The Federal Advisory Committee Act and Public Participation in Environmental Policy

This paper discusses the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and how it affects public participation in environmental decision-making. Passed in 1972 as one of the "openness in government" laws, FACA governs how the federal government seeks outside advice. It has had a profound influence on who participates in government decision-making, when they participate, how they participate, and what influence participation has on policy. FACA has had a number of notable successes. Primary among these has been its role in limiting the unbalanced influence of special interests, acting through advisory committees, on public policy-making. The advisory committees which the law governs have also achieved a number of the "social goals" of public participation, including: (1) educating the public, (2) bringing public values into government decision-making, (3) improving the substantive quality of decisions, (4) increasing trust in government institutions, and (5) reducing conflict. Often, advisory committees have given government relatively inexpensive access to experts and stakeholders in order to achieve these goals. However, FACA has also created�directly and indirectly�a number of "chilling effects" on public participation in environmental decision-making. First are procedural requirements which make it difficult for groups outside of government to become advisory committees, and thereby gain access to decision-making. Second are ambiguities in the law and its regulations which limit the willingness of public agencies to engage the public outside of FACA. And third are Clinton Administration policies which limit the number of advisory committees that agencies are allowed to establish. Taken together, these chilling effects create a paradox wherein agencies are reluctant to engage the public in decision-making outside of FACA but significant barriers keep groups (and agencies) from forming advisory committees under the Act. The paper concludes by recommending a streamlining of FACA's procedural requirements, a clarification of regulations and policies regarding what type of participation falls under FACA, and an elimination of administrative ceilings on advisory committee formation.

Who Influences Debates in Business Ethics? An Investigation into the Development of Corporate Governance in the UK since 1990.

We investigate the influences behind five major investigations into corporate governance in the UK since 1990: the Cadbury, Greenbury, Hampel and Turnbull Committees, and the Company Law Review. In each case we examine the roles of business, the authorities, public opinion and events in shaping the course of the investigation, its conclusions and its impact. We do this on the basis of interviews with members of the committees and analysis of newspaper coverage of the debates. The picture that emerges is one where the process of forming the investigating committee, its membership and its mode of operation strongly influence its recommendations and effectiveness. We draw conclusions that contrast the strong influence of the accountancy and legal professions in shaping the debate and the varied influence of the authorities, the media and events. Copyright Permission: Based on a chapter in Palgrave's forthcoming book: Jones, I & Pollitt, M (2002) Understanding How Issues in Business Ethics Develop. Reprinted with kind permission of the publisher.corporate governance, business ethics, influences, Cadbury Report, Greenbury Report, Hampel Report, Turnbull Report,Company Law Review

First Things First? The Agenda Formation Problem for Multi-issue Committees

It is often argued that multi-issue committees should discuss issues simultaneously to avoid ineciency. However, in practice, parties can be constrained to discuss issues sequentially and in this case, existing game-theoretical models give inconclusive results: either parties have dierent preferences over agendas or they are indierent. We show that when there is an important issue, parties have the same preferences over agendas, in particular they prefer to discuss the most important issue Þrst. Moreover, when an issue is dicult/urgent (in the sense that the rejection of a proposal on this issue implies a game breakdown with a positive probability) parties prefer to postpone the negotiations over the dicult/urgent issue. We highlight several incentives that players need to take into account in forming their preferences over agendas. Since theseareoften in conßict, the existence of a Pareto optimal agenda is of particular interest.

Diversity and equality in honours and awards programs – steps towards a fair representation of membership

Honours and awards bestowed by professional societies recognize and reward members who have advanced the goals and values of that society. All too often, however, awards reflect a small network of people who know about the awards and participate in the process. This network works wonderfully for the people lucky enough to be in it, but typically neglects the full range and breadth of scholarship and service within the society. We represent a combined 15C years’ experience on the honours’ committee for a large professional society (the American Geophysical Union) and here offer strategies to increase the representation of honourees.Women represented less than 20%of awardees when we first became committee members in 2008; women represented 50% of awardees in 2019. There is still much to do to ensure that members from other typically underrepresented groups (non-US members, members from underrepresented races/ethnicities) are truly represented and honoured for outstanding science and service. We recommend forming canvassing committees that will scour the literature, conferences, and membership lists for appropriate and otherwise overlooked nominees; providing implicit bias training to selection committees; and ensuring selection committees focus on the criteria for the award rather than non-pertinent, often personal, information, as well as additional strategies that allow us to recognize our worthy colleagues

Statement of Samuel Estreicher Before the Commission on the Future of Worker-Management Relations

Includes correspondence between the author and Senate Labor Committee counsel on topic of testimony.Testimony_Estreicher_011994.pdf: 344 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

Questions and Answers and Informational Exchange (Spring 1980)

1. Information Needed on Common Research Interests 2. Information Available on Faculty Self-Analysis Program 3. Information Needed on a POD Membership Research Effort 4. Information Available on The Solution of the Attrition Problem and a Crediting Mechanism for Service-Learning Experiences 5. Information Needed on a Faculty Partnership Program 6. Information Available on a Bibliography on Collegial Evaluation 7. Information Needed on Copies of Policy Statements on Tests and Exams and Test Questions Currently Being Used on Your Campus 8. Information Available on a Diploma in College Teaching 9. Information Available on Team Teaching in a History Survey Course 10. Information Available on the Establishment of a System for Forming College Committees 11. Information Available on the PEPA Questionnair