A Constitution of Democratic Experimentalism

In this Article, Professors Dorf and Sabel identify a new form of government, democratic experimentalism, in which power is decentralized to enable citizens and other actors to utilize their local knowledge to fit solutions to their individual circumstances, but in which regional and national coordinating bodies require actors to share their knowledge with others facing similar problems. This information pooling, informed by the example of novel kinds of coordination within and among private firms, both increases the efficiency of public administration by encouraging mutual learning among its parts and heightens its accountability through participation of citizens in the decisions that affect them. In democratic experimentalism, subnational units of government are broadly free to set goals and to choose the means to attain them. Regulatory agencies set and ensure compliance with national objectives by means of bestpractice performance standards based on information that regulated entities provide in return for the freedom to experiment with solutions they prefer. The authors argue that this type of self-government is currently emerging in settings as diverse as the regulation of nuclear power plants, community policing, procurement of sophisticated military hardware, environmental regulation, and child-protective services. The Article claims further that a shift towards democratic experimentalism holds out the promise of reducing the distance between, on the one hand, the Madisonian ideal of a limited government assured by a complex division of powers and, on the other hand, the governmental reality characteristic of the New Deal synthesis, in which an all-powerful Congress delegates much of its authority to expert agencies that are checked by the courts when they infringe individual rights, but are otherwise assumed to act in the public interest. Professors Dorf and Sabel argue that the combination of decentralization and mutual monitoring intrinsic to democratic experimentalism better protects the constitutional ideal than do doctrines of federalism and the separation of powers, so at odds with current circumstances, that courts recognize the futility of applying them consistently in practice by limiting themselves to fitful declarations of their validity in principle. For example, conventional administrative law imposes external judicial checks on administrative agencies, obliging judges to choose between superficial scrutiny of formal proprieties and disruptive, indeed often paralyzing, inquiry into what an idealized agency might be expected to do. By contrast, democratic experimentalism requires the social actors, separately and in exchange with each other, to take constitutional considerations into account in their decisionmaking. The administrative agency assists the actors even while monitoring their performance by scrutinizing the reactions of each to relevant proposals by the others. The courts then determine whether the agency has met its obligations to foster and generalize the results of this information pooling. Agencies and courts alike use the rich record of the parties\u27 intentions, as interpreted by their acts contained in the continuing, comparative evaluation of experimentation itself In the administrative and related settings, the aim of democratic experimentalism is to democratize public decisionmaking from within, and so lessen the burdens on a judiciary that today awkwardly superintends the every-day workings of democracy from an external vantage point. Finally, the Article reconceptualizes constitutional rights. Relying in this and other regards on ideas associated with early-twentieth-century American pragmatism, the Article treats disagreements over rights as principally about how to implement widely shared general principles. Under the heading of prophylactic rules and related doctrines, the United States Supreme Court has recognized that there are often a variety of acceptable remedies for a violation of rights or a variety of acceptable means of achieving a constitutionally mandated end. The authors argue for a radical extension of these doctrines, in which judicial recognition of a general, core right, permits substantial experimentation about how to implement that right. They propose institutional mechanisms to facilitate such experimentation. The authors contend, however, that with rights, as with other constitutionally entrenched principles, means and ends cannot be neatly separated, so that experimentation at the periphery also redefines the core, ultimately challenging the very distinction between core and periphery

