Votes and Lobbying in the European Decision-Making Process: Application to the European Regulation on GMO Release

The paper presents a multi-agent model simulating a two-level public decision game in which politicians, voters and interest groups interact. The objective is to model the political market for influence at the domestic level and at the international level, and to assess how new consultation procedures affect the final decision. It is based on public choice theory as well as on political science findings. We consider in this paper that lobbying groups have different strategies for influencing voters and decision-makers, with long-term and short-term effects. Our computational model enables us to represent the situation as an iterative process, in which past decisions have an impact on the preferences and choices of agents in the following period. In the paper, the model is applied to the European decision-making procedure for authorizing the placing on the market of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). It illustrates the political links between public opinions, lobbying groups and elected representatives at the national scale in the 15 country members, and at the European scale. It compares the procedure which was defined by the European 1990/220 Directive in 1990 with the new procedure, the 2001/18 Directive, which replaced it in 2001. The objective is to explore the impact of the new decision rules and the reinforced public participation procedures planned by the 2001/18 Directive on the lobbying efficiency of NGOs and biotechnology firms, and on the overall acceptability of the European decision concerning the release of new GMOs on the European territory.Lobbying, Europe, GMO, Multi-Agent Simulation, Public Choice, Politician, Voter, Group Contest

The Measure of a Justice: Justice Scalia and the Faltering of the Property Rights Movement within the U.S. Supreme Court

The purpose of this Article is to take the measure of Justice Scalia\u27s ability to produce significant opinions for the Court, rather than just for himself, by focusing on the Court\u27s property rights cases during the past several decades. Much of the analysis will rely on the Blackmun Papers, because they provide a virtual treasure trove of information revealing the Court\u27s deliberative process while Blackmun was on the Court from 1971 to 1994. Almost all of this information, including Justice Blackmun\u27s handwritten notes on what each Justice said at the Court\u27s private deliberations and initial voting on the cases at conference, has never before been revealed and analyzed

Reading Casey: Structuring the Woman\u27s Decisionmaking Process

In this Article, Professor Goldstein argues that the primary concerns of Planned Parenthood v. Casey\u27s joint opinion were expressive, not regulatory, in nature: to allow the state more leeway to structure the woman\u27s decisionmaking process and to engage in its own speech regarding her exercise of her procreative choice. To this end, he identifies three models by which the state can engage in such structuring: the autonomy informed consent model, the dialogical model, and the government speech model. He then analyzes Casey in light of each model to understand what limits Casey places on state abortion regulation. He also develops an argument for the special speech rights of the learned professions in order to discuss the right of the physician to counter the state\u27s message, even when the state funds the physician\u27s speech under Rust v. Sullivan. In conclusion, he offers his own suggestions about the appropriate subjects of a state-sponsored conversation about abortio

\u27Taiwanization\u27 in the Strait Conflict: Public Opinion\u27s Effect on Peace vs Conflict

Since the election of Tsai Ing-wen, the Taiwan Strait Conflict has been rising in tension. Many scholars state that interdependence leads to peace; however, Taiwan and China extensively trade with one another, and peace has not occurred. To understand why the Taiwan Strait continuously suffers from conflict, one must explore mechanisms that can alter the effect of commercial interdependence on peace. In a democracy, this power would reside with the voting public. To understand why Taiwan’s trade relations have not led to peace, we must examine the Taiwanese public opinion. Most believe that peace has not come about because Taiwan does not desire unification and lacks the power to challenge China. By viewing this issue in this way, one is disregarding the legitimate influence that the people of Taiwan have on their political parties in Taiwan. Although Taiwan is a small island, the decisions of the Taiwanese government could launch the world into a massive war. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the policies of each Taiwanese president regarding mainland China. The Taiwanese people have favored maintaining the status quo in the Taiwan Strait Conflict, but recent surveys show that the public is starting to consider taking steps toward independence. Should this trend continue, China will resort to war. Therefore, one must understand how this trend formed and how it influences the political parties of Taiwan. I call this phenomenon of Taiwan’s public viewing the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as a common enemy while utilizing grass-root movements to embrace its identity and alter mainland policy – Taiwanization. Many scholars have used this term in the past, and because my terminology differs, I will denote my term with the capital ‘T.’ Taiwanization steers Taiwan away from peaceful trade and creates tension between Taiwan and China

\u27Taiwanization\u27 in the Strait Conflict: Public Opinion\u27s Effect on Peace vs Conflict

Since the election of Tsai Ing-wen, the Taiwan Strait Conflict has been rising in tension. Many scholars state that interdependence leads to peace; however, Taiwan and China extensively trade with one another, and peace has not occurred. To understand why the Taiwan Strait continuously suffers from conflict, one must explore mechanisms that can alter the effect of commercial interdependence on peace. In a democracy, this power would reside with the voting public. To understand why Taiwan’s trade relations have not led to peace, we must examine the Taiwanese public opinion. Most believe that peace has not come about because Taiwan does not desire unification and lacks the power to challenge China. By viewing this issue in this way, one is disregarding the legitimate influence that the people of Taiwan have on their political parties in Taiwan. Although Taiwan is a small island, the decisions of the Taiwanese government could launch the world into a massive war. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the policies of each Taiwanese president regarding mainland China. The Taiwanese people have favored maintaining the status quo in the Taiwan Strait Conflict, but recent surveys show that the public is starting to consider taking steps toward independence. Should this trend continue, China will resort to war. Therefore, one must understand how this trend formed and how it influences the political parties of Taiwan. I call this phenomenon of Taiwan’s public viewing the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as a common enemy while utilizing grass-root movements to embrace its identity and alter mainland policy – Taiwanization. Many scholars have used this term in the past, and because my terminology differs, I will denote my term with the capital ‘T.’ Taiwanization steers Taiwan away from peaceful trade and creates tension between Taiwan and China

Collective action problems:Disentangling possible feedback loops between government policies and the public’s value-change

Solving collective action problems, such as poverty reduction or climate change, depends on interactions between governments' and voters' preferences regarding pro-social actions. This paper examines whether the overall direction of change in pro-social public policy precedes public value-change, rather than the other way around. We examine change in the public’s pro-social values in six European countries, as measured by the European Social Survey (ESS) during 2002-2012. In these countries, we conducted an expert survey to rate governmental policy that expresses these values over the same period, thereby examining value-change in governmental policy. The chronological comparison of value-change of the public with that of respective governments suggests that changes in pro-social government policies may drive public value-change rather than vice versa. This complements previous studies focused on the opinion-policy connection. Possible political implications are discussed. The promising findings of this initial study point to the importance of conducting larger-scale future studies