under the framework of “Governing for Sustainable Rural Futures”. This report provides a summary of recommendations and comparative policy findings resulting from the institute. Five main topics are addressed in the report: Regional Development; Inequality; Energy; Food; and the Natural Environment.

Infertility politics implies a role for the state in regulating the relationships between different parties involved in the medicalized process of reproduction, namely would-be-parents (infertile couples or individuals), gamete donors, surrogate mothers, fertility specialists, etc. Policies adopted by the Canadian federal government in 2004 as regards assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) were largely inspired by British regulations. Despite this similar start, Canadian policies never lead to implementation; the province of Quebec rapidly contested the federal Assisted Human Reproduction Act before the courts; and many issues of assisted conception were regulated in a heterogeneous manner by the provinces. Meanwhile in Britain, the implementation of the policies created many disparities among the regions of the country; the principle of the law was thoroughly contested and scrutinized; and the sites of deliberation were multiple in spite of the existence of a national regulatory agency. First, the author argues that assisted reproduction technologies cannot be taken as one policy domain, but is an umbrella label for a variety of policy issues. In that context, ARTs are unpacked in order to study, at the system level, the practices related to the overcoming of infertility. I focus on three sub-issues: access to fertility treatments, including the question of public funding and access criteria; gamete and embryo donation, including the question of filiation and donor conceived children’s right to know their biological origins; and surrogacy or the enforcement of pre-natal gestational surrogacy arrangements. Second, by mapping the variety of discourses and arenas mobilized by a range of actors, this study shows how framing and reframing dynamics influence public policies and their implementation. Third, by comparing frame mobilization and discursive dynamics between Quebec, Ontario and England this analysis demonstrates how frame alignment can be a necessary condition for a frame to be performative and influence policy outcomes. Depending on the context in which it occurs, frame transformation, amplification, extension or bridging can induce stability or trigger a cascade of events that will lead to policy change or to a change in the implementation of a policy.

This review article suggests that there is a new school of comparative lobbying emerging. However, this development is taking place only gradually. Unlike the earlier studies which studied corporatism/pluralism, outside lobbying and lobbying regulations, the new comparativists are mainly focusing on inside lobbying strategies and success as a function of country-level factors. Yet, the literature still suffers from underdeveloped theories. I stress that our knowledge can be improved with better theorising. Better theories, in turn, can be formulated by improving the use of quantitative data-gathering, qualitative research, formal models and better communication between researchers working with different methodologies in different disciplines.

This paper reflects on the challenges facing European higher education by investigating current dynamics across three national systems: Norway, Sweden and Finland. We identify four sets of tensions permeating current dynamics across the region, and link those to a series of dilemmas facing European universities more broadly. The paper demonstrates that there is a complex interplay between the so-called ‘nested tensions’ and different types of internal and external pressures. We conclude by providing a set of policy recommendations as well as suggestions for future research inquiries

Written by Anthony K. Fleming, University of West Georgia, USA. The shooting at Virginia Tech in 2007 was one of the worst mass murders in the U.S., but it did not lead to any new federal gun control policy. In contrast, following a similar event in Montreal in 1989, Canada created new comprehensive gun policy.

Such different outcomes are the focus of this survey, which sets out to explore the gun policymaking process in the U.S. and Canada in the aftermath of major events. It explores the many factors that lead to the drastically different reactions of the federal governments in each state if the aftermath of a mass shooting or assassination. To do so, it examines such elements as institutional arrangements, interest groups pressures (NRA, e.g.), and the party in power, studying the impact of such key events as the assassinations of J.F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., Georgina Leimonis and shootings that occurred at Columbine, Stockton, and Vernon.

A unique comparative study, Gun Policy in the United States and Canada will be an essential resource to anyone researching gun policy issues and comparative policymaking.

