Politics
851 – The Public Policy Process
January
2009
Thursday
12:30-3:30
Scotia
McLeod Conference Room
Harbour
Center
M. Howlett
AQ 6043
604.291.3082
Office Hours: Thursday 3:30-4:30
Overview:
This course is designed to
review relevant theoretical materials pertaining to public policy-making and
test key hypotheses in the policy sciences through empirical examinations of
Canadian cases in public policy-making. Policy theory related to the stages of
the policy cycle; the impact of policy ideas, institutions and actors on policy
outcomes; and the concepts of
policy styles, and policy regimes will be reviewed and tested against
examples of Canadian policy making behaviour. Throughout the course an emphasis
will be placed on methodological aspects of operationalizing key concepts in
the field.
Required
Texts:
M.
Howlett, A. Perl and M. Ramesh, Studying Public Policy (Toronto: Oxford
University Press, 2009) – as course package.
Grading:
Class
Presentations:
At the beginning of term, each student will be assigned two weeks for which he/she will be responsible for commenting on the theoretical and methodological issues raised in that week’s readings. Missed assignments will receive a zero (0) grade. Students who are not presenting are expected to comment and critique class presentations and contribute to the development of a common understanding of conceptual and methodological issues of interest to political scientists engaged in public policy research.
Paper
Topics:
By
mid-term, each student will identify a specific topic area and methodological
issue which will be the subject of their term paper. These topics and issues
will be investigated through examination of a specific empirical case of
Canadian public policy-making. Preliminary drafts of the term papers will be
presented to class in Weeks XI-XIII. Papers are due on the last day of class, with
the exception of those students presenting in Week XIII who will be granted an
automatic one week extension. Late papers will lose 10% per day late.
a. Policy Analysis and
Political Science:
Garson,
G. David. “From Policy Science to Policy Analysis: A Quarter Century of
Progress.” In W. N. Dunn, ed(s), Policy Analysis: Perspectives,
Concepts, and Methods, Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press, 1986. 3-22.
Hawkesworth,
Mary. “Epistemology and Policy Analysis.” In W. Dunn and R. M. Kelly, ed(s), Advances
in Policy Studies, New
Brunswick: Transaction Press, 1992.
291-329.
Torgerson,
Douglas. “Between Knowledge and Politics: Three Faces Of Policy Analysis.” Policy
Sciences. 19, no. 1 (1986): 33-59.
Webber,
David J. “Analyzing Political Feasibility: Political Scientists' Unique
Contribution to Policy Analysis.” Policy Studies Journal. 14, no. 4
(1986): 545-554.
b. Policy Cycles:
Lyden,
Fremont J., George A. Shipman, and Robert W. Wilkinson. “Decision-Flow
Analysis: A Methodology for Studying the Public Policy-Making Process.” In P.
P. Le Breton, ed(s), Comparative Administrative Theory, Seattle: University of Washington
Press, 1968. 155-168.
deLeon,
Peter. “The Stages Approach to the Policy Process: What Has It Done? Where Is
It Going?” In P. A. Sabatier, ed(s), Theories of the Policy Process, Boulder: Westview, 1999. 19-34.
Sabatier,
Paul A. “Toward Better Theories of the Policy Process.” PS: Political
Science and Politics. 24, no. 2 (1991): 144-156.
c. Policy Regimes
Eisner,
Marc Allen. “Discovering Patterns in Regulatory History: Continuity, Change and
Regulatory Regimes.” Journal of Policy History. 6, no. 2 (1994):
157-187.
Orren,
Karen and Stephen Skowronek. “Regimes and Regime Building in American
Government: A Review of Literature on the 1940s.” Political Science
Quarterly. 113, no. 4 (1998-99): 689-702.
Wilson,
Carter A. “Policy Regimes and Policy Change.” Journal of Public Policy.
20, no. 3 (2000): 247-271.
Esping-Andersen,
Gosta. “Power and Distributional Regimes.” Politics and Society. 14, no.
2 (1985): 223-256.
d.
