The in-plane paraconductivity in La_{2-x}Sr_xCuO_4 thin film superconductors at high reduced-temperatures: Independence of the normal-state pseudogap

The in-plane resistivity has been measured in $La_{2-x}Sr_xCuO_4$ (LSxCO) superconducting thin films of underdoped ($x=0.10,0.12$), optimally-doped ($x=0.15$) and overdoped ($x=0.20,0.25$) compositions. These films were grown on (100)SrTiO$_3$ substrates, and have about 150 nm thickness. The in-plane conductivity induced by superconducting fluctuations above the superconducting transition (the so-called in-plane paraconductivity, $\Delta\sigma_{ab}$) was extracted from these data in the reduced-temperature range 10^{-2}\lsim\epsilon\equiv\ln(T/\Tc)\lsim1. Such a $\Delta\sigma_{ab}(\epsilon)$ was then analyzed in terms of the mean-field--like Gaussian-Ginzburg-Landau (GGL) approach extended to the high-$\epsilon$ region by means of the introduction of a total-energy cutoff, which takes into account both the kinetic energy and the quantum localization energy of each fluctuating mode. Our results strongly suggest that at all temperatures above Tc, including the high reduced-temperature region, the doping mainly affects in LSxCO thin films the normal-state properties and that its influence on the superconducting fluctuations is relatively moderate: Even in the high-$\epsilon$ region, the in-plane paraconductivity is found to be independent of the opening of a pseudogap in the normal state of the underdoped films.Comment: 35 pages including 10 figures and 1 tabl

Policy masquerading as science: an examination of non-state actor involvement in European risk assessment policy for genetically modified animals

In 2013, at the request of the European Commission, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) announced a new risk assessment policy: Guidance on the environmental risks of genetically modified (GM) animals (‘Guidance’). This policy specifies the issues to be addressed in future risk assessments for GM animals. EFSA is the European Commission's scientific arm, responsible for food-related risk assessment. EFSA relies heavily on independent experts and consults non-state actors. Employing expert interviews and documentary analysis, the article explores non-state actor involvement in a traditionally expert domain through a case study. Analysis of EFSA's consultation demonstrates the inability of non-state actors to influence policy. The article argues that despite international legal obligations to develop risk assessment policy, the European Commission failed to recognize the Guidance as policy. When policy masquerades as science, unjustified restrictions are placed on non-state actor involvement and value judgements are cloaked from public scrutiny

The choice for EU theorists: Establishing a common framework for analysis

European Union (EU) studies have entered a highly contentious and, arguably, creative phase. A range of theoretical perspectives, seemingly quite highly differentiated from one another, now compete for influence and lsquospacersquo. However, the questions remain: is EU studies developing theories which are truly competing theories? Or is it developing theories that do not compete so much as they aim to explain distinctly different pieces of the EU puzzle? This paper responds directly to these two questions, while reviewing recent literature on EU governance. It argues, first, that we lack theories of EU governance that are true rivals; and, second, that leading models explain different outcomes at different levels in a multi-level system of governance. The result is somewhat phoney debates between compatible theories masquerading as rivals, and between lsquocomparative politicsrsquo and lsquointernational relationsrsquo approaches. Above all, perhaps, we find middle range theories posing as general or lsquometa-theoriesrsquo. In the absence of a plausible general theory of EU governance, theorists must choose precisely which type of outcome theywish to explain

Sport policy convergence: a framework for analysis

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in European Sport Management Quarterly on 30th April 2012, available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/16184742.2012.669390The growth in the comparative analysis of sport management processes and policy has led to an increased interest in the concept of convergence. However, the concept is too often treated as unproblematic in definition, measurement and operationalisation. It is argued in this paper that a more effective framework for examining claims of convergence is one that analyses the concept in terms of seven dimensions which can be explored through a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection. It is also argued that a deeper understanding of the process of convergence can be gained by operationalising the concept in the context of a selected range of meso-level theories of the policy process or of specific aspects of the process. The proposed analytic framework provides not only a definition of convergence but also the basis for a more nuanced investigation of hypotheses of convergence

The appraisal of policy appraisal – Learning about the quality of impact assessment

What do governments, international organizations and stakeholders mean when they say that proposals for new regulation should be systematically appraised? And do regulators really use the results of appraisal? In this article, we consider two dimensions of policy appraisal: the breadth and scope of the empirical analysis, and the utilization of impact assessment. We use these two dimensions to produce an explanatory typology with four types. The types enable us to review the literature systematically, exposing gaps as well as documenting the results. In the final part of the article we build hypotheses that link quality of analysis and utilization, thus showing how future research may become less descriptive and more inclined to test explicit hypotheses