This volume was planned and developed on the assumption that rhe phenomena of obedience and revol... more This volume was planned and developed on the assumption that rhe phenomena of obedience and revolt were being treated in parallel, never-intersecting lines b y different professions. It was our assumption that the existence of such nMdlessly disren approaches-one often not known to its neighbor-has contribumj to a k k of &vdopment of both theory end accumulated data. **-from the Editon' Introduction
This volume was planned and developed on the assumption that rhe phenomena of obedience and revol... more This volume was planned and developed on the assumption that rhe phenomena of obedience and revolt were being treated in parallel, never-intersecting lines b y different professions. It was our assumption that the existence of such nMdlessly disren approaches-one often not known to its neighbor-has contribumj to a k k of &vdopment of both theory end accumulated data. **-from the Editon' Introduction
It is only quite recently that students of judicial administration have begun to capitalize on wh... more It is only quite recently that students of judicial administration have begun to capitalize on what seem to be some elementary observations: that courts are places where human beings interact, that the ways in which people interact are related to their goals and motivations, and that patterns of goals and motivations may underlie patterns of interaction, producing in turn patterned outcomes of court processes such as backlogs and delay. That is not to say that early observers of court processes would in some way have been oblivious to the presence of human beings in courts. Rather early analysis of delay adopted different perspectives for the most part.
Earlier this year Executive Vice Chancellor Gary Reichard, in response to campus inquiries about ... more Earlier this year Executive Vice Chancellor Gary Reichard, in response to campus inquiries about irregularities in the composition, voting, and conduct of the Board of Examiners for Vocational Education, contacted deans who have responsibilities for Bachelor of Vocational Education (BVE) degree programs. The deans were helpful in directing BVE student work (also called "Swan Portfolios") away from the improperly constituted Board and into the hands of the CSU for evaluation and recommendation for award of academic credit. Since that time, Chancellor Reed and Jack O'Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, have agreed that the administration and curricular responsibility of CSU BVE programs is most appropriately carried out by the CSU. Chancellor Reed informed Superintendent O'Connell that the CSU plans to revisit the university's programs for educating career and technical (vocational) instructors. In keeping with Title 5 regulations, the suggested title for such programs is a baccalaureate in Career and Technical Studies. (The CSU cannot award bachelor's degree with the word "Education" in the title.) Chancellor Reed has asked that the campuses offering BVE degree programs suspend enrollment in those programs, effective immediately so that they will not be out of compliance with obsolete yet existing statute and regulations that will be revised this year. Campuses are to make provisions to teach out enrolled students, and are to initiate program discontinuation processes for existing BVE programs. Please follow campus discontinuation policy and inform Chancellor Reed when the discontinuation process is approved at the campus level. In response to state workforce development needs, and in keeping with the CSU mission, we are asking campuses to consider developing baccalaureate degree programs in Career and Technical Studies, and we would like to facilitate discussion of program development, best practice, and curriculum for the new programs. If your campus is interested in developing a baccalaureate degree program in Career and Technical Studies, please have a representative contact Dr. Christine Hanson, State University Dean, who will coordinate a systemwide planning network.
... Proposals for reform thus unavoidably generate political conflict ... Consid-er tax reform, e... more ... Proposals for reform thus unavoidably generate political conflict ... Consid-er tax reform, education reform, welfare reform, and immigration reform alongside proposals to reform courts; each is ... to what government will do in areas in which government is already active (Boyum, 1987 ...
