This conclusion presents some closing thoughts on the concepts discussed in the book. The book begins the process of building knowledge about the empirical effect of independence-promoting measures by investigating the effects of state codes of conduct. States have used judicial elections for more than 150 years. The book demonstrates that some parts of judicial codes of conduct have real effects on judicial elections. Independent of broader political trends and candidate- and race-specific characteristics, the canons of ethics provide enough constraints on candidate behavior to have demonstrable effects on candidate messages and election outcomes. Charles Geyh's framework points the way forward for how to integrate empirical findings into normative debates about the effects of ethical regulations and other independence-promoting mechanisms. Geyh's framework could give rise to a host of testable …

One important criterion for assessing the quality of democratic governance is the extent to which the policy process effectively translates citizen preferences into collective choices. Several scholars have observed a discrepancy between citizen preferences for strong environmental protection and weak policies adopted in the United States, indicating that the United States may fall short on this criterion. We examine one possible mechanism contributing to this discrepancy—legislator defection from campaign promises. Our data indicate that legislators in the U.S. Congress routinely defect from their campaign promises in environmental protection, undermining the link between citizen preferences and policy choice. We also find that legislators are much more likely to defect from pro-environmental campaign promises, which moves government policy toward less stringent environmental programs. Finally, the propensity of legislators to defect from their campaign promises is systematic, with defection affected by partisanship, constituency influence, the influence of the majority party, and the likely consequences of defection for policy choice. These findings contribute empirical evidence relevant to the “mandate theory” perspective on how citizen preferences are translated into collective choices through the policy process. These findings may also complement research in comparative politics concluding that legislatures selected through single member districts adopt less stringent environmental policies than do legislatures chosen via proportional representation in that the mechanism for this effect may go through legislator defection from campaign promises.

We modify Berry et al.‘s congressional-delegation-based measure of state government ideology to construct a new measure—which we call the state-legislative-based state government ideology measure—by relying on Shor and McCarty's National Political Awareness Test common space estimates of the ideal points of U.S. state legislators. We conduct tests of convergent and construct validity for the two measures. We find that they correlate highly in each year for which the state-legislative-based indicator is available (1995–2008), and when observations are pooled across all years. We also replicate numerous published studies assessing the impact of state government ideology using each indicator of ideology and find that the two measures nearly always yield similar conclusions about the effect of government ideology. Because the state-legislative-based measure is based on more direct estimates of the ideal points of state legislators than is the congressional-delegation-based measure—which uses estimates of ideal points for members of Congress from the same state as a proxy—we believe the state-legislative-based measure is superior, and we recommend that scholars use it when it is available for the state-years being studied. Because our empirical evidence indicates that Berry et al.‘s congressional-delegation-based measure is also valid—and it is available for a much longer period (annually beginning in 1960)—we advise that it be used when the state-legislative-based measure is not available.

This article builds on a growing literature about collaborative environmental policymaking and assesses its use in relation to a major element of American water pollution policy—the total maximum daily load (TMDL) program. It extends current literature by tying collaborative policymaking to a key element of the federal Clean Water Act and by compiling information on the implementation of actions recommended in TMDL reports. We find that recommendations contained in TMDL reports are being implemented in many—but not all—of the TMDL-limited watersheds in Ohio and West Virginia. In addition, we find that the presence of a collaborative watershed group is positively associated with perceived progress in TMDL implementation. However, we also find that current efforts are far from sufficient, and we suggest that future efforts to understand collaborative watershed management should take account of TMDL processes and the federal policy structures in which they are embedded.

This study assesses the effectiveness of two information disclosure programs – the success of state-based mandatory carbon reporting programs and the voluntary Carbon Disclosure Project, which uses investor pressure to push firms to disclose carbon emissions and carbon management strategies. I match firms in each program to control groups of firms that have not participated in each program. Using panel data methods including a difference in differences model and fixed effects model, I measure the impact of each program on plant-level carbon emissions and plant-level carbon intensity. I find that the Carbon Disclosure Project is associated with reductions in plant level carbon intensity. State reporting programs do not have an impact on carbon intensity. Neither program impacted total carbon emissions. I conclude that participation in the CDP reflects changes made by firm managers that lead to improved carbon management.

Using data from the Federal Human Capital Survey, we demonstrate that the managerial traits of competence, integrity, and benevolence share an important common dimension that we identify as the trustworthiness of managerial leadership (TWML). Using recursive hierarchical linear models, we demonstrate that levels of TWML are strongly and positively associated with several measures of perceived organizational outcomes. This relationship between TWML and perceived outcomes is especially strong in low-performing agencies and in agencies experiencing increased uncertainty due to structural and upper level leadership changes. We draw two substantive conclusions from these empirical results. First, it is clear that the characteristics of managers matter for outcomes of public organizations. In particular, trustworthy managers preside over more productive organizations and are better able to maintain and even increase organizational outcomes in agencies challenged by low level of performance and perturbations in the external environment. Second, public managers and management scholars ought to view trust not only as an exogenous variable but also as a managerial resource to be cultivated.