Policy Subsystems
Knoke,
David. “Networks as Political Glue: Explaining Public Policy-Making.” In W. J.
Wilson, ed(s), Sociology and the Public Agenda, London: Sage, 1993. 164-184.
McCool,
Daniel. “The Subsystem Family of Concepts: A Critique and a Proposal.” Political
Research Quarterly. 51, no. 2 (1998): 551-570.
Burstein,
Paul. “Policy Domains: Organization, Culture and Policy Outcomes.” Annual
Review of Sociology. 17(1991): 327-350.
Milward,
H. Brinton and Gary L. Walmsley. “Policy Subsystems, Networks and the Tools of
Public Management.” In R. Eyestone, ed(s), Public Policy Formation,
Greenwich: JAI Press, 1984. 3-25.
Overview:
Howlett,
Michael, Anthony Perl and M. Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems.
Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2009 Chapters 1 & 2
Approaches:
Sabatier,
Paul A. Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder: Westview Press, 1999.
Birkland,
Thomas A. An Introduction to the Policy Process; Theories, Concepts, and
Models of Public Policy Making.
Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 2001.
Dobuzinskis, Laurent, Michael
Howlett, and David Laycock, ed. Policy Studies in Canada: The State of
the Art. Toronto: University
of Toronto Press, 1996.
Overview:
Howlett,
Michael, Anthony Perl and M. Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems.
Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2009 Ch 4
Theories:
Baumgartner,
Frank R. and Bryan D. Jones. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1993.
Kingdon,
John W. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. Boston: HarperCollins College
Publishers, 1995.
Cobb,
R., J.K. Ross, and M.H. Ross. “Agenda Building as a Comparative Political
Process.” American Political Science Review. 70, no. 1 (1976): 126-138.
Methods:
Howlett, Michael. “Issue-Attention
and Punctuated Equilibria Models Reconsidered: An Empirical Examination of the
Dynamics of Agenda-Setting in Canada.” Canadian Journal of Political Science.
30, no. 1 (1997): 3-29.
Howlett,
Michael. “Predictable and Unpredictable Policy Windows: Issue, Institutional
and Exogenous Correlates of Canadian Federal Agenda-Setting.” Canadian
Journal of Political Science. 31, no. 3 (1998): 495-524.
Soroka,
Stuart N. Agenda-Setting
Dynamics in Canada Vancouver: UBC Press, 2002
Overview:
Howlett,
Michael, Anthony Perl and M. Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems. Toronto:
Oxford University Press, 2009 Ch 5
Theories:
Linder, Stephen H. and B. Guy
Peters. “Policy Formulation and the Challenge of Conscious Design.” Evaluation
and Program Planning. 13(1990): 303-311.
Jordan,
A. Grant. “Iron Triangles, Woolly Corporatism and Elastic Nets: Images of the
Policy Process.” Journal of Public Policy. 1, no. 1 (1981): 95-123.
deLeon, Peter. “Policy Formulation:
Where Ignorant Armies Clash By Night.” Policy Studies Review. 11, no.
3/4 (1992): 389-405.
Weiss, Carol H. “Research for
Policy's Sake: The Enlightenment Function of Social Science Research.” Policy
Analysis. 3, no. 4 (1977): 531-545.
Dowding, Keith. “Model or Metaphor?
A Critical Review of the Policy Network Approach.” Political Studies.
43(1995): 136-158.
Methods:
Howlett, Michael and Evert
Lindquist. “Policy Analysis and Governance: Analytical and Policy Styles in
Canada.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis. 6, no. 3 (2004):
225-249.
Zahariadis,
Nikoloas and Christopher S. Allen. “Ideas, Networks, and Policy Streams:
Privatization in Britain and Germany.” Policy Studies Review. 14, no.
1/2 (1995): 71-98.
Schneider,
Mark et al. “Building Consensual institutions: Networks and the National
Estuary Program.” American Journal of Political Science. 47, no. 1
(2003): 143-158.
Landry,
Rejean, Moktar Lamari, and Nabil Amara. “The Extent and Determinants of the
Utilization of University Research in Government Agencies.” Public
Administration Review. 63, no. 2 (2003): 192-205.