Harold Lasswell (1950) posed the defining question for political analysis when he asked, "Wh... more Harold Lasswell (1950) posed the defining question for political analysis when he asked, "Who gets what, when and how?". I think a question like Lasswell's?who wants what from courts??can help us to understand the value of the studies in this special edition of the Journal. As well, posing that question may be an appropriate way to approach the simple yet very complex question posed in the title of this afterword. In the same breath that we ask what it may mean to ask whether court-annexed arbitration works, we must ask for whom. Judicial administrators presumably want efficiency. Broadly, that would mean improvements in the relationship between output and cost. Let us use decisions and rules as a convenient shorthand for that which courts
Nearly two-thirds of the American states have produced reports that seek to understand the 20-30 ... more Nearly two-thirds of the American states have produced reports that seek to understand the 20-30 year future for judiciaries. This article overviews a set of those reports.l The present is seen to trump the future in the sense that the reports largely fail to display the language, tools, and predictions that might be expected from "futurology." Instead, the reports are well-grounded in the professional interests of judges and designed to advance the well-being of judiciaries in familiar inter-branch contests for resources and policy leadership. Ultimately, the reports are policy formulation documents and, on their own terms, significant and successful. ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION This article seeks to understand an especially interesting series of documents: the very long range planning reports issued by nearly two-thirds of the American state judiciaries. The reports seek to chart how to achieve preferred conditions for the courts some twenty-five or thirty years hence. As documented by Dahlin (1994) and Holmes (1994), the planning work occurred within the short space of about a half-decade. Virginia's report was published in 1989 as was Arizona's; Michigan's and New Hampshire's in 1990; Utah's in 1991; Massachusetts, Colorado, and Illinois followed in 1992; California's 1993 Justice in the Balance, 2020 sought to comment on the conditions for courts two decades into the twenty-first century (i.e., 2020) and to do so clearly (the play on words is 20/20 vision). The proximate explanation for the burst of work was interest on the part of the State Justice Institute (SJI), an entity supported by Congress and in the business of funding court "future projects." The availability of the money made it very much the thing to do for state administrative offices of the courts to establish a mixed lay/bar commission seeking to envision the future. However, helpful SJI funding was not the only thing to make long-range planning seem attractive. Also available were tools for analysis and the apparent of large change. As for tools, the work of Dator (1981) and Bezold (1991) is notable. Energetic scholars with a big idea, the pair worked hard with the Hawaiian judiciary to develop ways and means of assessing the future. By the last half of the 1980s, the pair had plausible methods in hand and experience with applying them in the island state. Allen (1978:79) captured the purpose of futures research: "[Broadening] the concept from simple forecasting to ... attempts to explain the effects of various actions so that effective policies can be generated, thereby creating the future conditions deemed desirable" (cf. Lipset, 1983). Nine states reports constitute the present focus, those from Arizona, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, Utah, and Virginia. These reports are among the more energetic products respectively of substantial effort involving "blue ribbon" lay/bar commissions. Dahlin's (1994) overview of longrange planning reports from twelve states will also provide useful comparative reference. He reviews Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Massachusetts, Michigan, Utah, and Virginia. First is an overview and analysis of the state reports. Part II strikes out on a different tack, focused on the interests of judiciaries and of judges per se. Conclusions and implications wrap things up in Part III. I. OVERVIEW OF STATE REPORTS The state reports contained hundred of specific recommendations, yet five key dimensions dominate them, roughly at the level of chapter topics within the book-length commission products. Public Knowledge Levels and Public Trust. Overall, concerns for public trust were widespread in the reports and an appropriate focus for the work of the commissions. After all, levels of public trust as measured in public opinion surveys appear to come close to the heart of the judicial function, to legitimize. …
Law <html_ent glyph="@amp;" ascii="&"/> Social Inquiry, 1983
"The Problem of Regulatory Unreasonableness" is the subtitle of Eugene Bardach and Robe... more "The Problem of Regulatory Unreasonableness" is the subtitle of Eugene Bardach and Robert A. Kagan's volume entitled Going by the Book.' In 323 pages of text the authors offer 11 chapters grouped in 3 parts. Part 1 is "The Problem of Regulatory Unreasonableness"; part 2 is "Flexible Enforcement and Its Limits"; part 3 is "Indirect Regulation." A distinctive feature of this volume is its definition of and consequent focus on regulatory unreasonableness. Regulatory unreasonableness is defined casually (at 58) as "the imposition of uniform regulatory requirements in situations where they do not make sense." But the authors give a more exact definition earlier in the book: "A regulatory requirement is unreasonable if compliance would not yield the intended benefits . . . . Further, a regulatory requirement is unreasonable if compliance would entail costs that clearly exceed the resulting social benefits. . . . Finally, unreasonableness means cost-ineffectiveness" (at 6). Their summary is apt: "Basically, 'unreasonableness' involves economic inefficiency" (at 6). The authors define two kinds of economically inefficient and thus unreasonable regulatory requirements. These are "'rule-level unreasonableness,' which has to do with aggregate economic inefficiency, and 'site-level unreasonableness,' which has to do with particular encounters between enforcers and the regulated" (at 7). The extended analysis of site-level unreasonableness is a novel focus and especially commends this book. Arguments about the costs and benefits at the level of aggregate effects are, after all, relatively common (as Bardach and Kagan's many references illustrate). On the other hand, this book is to my knowledge the only extended analytical treatment of site-level reactions and frustrations to regulations that as applied are experienced as unreasonable. This has to do, then, with a "mosaic of person-
... Does it report anything new, or does it recast existing knowledge or theory in a ... this iss... more ... Does it report anything new, or does it recast existing knowledge or theory in a ... this issue, Keith 0. Boyum, the John Brown Mason Professor of Political Science, California ... Courts that saw the Institute for Court Management (the National Center's education and communication ...
