Suchergebnisse

International audience ; This paper seeks to explain why the operation of the Barnett formula has failed to generated convergence in the per capita public expenditure levels in the four countries of the UK. Using Scotland as an example, the paper argues that a 'formula plus influence' allocation mechanism has been in place. This offers improved flexibility, greater political integration and increased information flows than would be available through either a straight bargaining or formula process. While devolution has not changed the Barnett formula, it has altered the environment in which it operates and that this may well destabilise an otherwise secure system.

A wide range of geographically decentralised governance structures exists across countries (Ter-Minassian, 1997). These differences in administrative and constitutional mechanisms come about, at least partly, by historical accident and wider political factors. However, in this paper we focus on the more narrowly defined efficiency implications of such arrangements. This is useful for identifying the motives that might underlie particular administrative set ups and the possible efficiency losses associated with specific forms of decentralisation or devolution. In particular, we develop a framework that allows a comparison of the effectiveness of implementing policy through three alternative systems. These are: a centralised; a decentralised; and a fully devolved structure. In this analysis we build on the work of Canes-Wrone et al, (2001) and Maskin and Tirole (2004) on representative democracy. The novelty is that we place this analysis in the context of a potentially decentralised or devolved regional administration. We find that the choice of appropriate administrative form depends upon the degree of homogeneity between regions, the relative efficiency of regional decision makers and their time discount rate.

This paper seeks to explain why the operation of the Barnett formula has failed to generated convergence in the per capita public expenditure levels in the four countries of the UK. Using Scotland as an example, the paper argues that a 'formula plus influence' allocation mechanism has been in place. This offers improved flexibility, greater political integration and increased information flows than would be available through either a straight bargaining or formula process. While devolution has not changed the Barnett formula, it has altered the environment in which it operates and that this may well destabilise an otherwise secure system.

In 2012���2013, a team led by Ray Siemens at the Electronic Textual Cultures Lab (ETCL), in collaboration with Implementing New Knowledge Environments (INKE), developed three annotated bibliographies under the rubric of ���social knowledge creation.��� The items for the bibliographies were gathered and annotated by members of the Electric Textual Cultures Lab (ETCL) to form this tripartite document as a resource for students and researchers involved in the INKE team and well beyond, including at digital humanities seminars in Bern (June 2013) and Leipzig (July 2013). Gathered here, the result of this initiative might best be approached as an expeditious environmental scan, a necessarily partial snapshot of scholarship coalescing around an emerging area of critical interest. The project did not seek to establish a canon, but instead to provide a transient representation of interrelational research areas through a process of collaborative aggregation. The annotated bibliography is purposefully focused on the active, present, and future ���social knowledge creation��� instead of the passive and past ���social construction of knowledge,��� in which its roots lie. The difference in emphasis signals a newfound concern with (re)shaping processes that produce knowledge, and doing so in ways that productively reposition sociological and historical approaches. Taken together, the three parts of the bibliography connect contemporary thinking about new knowledge production with a range of Web 2.0 digital tools and game-design models for redesigning knowledge processes to better facilitate collaboration.

Changing Scotland uses longitudinal data from the British Household Panel Survey to improve our knowledge and understanding of the impact of devolution on the lives of people in Scotland. It is the first time that BHPS data has been used in this way. The book provides a detailed examination of social, economic, demographic and political differences, especially those involving dynamic behaviour such as residential mobility, unemployment duration, job mobility, income inequality, poverty, health and deprivation, national identity, family structure and other aspects of individual's lives as they change over time. This data provides a 'baseline' for policy formulation and for analysing the impact of subsequent differential developments arising out of devolution. The book is also an invaluable resource for establishing pre-existing differences between England and Scotland and evaluating the impact of policy initiatives by the Scottish Executive