La première ligne de chemin de fer belge a été inaugurée en 1835. Aujourd’hui, le réseau de la Belgique est l’un des plus denses au monde, avec quelque 3 500 kilomètres de voies. Afin notamment de garantir sa durabilité, il est indispensable qu’une telle infrastructure soit l’objet d’une stricte régulation. David Aubin et Stéphane Moyson retracent l’évolution des mesures de régulation, d’origine belge et internationale, en particulier européenne, depuis 1832. Ils distinguent cinq grandes phases : la création du réseau national (1832-1872), la prise en main du secteur par l’État (1873-1926), la création de la SNCB et son autonomisation (1926-1979), la rationalisation de l’activité ferroviaire et sa relance (1980-1996) et la libéralisation des chemins de fer (depuis 1997). Pour chacune d’entre elles, ils analysent les logiques qui sous-tendent les politiques publiques, les implications en termes de droits de propriété et les conséquences sur les fonctions et les acteurs concernés. Parmi les facteurs d’évolution, la volonté de lutter contre les déficits de gestion et d’exploitation du rail ressort nettement. Cette volonté est bien au cœur de la récente libéralisation du secteur ferroviaire européen (qui, contrairement aux apparences, ne constitue pas un réel retrait de l’État en faveur du secteur privé). Le plan d’économie récemment approuvé par la SNCB, visant à atteindre un équilibre financier d’ici 2015, s’inscrit dans ce mouvement.

La première ligne de chemin de fer belge a été inaugurée en 1835. Aujourd’hui, le réseau de la Belgique est l’un des plus denses au monde, avec quelque 3 500 kilomètres de voies. Afin notamment de garantir sa durabilité, il est indispensable qu’une telle infrastructure soit l’objet d’une stricte régulation. David Aubin et Stéphane Moyson retracent l’évolution des mesures de régulation, d’origine belge et internationale, en particulier européenne, depuis 1832. Ils distinguent cinq grandes phases : la création du réseau national (1832-1872), la prise en main du secteur par l’État (1873-1926), la création de la SNCB et son autonomisation (1926-1979), la rationalisation de l’activité ferroviaire et sa relance (1980-1996) et la libéralisation des chemins de fer (depuis 1997). Pour chacune d’entre elles, ils analysent les logiques qui sous-tendent les politiques publiques, les implications en termes de droits de propriété et les conséquences sur les fonctions et les acteurs concernés. Parmi les facteurs d’évolution, la volonté de lutter contre les déficits de gestion et d’exploitation du rail ressort nettement. Cette volonté est bien au cœur de la récente libéralisation du secteur ferroviaire européen (qui, contrairement aux apparences, ne constitue pas un réel retrait de l’État en faveur du secteur privé). Le plan d’économie récemment approuvé par la SNCB, visant à atteindre un équilibre financier d’ici 2015, s’inscrit dans ce mouvement.

Les industries de réseau (par exemple, le secteur de l’électricité ou celui du rail) font l’objet d’un processus historique de réorganisations successives, en Europe. L’objectif de ce Chapitre est d’analyser la dynamique de changements de la régulation dans le secteur ferroviaire belge. Les facteurs de changement de la régulation dans les industries de réseau peuvent être identifiés à l’aide de l’approche par les régimes institutionnels de ressources. Ceci implique de considérer l’infrastructure de réseau comme une ressource artificielle, construite par l’homme. L’approche par les régimes institutionnels de ressources explore deux relations centrales. D’une part, elle évalue l’influence des règles formelles - droits de propriété et politiques publiques - sur la durabilité des systèmes de ressources. D’autre part, elle identifie les causes des changements des règles formelles. Ce Chapitre est centré sur la seconde de ces deux relations centrales. L’évolution de la régulation dans un secteur de politique publique dépend de la capacité des acteurs à contrôler l’agenda des décisions. Dans le secteur ferroviaire belge, la plupart des changements furent le fruit des efforts de certains acteurs à promouvoir une définition donnée des problèmes et les solutions pour les résoudre à un moment clef, c’est-à-dire quand l’attention de l’opinion et des autorités publiques étaient focalisée sur le secteur. Dans ces circonstances, en d’autres termes, des “entrepreneurs politiques” se sont saisis d’une “fenêtre d’opportunité”. Dans les autres cas, les règles changèrent en raison de facteurs que les acteurs du secteur ne contrôlaient pas, en particulier lorsqu’une politique publique a dû être transférée depuis un échelon de gouvernement de niveau hiérarchique supérieur. Par exemple, en Europe, les Etats Membres ont du se conformer au récent processus politique de libéralisation des industries de réseau. Ce Chapitre met le processus européen de libéralisation du rail belge en perspective historique. D’une part, malgré l’Européanisation des industries de réseau qu’implique ce processus, les Etats Membres contrôlent encore beaucoup d’aspects de la stratégie et de la régulation de ces secteurs. D’autre part, alors que ce changement peut paraître très profond pour des contemporains, des changements de nature et d’étendue comparables ont déjà eu lieu par le passé.