Overview;
Howlett,
Michael, Anthony Perl and M. Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems.
Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2009 Ch 6
Theories:
Simon,
Herbert A. “The Structure of Ill Structured Problems.” Artificial Intelligence.
4(1973): 181-201.
Lindblom,
Charles E. “The Science of Muddling Through.” Public Administration Review.
19, no. 2 (1959): 79-88.
Smith,
Gilbert and David May. “The Artificial Debate Between Rationalist and
Incrementalist Models of Decision-Making.” Policy and Politics. 8, no. 2
(1980): 147-161.
Cohen,
M., J. March, and J. Olsen. “A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice.” Administrative
Science Quarterly. 17, no. 1 (1972): 1-25.
Allison,
Graham. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston: Little Brown, 1971.
Teisman,
Geert R. “Models for Research into Decision-Making Processes: On Phases,
Streams and Decision-Making Rounds.” Public Administration. 78, no. 4
(2000): 937-956
Weiss,
Carol H. “Knowledge Creep and Decision Accretion.” Knowledge: Creation,
Diffusion, Utilization. 1, no. 3 (1980): 381-404.
Methods:
Kahneman, Daniel and Amos Tversky.
“Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk.” Econometrica.
47(1979): 263-289.
Bendor,
Jonathan. “A Model of Muddling Through.” American Political Science Review.
89, no. 4 (1995): 819-840
Bendor,
Jonathan and Thomas H. Hammond. “Re-Thinking Allison's Models.” American
Political Science Review. 86, no. 2 (1992): 301-322.
Bendor, Jonathan, Terry M. Moe, and
Kenneth W. Shotts. “Recycling the Garbage Can: An Assessment of the Research
Program.” American Political Science Review. 95, no. 1 (2001): 169-190.
Mintz,
Alex and Nehemia Geva. “The PoliHeuristic Theory of Foreign Policy Decision
Making.” In N. Geva and A. Mintz, ed(s), Decision-Making in War and Peace:
The Cognitive-Rational Debate,
Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1997.
Howlett, Michael. 2007. Analyzing Multi-Actor, Multi-Round Public
Policy Decision-Making Processes in Government: Findings from Five Canadian
Cases. Canadian Journal of
Political Science 40 (3):659-684.
Overview;
Howlett,
Michael, Anthony Perl and M. Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems.
Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2009 Ch 7
Theories:
Peters,
B. Guy and F. K. M. Van Nispen, ed.
Public Policy Instruments : Evaluating the Tools of Public
Administration. New York:
Edward Elgar, 1998.
Sabatier,
Paul A. “Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: A
Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis.” Journal of Public Policy.
6(1986): 21-48.
O'Toole,
Laurence J. “Research on Policy Implementation: Assessment and Prospects.” Journal
of Public Administration Research and Theory. 10, no. 2 (2000): 263-288.
Hood,
Christopher. The Tools of Government. Chatham: Chatham House Publishers, 1986.
Howlett,
Michael. “Managing the "Hollow State": Procedural Policy Instruments
and Modern Governance.” Canadian Public Administration. 43, no. 4
(2000): 412-431.
Methods
Salamon,
Lester M., ed. The Tools of
Government: A Guide to the New Governance. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Goggin,
Malcolm L. et al. Implementation Theory and Practice: Toward A Third
Generation. Glenview: Scott,
Foresman/Little, Brown, 1990.
McCubbins,
Mathew D. and Arthur Lupia. “Learning from Oversight: Fire Alarms and Policy
Patrols Reconstructed.” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization. 10,
no. 1 (1994): 96-125.
Hawkins,
Keith and John M. Thomas. “Making Policy in Regulatory Bureaucracies.” In K.
Hawkins and J. M. Thomas, ed(s), Making Regulatory Policy, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh
Press, 1989. 3-30.
Scholz,
John T. “Cooperative Regulatory Enforcement and the Politics of Administrative
Effectiveness.” American Political Science Review. 85, no. 1 (1991):
115-136.