Drug Treatment Courts and Emergent Experimental Government

Despite the continuing war on drugs, the last decade has witnessed the creation and nationwide spread of a remarkable set of institutions, drug treatment courts. In drug treatment court, a criminal defendant pleads guilty or otherwise accepts responsibility for a charged offense and accepts placement in a court-mandated program of drug treatment. The judge and court personnel closely monitor the defendant\u27s performance in the program and the program\u27s capacity to serve the mandated client. The federal government and national associations in turn monitor the local drug treatment courts and disseminate successful practices. The ensemble of institutions, monitoring, and pooling exemplifies what the authors have elsewhere called experimentalism. The authors argue here that treatment courts as open and evolving experimentalist institutions point one way beyond the conventional limitation of courts and other institutions. By pooling information on good and bad performance, and sanctioning when necessary unsatisfactory performers, the courts enable and oblige improvement by the actors both individually and as members of a complex ensemble. Judicial involvement in reform is permanent and continuous in this model. Yet it is, paradoxically, less imperious than traditional methods of court-directed reform for two reasons. First, the court in effect compels the actors to learn continuously and incrementally from each other rather than instructing them to implement a comprehensive remedial plan devised by the court alone or even in consultation with the parties. Second, the court is itself compelled to change in response to the changes it facilitates. In part this occurs through the exchanges with the treatment providers and in part it occurs in response to comparisons with experience in other jurisdictions as revealed by national pooling. Thus, the article argues, the experimentalist architecture of the drug courts suggests that they and like institutions need not face a strict tradeoff between efficacy and accountability

A Constitution of Democratic Experimentalism

In this Article, Professors Dorf and Sabel identify a new form of government, democratic experimentalism, in which power is decentralized to enable citizens and other actors to utilize their local knowledge to fit solutions to their individual circumstances, but in which regional and national coordinating bodies require actors to share their knowledge with others facing similar problems. This information pooling, informed by the example of novel kinds of coordination within and among private firms, both increases the efficiency of public administration by encouraging mutual learning among its parts and heightens its accountability through participation of citizens in the decisions that affect them. In democratic experimentalism, subnational units of government are broadly free to set goals and to choose the means to attain them. Regulatory agencies set and ensure compliance with national objectives by means of best-practice performance standards based on information that regulated entities provide in return for the freedom to experiment with solutions they prefer. The authors argue that this type of self-government is currently emerging in settings as diverse as the regulation of nuclear power plants, community policing, procurement of sophisticated military hardware, environmental regulation, and child-protective services. The Article claims further that a shift towards democratic experimentalism holds out the promise of reducing the distance between, on the one hand, the Madisonian ideal of a limited government assured by a complex division of powers and, on the other hand, the governmental reality characteristic of the New Deal synthesis, in which an all-powerful Congress delegates much of its authority to expert agencies that are checked by the courts when they infringe individual rights, but are otherwise assumed to act in the public interest. Professors Dorf and Sabel argue that the combination of decentralization and mutual monitoring intrinsic to democratic experimentalism better protects the constitutional ideal than do doctrines of federalism and the separation of powers, so at odds with current circumstances, that courts recognize the futility of applying them consistently in practice by limiting themselves to fitful declarations of their validity in principle. For example, conventional administrative law imposes external judicial checks on administrative agencies, obliging judges to choose between superficial scrutiny of formal proprieties and disruptive, indeed often paralyzing, inquiry into what an idealized agency might be expected to do. By contrast, democratic experimentalism requires the social actors, separately and in exchange with each other, to take constitutional considerations into account in their decisionmaking. The administrative agency assists the actors even while monitoring their performance by scrutinizing the reactions of each to relevant proposals by the others. The courts then determine whether the agency has met its obligations to foster and generalize the results of this information pooling. Agencies and courts alike use the rich record of the parties\u27 intentions, as interpreted by their acts contained in the continuing, comparative evaluation of experimentation itself In the administrative and related settings, the aim of democratic experimentalism is to democratize public decisionmaking from within, and so lessen the burdens on a judiciary that today awkwardly superintends the every-day workings of democracy from an external vantage point. Finally, the Article reconceptualizes constitutional rights. Relying in this and other regards on ideas associated with early-twentieth-century American pragmatism, the Article treats disagreements over rights as principally about how to implement widely shared general principles. Under the heading of prophylactic rules and related doctrines, the United States Supreme Court has recognized that there are often a variety of acceptable remedies for a violation of rights or a variety of acceptable means of achieving a constitutionally mandated end. The authors argue for a radical extension of these doctrines, in which judicial recognition of a general, core right, permits substantial experimentation about how to implement that right. They propose institutional mechanisms to facilitate such experimentation. The authors contend, however, that with rights, as with other constitutionally entrenched principles, means and ends cannot be neatly separated, so that experimentation at the periphery also redefines the core, ultimately challenging the very distinction between core and periphery

