Changes in diversionary strategies within the youth justice system of England & Wales (1908-2010)

A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy of the University of BedfordshireYouth justice in England and Wales is a highly politicised area of government policy and youth justice provision has always been a highly contested issue. The discourse of diversion stems from debates about the purpose and effectiveness of various types of penal regimes, and particularly their effect on children and young people in trouble with the law. The process of diversion aims to remove children and young people from the formal sanctions of the criminal justice system or minimize their penetration into it, and failing that it aims to avoid incarceration. Over the years diversion has taken many forms and the extent to which children have been diverted has varied. This thesis explores the various types of diversionary practice and how they have changed over time. It explores the political, administrative and professional conditions under which diversion has been a priority and those under which it has been effective. Bernard (1992) has argued that there is a ‘cycle of youth justice’ in which responses to youth crime move from the harsh to the more lenient before swinging back again. The thesis suggests that there is a ‘spiral’ of youth justice in which different paradigms are sometimes entangled together leading to the often contradictory and complex realities of youth justice and diversion without necessarily returning to the place of origin. It concludes that, given the current fiscal climate, there is a distinct likelihood that diversion policies will gain ascendancy. However, any developments will be fragile and susceptible to unintended consequences if the ‘real’ outcomes for children and young people are not part of the motivation for reform

Rights Without Remedies: The Court Party Theory and the Demise of the Court Challenges Program

The author argues that the Court Challenges Program’s 2006 cancellation was based on claims that judicial review is undemocratic, including those made by three academics, Rainer Knopff, F.L. Morton and Ian Brodie; the Court Party Theorists (the “CPT”). Through a study of Charter equality cases, this paper examines the CPT’s arguments regarding judicial activism, interest groups and interveners and finds they are largely unsupported by statistical evidence. Further, the debate about judicial review and democracy obscures judicial review’s important auditing function over the legislature’s constitutional adherence. This audit depends on individuals’ capacity to pursue Charter litigation, an ability compromised by the access to justice crisis. The author examines this crisis and the efforts to fill the funding gap left by the CCP’s cancellation and concludes that a publicly-funded program like the CCP is best-placed to ensure that the Charter remains a relevant tool for enforcing fundamental human rights in Canada.MAS

Teaching Bioeconomics

Bioeconomics is a relatively young field that uses an expanded microeconomics to examine animal behavior, human behavior, and animal and human social institutions. A voluminous literature is rapidly accumulating. There are as yet no standard textbooks, but there are several excellent books and/or articles that can be used in combination with videos and other aids to make a course that students will enjoy and that teachers can use to advance the frontiers of scholarship in economics and biology. Copyright Springer 2005altruism, conflict, cooperation, evolution, game theory, institutions, rationality,