This volume was planned and developed on the assumption that rhe phenomena of obedience and revol... more This volume was planned and developed on the assumption that rhe phenomena of obedience and revolt were being treated in parallel, never-intersecting lines b y different professions. It was our assumption that the existence of such nMdlessly disren approaches-one often not known to its neighbor-has contribumj to a k k of &vdopment of both theory end accumulated data. **-from the Editon' Introduction
This volume was planned and developed on the assumption that rhe phenomena of obedience and revol... more This volume was planned and developed on the assumption that rhe phenomena of obedience and revolt were being treated in parallel, never-intersecting lines b y different professions. It was our assumption that the existence of such nMdlessly disren approaches-one often not known to its neighbor-has contribumj to a k k of &vdopment of both theory end accumulated data. **-from the Editon' Introduction
It is only quite recently that students of judicial administration have begun to capitalize on wh... more It is only quite recently that students of judicial administration have begun to capitalize on what seem to be some elementary observations: that courts are places where human beings interact, that the ways in which people interact are related to their goals and motivations, and that patterns of goals and motivations may underlie patterns of interaction, producing in turn patterned outcomes of court processes such as backlogs and delay. That is not to say that early observers of court processes would in some way have been oblivious to the presence of human beings in courts. Rather early analysis of delay adopted different perspectives for the most part.
Earlier this year Executive Vice Chancellor Gary Reichard, in response to campus inquiries about ... more Earlier this year Executive Vice Chancellor Gary Reichard, in response to campus inquiries about irregularities in the composition, voting, and conduct of the Board of Examiners for Vocational Education, contacted deans who have responsibilities for Bachelor of Vocational Education (BVE) degree programs. The deans were helpful in directing BVE student work (also called "Swan Portfolios") away from the improperly constituted Board and into the hands of the CSU for evaluation and recommendation for award of academic credit. Since that time, Chancellor Reed and Jack O'Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, have agreed that the administration and curricular responsibility of CSU BVE programs is most appropriately carried out by the CSU. Chancellor Reed informed Superintendent O'Connell that the CSU plans to revisit the university's programs for educating career and technical (vocational) instructors. In keeping with Title 5 regulations, the suggested title for such programs is a baccalaureate in Career and Technical Studies. (The CSU cannot award bachelor's degree with the word "Education" in the title.) Chancellor Reed has asked that the campuses offering BVE degree programs suspend enrollment in those programs, effective immediately so that they will not be out of compliance with obsolete yet existing statute and regulations that will be revised this year. Campuses are to make provisions to teach out enrolled students, and are to initiate program discontinuation processes for existing BVE programs. Please follow campus discontinuation policy and inform Chancellor Reed when the discontinuation process is approved at the campus level. In response to state workforce development needs, and in keeping with the CSU mission, we are asking campuses to consider developing baccalaureate degree programs in Career and Technical Studies, and we would like to facilitate discussion of program development, best practice, and curriculum for the new programs. If your campus is interested in developing a baccalaureate degree program in Career and Technical Studies, please have a representative contact Dr. Christine Hanson, State University Dean, who will coordinate a systemwide planning network.
... Proposals for reform thus unavoidably generate political conflict ... Consid-er tax reform, e... more ... Proposals for reform thus unavoidably generate political conflict ... Consid-er tax reform, education reform, welfare reform, and immigration reform alongside proposals to reform courts; each is ... to what government will do in areas in which government is already active (Boyum, 1987 ...
