Search results

This chapter aims to advance economic development theory through the concept of jurisdictional advantage; demonstrating how places might strategically position themselves to gain economic advantage; then considering how this place-specific advantage might be constructed. We choose the term “jurisdiction” to define the set of actors that have a common interest in a spatially bound community. Jurisdictions are entities with a legitimate political ability to influence social and economic outcomes within their boundaries. Borrowing from the literature on corporate strategy, the uniqueness of local capabilities becomes a source of advantage for jurisdictions. We consider how to measure and construct jurisdictional advantage.

The study of cause lawyers has focused heavily on the private sector, but both public and private attorneys bring voting rights litigation. This chapter first situates voting rights litigation within cause lawyering, as described by Scheingold and Sarat. It then suggests criteria for analyzing cause lawyering across public and private sectors and applies them to the attorneys who have done the majority of voting rights litigation for American Indians: The Voting Section of the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division and the Voting Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. The chapter suggests that the public and private attorneys are more similar than one might expect in their motivation, relationship to clients, and range of political strategies used. Their organizational practice sites differ greatly, but the dynamics of the public practice site confirm that Voting Section attorneys are cause lawyers.

The formality of modern law is a constitutive element in its operation, but the “revolt against formalism” and the charge of mechanical jurisprudence are also as old as the law. This chapter focuses on formalism in legal decision-making in hard cases and assumes that contemporary decision-making in law combines formalistic with nonformalistic expressions as part of its routine operation. The research develops a sensitive multidimensional measure that will be used to evaluate legal texts by examining various vectors of formalism. It begins by exploring diverse jurisprudential cultures of formalism, which have developed mainly in American legal thought. Based on the historical analysis of cultures of formalism, the chapter continues to frame eight claims of formalism that have all been contested in legal writing. It proposes to examine the following parameters, based on these claims: (1) the introduction and framing of the legal question; (2) the use of extralegal arguments; (3) reliance on policy arguments and on legal principles; (4) reference to discretion and choice; (5) the relationship between what is presented as facts and what is presented as norms; (6) preservation of traditional boundaries in law; (7) the use of professional judicial rhetoric; (8) the gap between law in the books and law in action; and (9) judicial stability and institutional deference. Each of these parameters can be used to evaluate the level of formalism in a concrete text. The interplay between diverse evaluations of the same case is a subject for inquiry and contemplation. These parameters can also be redefined as variables for a quantitative content analysis, and legal decisions can be coded accordingly. This will enable an analysis of differences between justices, legal issues, legal jurisdictions, and time frames, as well as the correlation between the various parameters of formalism. The tendency to formalism, according to the analysis here, is never pure and is part of a complex legal culture that usually combines formalistic elements with nonformalistic ones.

Recognizing the 9/11 attacks as a turning point in the history of American emergency management and response philosophies, this chapter examines the evolution to a standardized National Incident Management System (NIMS). This involved the movement from individual jurisdictional and agency autonomy to adoption of a multilayered system where all efforts are intended to support a response beginning and ending at the local level. This chapter discusses the overarching NIMS doctrine and its incumbent on-scene Incident Command System (ICS) for coordinating on-scene operations. The specific focus is the application to the NIMS and the ICS to law enforcement.

The debate over ‘judicial activism’ has flourished in recent decades, but the term was in fact coined 70 years ago, by the historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. The legal academy has bemoaned the term as perpetually ill-defined, but can this be attributed to its equivocal beginnings on the pages of Fortune magazine? This chapter investigates the circumstances in which the term was produced and the early meanings given to it in scholarly work. It is argued that there was very little effort on the part of legal academics and political scientists to gather a consensus as to definition, or otherwise to treat the terminology with caution, before the term was wrested from the university cloisters and captured by the popular media in the mid-1960s.

Many Australasian-Anglo-American jurisdictions including Queensland, other Australian states, the Australian Commonwealth, central government in Britain, the U.S., Canada and New Zealand (Department of Finance and Administration, 2000; NZ Treasury/State Services Commission, 2002; Queensland Treasury, 1997; Treasury Board of Canada, 2000), are presently debating over “managing for outcomes.” Throughout this chapter, the acronym MFO is used to stand for this whole movement even though it implies greater coherence than exists. There is a definite movement in this direction in Australasian public services with the emergence of widespread rethinking about its purposes and characteristics. It is driven in some jurisdictions by ministers wanting to know about actual policy outcomes and less about the shiny-chrome management systems behind them and, in other jurisdictions, by senior managers in central agencies and some line agencies who are rediscovering the real purposes constituting public management. There is also some back-pedaling in relation to some aspects of the economic reform agenda that was applied too hard during the late 1980s and 1990s in this part of the world. There are also some that claim that MFO is a logical extension of the first stage of reform undertaken during the 1980s and 1990s – one in which outputs rather than outcomes was the primary focus.

Social entrepreneurship has played a significant role in reducing unemployment and poverty, fixing other social issues and environmental concerns. Although there is an increasing concern on social entrepreneurship by the public sector, practitioner and scholars, there are still limited studies on predicting the intention to become a social entrepreneur. Thus, investigating social entrepreneurship intention using a systematic literature review (SLR) approach is crucial due to the lack of systematisation and categorisation in this field. Therefore, this study aims to conduct a SLR to identify the antecedents of social entrepreneurial intention (SEI) used by the previous research. In this sense, this chapter carries out a systematic review of the literature on social entrepreneurship intentions. The review is guided by the PRISMA Statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses). After the identification and screening process, only 56 articles were qualified for further analysis. This SLR focused on articles that are using quantitative research and in the English language published in Scopus. Although there is no limitation in the timeline, the search string results found that the related articles were published between 2010 and 2020. From the thematic analysis, nine main themes were found. The themes are categorised based on the antecedents of SEI used by previous research. There are nine antecedents found: (1) perceived desirability and feasibility, (2) attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control, (3) prior experience, (4) emotional factors, (5) self-efficacy, (6) personality, (7) support systems, (8) skills and competencies and (9) motivational factors. Further analysis of the themes has resulted in ten sub-themes. This chapter's contribution includes offering a clearer picture of the antecedents of social entrepreneurial intention that is still at its infancy stage. Additionally, this chapter managed to identify the research gaps and proposed future research agenda.