Eliadis,
Pearl, Margaret Hill, and Michael Howlett, ed. Designing Government: From
Instruments to Governance. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2004.
Overview;
Howlett,
Michael, Anthony Perl and M. Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems.
Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2009 Ch 8
Theories:
Weimer,
David L. and Aidan R. Vining. Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1999.
Patton,
Carl V. and David S. Sawicki. Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall,
1993.
Palumbo,
Dennis J. The Politics of Program Evaluation. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1987.
Nachmias,
David. Public Policy Evaluation: Approaches and Methods. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1979.
Dobell,
Rodney and David Zussman. “An Evaluation System for Government: If Politics is
Theatre, then Evaluation is (mostly) Art.” Canadian Public Administration.
24, no. 3 (1981): 404-427.
deLeon,
Peter. “Policy Evaluation and Program Termination.” Policy Studies Review.
2, no. 4 (1983): 631-647.
Geva-May,
Iris. “When the Motto is 'Till Death Do Us Part": The Conceptualization
and the Craft of Termination in the Public Policy Cycle.” International
Journal of Public Administration. 24, no. 3 (2001): 263-288.
Methods:
Kirkpatrick,
Susan E., James P. Lester, and Mark R. Peterson. “The Policy Termination
Process: A Conceptual Framework and Application to Revenue Sharing.” Policy
Studies Review. 16, no. 1 (1999): 209-236.
Hahn,
Robert W. and Patrick Dudley. How Well Does the Government Do Cost-Benefit
Analysis. Washington D.C.: AEI-Brookings Joint Centre for Regulatory
Studies Working Paper, 2004
Gunton,
Thomas. “Megaprojects and Regional Development: Pathologies in Project
Planning.” Regional Studies. 37, no. 5 (2003): 505-519.
Jung, Tobias, and Sandra M. Nutley. 2008. Evidence and Policy
Networks: the UK Debate about Sex Offender Community Notification. Evidence & Policy 4
(2):187-207.
Overview;
Howlett,
Michael, Anthony Perl and M. Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems.
Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2009 Ch 3 (sections on Ideas).
Theories:
Hall, Peter A. “Policy Paradigms,
Social Learning and the State: The Case of Economic Policy Making in Britain.” Comparative
Politics. 25, no. 3 (1993): 275-96.
Blyth,
Mark M. “"Any More Bright Ideas?" The Ideational Turn of Comparative
Political Economy.” Comparative Politics. 29(1997): 229-250.
Schmidt,
Vivien A. 2008. "Discursive Institutionalism: The Explanatory Power of Ideas and Discourse." Annual Review of Political Science 11:303-26.
Braun, Dietmar and Andreas Busch,
ed. Public Policy and Political
Ideas. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar, 1999.
Campbell, John L. “Institutional
Analysis and the Role of Ideas in Political Economy.” Theory and Society.
27, no. 5 (1998): 377-409.
Methods:
Howlett, M., and J. Rayner. 1995. Do Ideas Matter? Policy Subsystem
Configurations and the Continuing Conflict Over Canadian Forest Policy. Canadian Public Administration 38
(3):382-410.
Howlett, Michael. “Policy Paradigms
and Policy Change: Lessons From the Old and New Canadian Policies Towards
Aboriginal Peoples.” Policy Studies Journal. 22, no. 4 (1994): 631-651.
Goldstein, Judith and Robert O.
Keohane. “Ideas and Foreign Policy: An Analytical Framework.” In J. Goldstein
and R. O. Keohane, ed(s), Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions
and Political Change, Ithaca:
Cornell University Press, 1993.
3-30.
Yee, Albert S. “The Causal Effects
of Ideas on Policies.” International Organizations. 50, no. 1 (1996):
69-108.
Coleman,
William D., Grace D. Skogstad, and Michael Atkinson. “Paradigm Shifts and
Policy Networks: Cumulative Change in Agriculture.” Journal of Public Policy.
16, no. 3 (1996): 273-302.