Beyond Backyard Environmentalism

From California habitats to Massachusetts toxics, the United States is in the midst of a fundamental reorientation of its environmental regulation, one that is as improbable as it is unremarked Minimally, the new forms of regulation promise to improve the quality of our environment At a maximum, they suggest a novel form of democracy that combines the virtues oflocalism and decentraliz.ation with the discipline of national coordination. In substance and spirit, this new approach to regulation grows out of the tradition of backyard environmentalism. For two decades, residents of Woburn, Love Canal, and countless other communities across the country have organiz.ed to reclaim authority over their lived environment These pioneers of citiz.en environmental activism typically fought to keep harmful activity out of their neighborhoods-hence the acronym NIMBY, for Not In My Backyard. In their struggles to protect themselves and their children from poisoned air, soil, and water, ordinary citiz.ens have often been pitted against certified experts from corporations, government, and even big environmental organiz.ations

​Residential mobility:Towards progress in mobility health research

Research into health disparities has long recognized the importance of residential mobility as a crucial factor in determining health outcomes. However, a lack of connectivity between the health and mobility literatures has led to a stagnation of theory and application on the health side, which lacks the detail and temporal perspectives now seen as critical to understanding residential mobility decisions. Through a critical re-think of mobility processes with respect to health outcomes and an exploitation of longitudinal analytical techniques, we argue that health geographers have the potential to better understand and identify the relationship that residential mobility has with health.“The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013) / ERC Grant Agreement n. 615159 (ERC Consolidator Grant DEPRIVEDHOODS, Socio-spatial inequality, deprived neighbourhoods, and neighbourhood effects)”OLD Urban Renewal and Housin

Upregulation of Circulating PD-L1/PD-1 Is Associated with Poor Post-Cryoablation Prognosis in Patients with HBV-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND: The programmed cell death-1 receptor/programmed cell death-1 ligand (PD-1/PD-L1) pathway plays a crucial role in tumor evasion from host immunity. This study was designed to evaluate the association between circulating PD-L1/PD-1 and prognosis after cryoablation in patients with HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In the present study, 141 HBV-related HCC patients were enrolled and of those 109 patients received cryoablation. Circulating PD-L1/PD-1 expression was tested by flow cytometry, and 23 patients were simultaneously evaluated for intratumoral PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemical staining. Circulating PD-1/PD-L1 expression was associated with severity of diseases in patients with HCC, and the circulating PD-L1 expression was closely correlated with intratumoral PD-L1 expression. Of the clinical parameters, PD-1/PD-L1 expression was associated with tumor size, blood vessel invasion and BCLC staging. Moreover, PD-1/PD-L1 expression dropped after cryoablation while being elevated at the time of tumor recurrence. Patients with higher expression of circulating PD-L1, as well as circulating PD-1, had a significantly shorter overall survival and tumor-free survival than those with lower expression. Multivariate analysis confirmed that circulating PD-L1 could serve as an independent predictor of overall survival and tumor-recurrence survival in HCC patients after cryoablation. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Upregulation of circulating PD-L1/PD-1 is associated with poor post-cryoablation prognosis in patients with HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma

Spatial analysis of bladder, kidney, and pancreatic cancer on upper Cape Cod: an application of generalized additive models to case-control data