Harold Lasswell (1950) posed the defining question for political analysis when he asked, "Wh... more Harold Lasswell (1950) posed the defining question for political analysis when he asked, "Who gets what, when and how?". I think a question like Lasswell's?who wants what from courts??can help us to understand the value of the studies in this special edition of the Journal. As well, posing that question may be an appropriate way to approach the simple yet very complex question posed in the title of this afterword. In the same breath that we ask what it may mean to ask whether court-annexed arbitration works, we must ask for whom. Judicial administrators presumably want efficiency. Broadly, that would mean improvements in the relationship between output and cost. Let us use decisions and rules as a convenient shorthand for that which courts
Nearly two-thirds of the American states have produced reports that seek to understand the 20-30 ... more Nearly two-thirds of the American states have produced reports that seek to understand the 20-30 year future for judiciaries. This article overviews a set of those reports.l The present is seen to trump the future in the sense that the reports largely fail to display the language, tools, and predictions that might be expected from "futurology." Instead, the reports are well-grounded in the professional interests of judges and designed to advance the well-being of judiciaries in familiar inter-branch contests for resources and policy leadership. Ultimately, the reports are policy formulation documents and, on their own terms, significant and successful. ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION This article seeks to understand an especially interesting series of documents: the very long range planning reports issued by nearly two-thirds of the American state judiciaries. The reports seek to chart how to achieve preferred conditions for the courts some twenty-five or thirty years hence. As documented by Dahlin (1994) and Holmes (1994), the planning work occurred within the short space of about a half-decade. Virginia's report was published in 1989 as was Arizona's; Michigan's and New Hampshire's in 1990; Utah's in 1991; Massachusetts, Colorado, and Illinois followed in 1992; California's 1993 Justice in the Balance, 2020 sought to comment on the conditions for courts two decades into the twenty-first century (i.e., 2020) and to do so clearly (the play on words is 20/20 vision). The proximate explanation for the burst of work was interest on the part of the State Justice Institute (SJI), an entity supported by Congress and in the business of funding court "future projects." The availability of the money made it very much the thing to do for state administrative offices of the courts to establish a mixed lay/bar commission seeking to envision the future. However, helpful SJI funding was not the only thing to make long-range planning seem attractive. Also available were tools for analysis and the apparent of large change. As for tools, the work of Dator (1981) and Bezold (1991) is notable. Energetic scholars with a big idea, the pair worked hard with the Hawaiian judiciary to develop ways and means of assessing the future. By the last half of the 1980s, the pair had plausible methods in hand and experience with applying them in the island state. Allen (1978:79) captured the purpose of futures research: "[Broadening] the concept from simple forecasting to ... attempts to explain the effects of various actions so that effective policies can be generated, thereby creating the future conditions deemed desirable" (cf. Lipset, 1983). Nine states reports constitute the present focus, those from Arizona, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, Utah, and Virginia. These reports are among the more energetic products respectively of substantial effort involving "blue ribbon" lay/bar commissions. Dahlin's (1994) overview of longrange planning reports from twelve states will also provide useful comparative reference. He reviews Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Massachusetts, Michigan, Utah, and Virginia. First is an overview and analysis of the state reports. Part II strikes out on a different tack, focused on the interests of judiciaries and of judges per se. Conclusions and implications wrap things up in Part III. I. OVERVIEW OF STATE REPORTS The state reports contained hundred of specific recommendations, yet five key dimensions dominate them, roughly at the level of chapter topics within the book-length commission products. Public Knowledge Levels and Public Trust. Overall, concerns for public trust were widespread in the reports and an appropriate focus for the work of the commissions. After all, levels of public trust as measured in public opinion surveys appear to come close to the heart of the judicial function, to legitimize. …
Law <html_ent glyph="@amp;" ascii="&"/> Social Inquiry, 1983
"The Problem of Regulatory Unreasonableness" is the subtitle of Eugene Bardach and Robe... more "The Problem of Regulatory Unreasonableness" is the subtitle of Eugene Bardach and Robert A. Kagan's volume entitled Going by the Book.' In 323 pages of text the authors offer 11 chapters grouped in 3 parts. Part 1 is "The Problem of Regulatory Unreasonableness"; part 2 is "Flexible Enforcement and Its Limits"; part 3 is "Indirect Regulation." A distinctive feature of this volume is its definition of and consequent focus on regulatory unreasonableness. Regulatory unreasonableness is defined casually (at 58) as "the imposition of uniform regulatory requirements in situations where they do not make sense." But the authors give a more exact definition earlier in the book: "A regulatory requirement is unreasonable if compliance would not yield the intended benefits . . . . Further, a regulatory requirement is unreasonable if compliance would entail costs that clearly exceed the resulting social benefits. . . . Finally, unreasonableness means cost-ineffectiveness" (at 6). Their summary is apt: "Basically, 'unreasonableness' involves economic inefficiency" (at 6). The authors define two kinds of economically inefficient and thus unreasonable regulatory requirements. These are "'rule-level unreasonableness,' which has to do with aggregate economic inefficiency, and 'site-level unreasonableness,' which has to do with particular encounters between enforcers and the regulated" (at 7). The extended analysis of site-level unreasonableness is a novel focus and especially commends this book. Arguments about the costs and benefits at the level of aggregate effects are, after all, relatively common (as Bardach and Kagan's many references illustrate). On the other hand, this book is to my knowledge the only extended analytical treatment of site-level reactions and frustrations to regulations that as applied are experienced as unreasonable. This has to do, then, with a "mosaic of person-
... Does it report anything new, or does it recast existing knowledge or theory in a ... this iss... more ... Does it report anything new, or does it recast existing knowledge or theory in a ... this issue, Keith 0. Boyum, the John Brown Mason Professor of Political Science, California ... Courts that saw the Institute for Court Management (the National Center's education and communication ...
Uploads
Papers by Keith Boyum