Bhatia,
V. and W.D. Coleman. “Ideas and Discourse: Reform and Resistance in the German
and Canadian Health Systems.” Canadian Journal of Political Science. 36,
no. 4 (2003): 715-740
Chadwick,
Andrew. “Studying Political Ideas: A Public Political Discourse Approach.” Political
Studies. 48(2000): 283-301.
Muntigle,
Peter. “Policy, Politics and Social Control: A Systemic Functional Linguistic
Analysis of EU Employment Policy.” Text. 22, no. 3 (2002): 393-441.
Overview;
Howlett,
Michael, Anthony Perl and M. Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems.
Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2009 Ch 3 (sections on Institutions)
Theories:
Kiser,
Larry L. and Elinor Ostrom. “The Three Worlds of Action: A Metetheoretical
Synthesis of Institutional Approaches.” In E. Ostrom, ed(s), Strategies of
Political Inquiry, Beverly
Hills: Sage, 1982. 179-222.
March,
James G. and Johan P. Olsen. Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational
Basis of Politics. New York:
The Free Press, 1989.
Clemens,
Elisabeth S. and James M. Cook. “Politics and Institutionalism: Explaining
Durability and Change.” Annual Review of Sociology. 25(1999): 441-466.
Mahoney, James. “Path Dependence in
Historical Sociology.” Theory and Society. 29, no. 4 (2000): 507-548.
Wilsford,
David. “Path Dependency, or Why History Makes It Difficult but Not Impossible
to Reform Health Care Systems in A Big Way.” Journal of Public Policy.
14, no. 3 (1994): 251-284.
Methods:
Howlett, M. 1994. The Judicialization of Canadian Environmental
Policy 1980-1990 - A Test of the Canada-U.S. Convergence Hypothesis. Canadian
Journal of Political Science 27 (1).
Rayner, J., M. Howlett, J. Wilson, B. Cashore, and G. Hoberg. 2001.
Privileging the Sub-Sector: Critical Sub-Sectors and Sectoral Relationships in
Forest Policy-Making. Forest Policy and Economics 2 (3-4):319-332.
Ostrom, Elinor. “A Method of
Institutional Analysis.” In F. X. Kaufman, G. Majone and V. Ostrom, ed(s), Guidance,
Control and Evaluation in the Public Sector, Berlin: deGruyter, 1986.
Weaver, R. Kent and Bert A. Rockman.
“When and How do Institutions Matter?” In R. K. Weaver and B. A. Rockman,
ed(s), Do Institutions Matter? Government Capabilities in the United States
and Abroad, Washington, D.C.:
Brookings Institutions, 1993.
445-461.
Hall, Peter A. “The Change from
Keynesianism to Monetarism: Institutional Analysis and British Economic Policy in the 1970s.” In S. Steinmo, K.
Thelen and F. Longstreth, ed(s), Structuring Politics: Historical
Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. 90-114.
Pierson, Paul. “Increasing Returns,
Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics.” American Political Science
Review. 94, no. 2 (2000): 251-267.
Pierson, Paul. “The Limits of
Design: Explaining Institutional Origins and Change.” Governance. 13,
no. 4 (2000): 475-499.
Overview;
Howlett,
Michael, Anthony Perl and M. Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems.
Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2009 Ch 3 (sections on Actors)
Theories:
Howlett, Michael. “Do Networks
Matter? Linking Policy Formulation
Processes to Policy Outcomes: Evidence
From Four Canadian Policy Sectors 1990-2000.” Canadian Journal of
Political Science. 35, no. 2 (2002) 235-268
Heclo,
Hugh. “Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment.” In A. King, ed(s), The
New American Political System,
Washington D.C.: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy
Research, 1978. 87-124.
Sabatier,
Paul A. “An Advocacy Coalition Framework of Policy Change and the Role of
Policy-Oriented Learning Therein.” Policy Sciences. 21, no. 2/3 (1988):
129-168.
Peters,
Guy. “Policy Networks: Myth, Metaphor and Reality.” In D. Marsh, ed(s), Comparing
Policy Networks, Buckingham:
Open University Press, 1998.