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In 1988, elevated cancer incidence in upper Cape Cod, Massachusetts prompted a large epidemiological study of nine cancers to investigate possible environmental risk factors. Positive associations were observed, but explained only a portion of the excess cancer incidence. This case-control study provided detailed information on individual-level covariates and residential history that can be spatially analyzed using generalized additive models (GAMs) and geographical information systems (GIS).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We investigated the association between residence and bladder, kidney, and pancreatic cancer on upper Cape Cod. We estimated adjusted odds ratios using GAMs, smoothing on location. A 40-year residential history allowed for latency restrictions. We mapped spatially continuous odds ratios using GIS and identified statistically significant clusters using permutation tests.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Maps of bladder cancer are essentially flat ignoring latency, but show a statistically significant hot spot near known Massachusetts Military Reservation (MMR) groundwater plumes when 15 years latency is assumed. The kidney cancer map shows significantly increased ORs in the south of the study area and decreased ORs in the north.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Spatial epidemiology using individual level data from population-based studies addresses many methodological criticisms of cluster studies and generates new exposure hypotheses. Our results provide evidence for spatial clustering of bladder cancer near MMR plumes that suggest further investigation using detailed exposure modeling.</p

Systematizing Policy Learning: From Monolith to Dimensions

notes: The authors wish to express their gratitude to the Norwegian Political Science Association Annual Conference, 6 January 2010, University of Agder, Kristiansand, participants of the ‘Establishing Causality in Policy Learning’ panel at the American Political Science Association (APSA) annual meeting,2–5 September 2010,Washington DC, and the European Consortium of Political Research (ECPR) Joint Sessions, St Gallen, 12–17 April 2011, workshop 2. Dunlop and Radaelli gratefully acknowledge the support of the European Research Council, grant on Analysis of Learning in Regulatory Governance, ALREG, http://centres.exeter.ac.uk/ceg/research/ALREG/index.php.publication-status: AcceptedThe definitive version is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com and also from DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00982.xThe field of policy learning is characterised by concept stretching and lack of systematic findings. To systematize them, we combine the classic Sartorian approach to classification with the more recent insights on explanatory typologies. At the outset, we classify per genus et differentiam – distinguishing between the genus and the different species within it. By drawing on the technique of explanatory typologies to introduce a basic model of policy learning, we identify four major genera in the literature. We then generate variation within each cell by using rigorous concepts drawn from adult education research. Specifically, we conceptualize learning as control over the contents and goals of knowledge. By looking at learning through the lenses of knowledge utilization, we show that the basic model can be expanded to reveal sixteen different species. These types are all conceptually possible, but are not all empirically established in the literature. Up until now the scope conditions and connections among types have not been clarified. Our reconstruction of the field sheds light on mechanisms and relations associated with alternatives operationalizations of learning and the role of actors in the process of knowledge construction and utilization. By providing a comprehensive typology, we mitigate concept stretching problems and aim to lay the foundations for the systematic comparison across and within cases of policy learning.European Research Council, grant no 230267 on Analysis of Learning in Regulatory Governance, ALREG

Learning in the European Union: Theoretical Lenses and Meta-Theory

notes: This paper is based on research carried out with the support of the European Research Council grant on Analysis of Learning in Regulatory Governance, ALREG http://centres.exeter.ac.uk/ceg/research/ALREG/index.php. The authors wish to express their gratitude to the other authors in this special edition and in particular its editor, Nikos Zaharaidis and X anonymous referees.publication-status: AcceptedThe European Union may well be a learning organization, yet there is still confusion about the nature of learning, its causal structure and the normative implications. In this article we select four perspectives that address complexity, governance, the agency-structure nexus, and how learning occurs or may be blocked by institutional features. They are transactional theory, purposeful opportunism, experimental governance, and the joint decision trap. We use the four cases to investigate how history and disciplinary traditions inform theory; the core causal arguments about learning; the normative implications of the analysis; the types of learning that are theoretically predicted; the meta-theoretical aspects and the lessons for better theories of the policy process and political scientists more generally

Subjects, Topics, and Anchoring to the Context

The article discusses the connection between the syntactic and semantic properties of weak, strong, and referential DP subjects. In particular, I argue that nominal expressions possess a situation argument and that their interpretation and their distribution follow from the presuppositional requirements that the determiner imposes on the individual argument and situation argument of its complement nominal. These presuppositional requirements, I then argue, are embodied by local relations of the subject to a distinct head in the C domain, Fin(0) in the system of Rizzi 1997, where specific referential values of discourse antecedents are accessible