|
Showing 1 - 3 of
3 matches in All Departments
A systematic evaluation of the implementation of the federal
government's environmental justice policies. In the 1970s and
1980s, the U.S. Congress passed a series of laws that were
milestones in environmental protection, including the Clean Air Act
and the Clean Water Act. But by the 1990s, it was clear that
environmental benefits were not evenly distributed and that poor
and minority communities bore disproportionate environmental
burdens. The Clinton administration put these concerns on the
environmental policy agenda, most notably with a 1994 executive
order that called on federal agencies to consider environmental
justice issues whenever appropriate. This volume offers the first
systematic, empirically based evaluation of the effectiveness of
the federal government's environmental justice policies. The
contributors consider three overlapping aspects of environmental
justice: distributive justice, or the equitable distribution of
environmental burdens and benefits; procedural justice, or the
fairness of the decision-making process itself; and corrective
justice, or the fairness of punishment and compensation. Focusing
on the central role of the Environmental Protection Agency, they
discuss such topics as facility permitting, rulemaking,
participatory processes, bias in enforcement, and the role of the
courts in redressing environmental injustices. Taken together, the
contributions suggest that-despite recent environmental justice
initiatives from the Obama administration-the federal government
has largely failed to deliver on its promises of environmental
justice. Contributors Dorothy M. Daley, Eileen Gauna, Elizabeth
Gross, David M. Konisky, Douglas S. Noonan, Tony G. Reames,
Christopher Reenock, Ronald J. Shadbegian, Paul Stretesky, Ann
Wolverton
Liberal concepts of democracy envision courts as key institutions
for the promotion and protection of democratic regimes. Yet social
science scholarship suggests that courts are fundamentally
constrained in ways that undermine their ability to do so.
Recognizing these constraints, this book argues that courts can
influence regime instability by affecting inter-elite conflict.
They do so in three ways: by helping leaders credibly reveal their
rationales for policy choices that may appear to violate legal
rules; by encouraging leaders to less frequently make decisions
that raise concerns about rule violations; and by encouraging the
opposition to accept potential rule violations. Courts promote the
prudent use of power in each of these approaches. This book
evaluates the implications of this argument using a century of
global data tracking judicial politics and democratic survival.
This introduction applies analytic models to policymaking
challenges, equipping students with tools to evaluate core
policymaking dilemmas. Students are introduced to the approaches of
game theory, social choice theory, research design and causal
inference. Key terms, along with current research, are highlighted
to build an understanding of public policy study. Exercises and
thought questions enable students to develop skills to assess
public policy dilemmas. The analytically rigorous style of the text
is accessible and avoids lengthy descriptions. Supplementary
resources for instructors include extensive notes, ancillaries and
online resources, including a test bank, quizzes and editable
lecture slides for all chapters that can be modified to fit
particular courses. This textbook is suitable for introductory
public policy and public administration courses at both
undergraduate and postgraduate level.
|
|