21-32.
Marsh,
David and Martin Smith. “Understanding Policy Networks: Towards a Dialectical
Approach.” Political Studies. 48(2000): 4-21.
Rayner, J. , M.
Howlett, J. Wilson, G. Hoberg and B. Cashore ,“Privileging the Sub-Sector:
Critical Sub-Sectors and Sectoral Relationships in Forest Policy-Making.” Forest
Policy and Economics. 2, no. 3-4 (2001): 319-332.
Methods:
Heinz,
John P. et al. “Inner Circles or Hollow Cores.” Journal of Politics. 52,
no. 2 (1990): 356-390.
Heinz,
John P. et al. The Hollow Core: Private Interests in National Policy Making. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
1993.
Laumann,
Edward O. and David Knoke. The Organizational State: Social Choice in
National Policy Domains.
Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1987.
Raab,
Jorg. “Where Do Policy Networks Come From?” Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory. 12, no. 4 (2002): 581-622.
Brandes,
Ulrik et al. “Explorations into the Visualization of Policy Networks.” Journal
of Theoretical Politics. 11, no. 1 (1999): 75-106.
Raab,
Jorg and H. Brinton Milward. “Dark Networks as Problems.” Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory. 13, no. 4 (2003): 413-440.
McGregor,
Sue L. T. “Modeling the Evolution of a Policy Network Using Network Analysis.” Family
and Consumer Research Journal. 32, no. 4 (2004): 382-407.
Overview;
Howlett,
Michael, Anthony Perl and M. Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems.
Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2009 Ch 9
Theories:
Howlett,
M., and J. Rayner. 2006. Understanding the Historical Turn in the Policy
Sciences: A Critique of Stochastic, Narrative, Path Dependency and
Process-Sequencing Models of Policy-Making over Time. Policy Sciences 39 (1):1-18.
Gormley,
William T. “Regulatory Enforcement.” Political Research Quarterly. 51,
no. 2 (1998): 363-383.
Howlett,
Michael. “Beyond Legalism? Policy Ideas, Implementation Styles and
Emulation-Based Convergence in Canadian and U.S. Environmental Policy.” Journal
of Public Policy. 20, no. 3 (2000): 305-329.
Richardson,
Jeremy, Gunnel Gustafsson, and Grant Jordan. “The Concept of Policy Style.” In
J. J. Richardson, ed(s), Policy Styles in Western Europe, London: George Allen and Unwin,
1982. 1-16.
Freeman,
Gary P. “National Styles and Policy Sectors: Explaining Structured Variation.” Journal
of Public Policy. 5, no. 4 (1985): 467-496.
Methods:
Cashore,
Benjamin, and Michael Howlett. 2007. Punctuating Which Equilibrium?
Understanding Thermostatic Policy Dynamics in Pacific Northwest Forestry. American Journal of Political Science
51 (3).
Kagan,
Robert A. “Adversarial Legalism and American Government.” Journal of Policy
Analysis and Management. 10, no. 3 (1991): 369-406.
May, Peter J. and Soren Winter.
“Regulatory Enforcement and Compliance: Examining Danish Agro-Environmental
Policy.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 18, no. 4 (1999):
625-651.
Genschel, Philipp. “The Dynamics of
Inertia: Institutional Persistence and Change in Telecommunications and Health
care.” Governance. 10, no. 1 (1997): 43-66.
Kagan, Robert A. “The Political
Construction of American Adversarial Legalism.” In A. Ranney, ed(s), Courts
and the Political Process, Berkeley: Institute of Governmental Studies
Press, 1996. 19-39.
Kagan, Robert A. “Should Europe
Worry About Adversarial Legalism?” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. 17,
no. 2 (1997): 165-183.
Kagan, Robert A. and Lee Axelrad.
“Adversarial Legalism: An International Perspective.” In P. S. Nivola, ed(s), Comparative
Disadvantages? Social Regulations and the Global Economy, Washington D.C.:
Brookings Institution Press, 1997. 146-202.