Objective. Arthur Okun made plain the fundamental conflict between efficiency and equity that arises in the pursuit of policy goals (Okun, 1974). Although Okun was speaking about government tax and spending policy, the potential conflict between efficiency and equity is also manifest at the nexus of two of the most far‐reaching changes in the environmental policy arena: the adoption of market‐like tools for pollution control and the quest for environmental justice. The article assesses this potential tradeoff by determining whether the pursuit of efficiency through the Clean Air Act Amendment's (CAA) sulfur dioxide allowance trading program (ATP) inadvertently transfers pollution into poor and minority communities.Methods. I employ Probit, Tobit, and GLS models using data for all SO2 trading activity between January 1995 and March 2009 to estimate whether allowance trading concentrates SO2 emissions in poor communities and communities of color. When using these models, I control for sample selectivity and for possible bias stemming from the modifiable areal unit problem.Results. The ATP does not concentrate sulfur dioxide emissions in black or Hispanic communities. To the contrary, communities with high percentages of black and Hispanic residents experience fewer imports of sulfur dioxide. Allowance trading does transfer SO2 emissions into poorly educated communities.Conclusions. There is no inherent tradeoff between efficiency and equity when using market‐based instruments for pollution control. Policymakers, however, might make an effort to design and implement future emissions trading programs in a manner that reduces the monitoring costs of tracking emissions trading. By reducing monitoring costs, policymakers may prevent the concentration of emissions in poorly educated communities while preserving the efficiency benefits of these instruments.

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Berry et al.'s (1998) measures of U.S. state citizen and government ideology rely on unadjusted interest-group ratings for a state's members of Congress to infer information about (1) the ideological orientation of the electorates that selected them or (2) state legislators and the governor from the same state. Potential weaknesses in unadjusted interest-group ratings prompt the question: Are the Berry et al. measures flawed, and if so, can they be fixed by substituting alternative measures of a member's ideology? We conclude that a version of the Berry et al. state government ideology indicator relying on NOMINATE common space scores is marginally superior to the extant version. In contrast, we reaffirm the validity of the original state citizen ideology indicator and find that versions based on NOMINATE common space scores and adjusted ADA and COPE scores introduced by Groseclose, Levitt, and Snyder (1999) are weaker.

Journal of Policy Analysis and ManagementVolume 28, Issue 4 p. 753-757 Book Reviews The Politics of Presidential Appointments: Political Control and Bureaucratic Performance, by David E. Lewis, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006, 293 pp., $60.00 hardcover, $24.95 paperback Evan J. Ringquist, Evan J. Ringquist Professor and director, Ph.D. programs in Public Affairs and Public Policy, Indiana University School of Public and Environmental AffairsSearch for more papers by this author Evan J. Ringquist, Evan J. Ringquist Professor and director, Ph.D. programs in Public Affairs and Public Policy, Indiana University School of Public and Environmental AffairsSearch for more papers by this author First published: 29 September 2009 https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20473AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Volume28, Issue4Autumn (Fall) 2009Pages 753-757 RelatedInformation

Writing this reply presents a challenge for us since the authors of the preceding article reinforce most of our substantive points published previously (Brace et al. 2004, 2006). In this new article, Berry et al. (2007) acknowledge that there is more cross-sectional than longitudinal variation in the Berry et al. (1998) measure of state citizen ideology and imply that researchers should take precautions not to confuse them. They admit that their measure is tapping something different from survey-based self-identification, and they also note the distinction between absolute and relative change in their ideology measure. Given our many points of agreement, this reply focuses on four key points made by Berry et al. in the preceding article on which we differ. First, we address the argument that focusing on intra-state attitude change ignores important attitude change affecting all states simultaneously. Second, we discuss Berry et al.‘s distinction between symbolic ideology and operational ideology. Third, we consider the validity and reliability of the various measures. Finally, we revisit our choice of statistical methods. Although we certainly do not conclude that Berry et al.‘s measure lacks clear utility or relevance, we believe it may serve a more limited purpose than the authors intended. We urge researchers to consider the conceptual, methodological, and epistemological concerns raised in our response before using any indicator of state public opinion.

PAUL BRACE, RICE UNIVERSITY KEVIN ARCENEAUX, TEMPLE UNIVERSITY MARTIN JOHNSON, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE STACY G. ULBIG, MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY We recently became aware of a computation error in correlations appearing in footnote 9 on page 536 in our recent article in this journal.1 In searching for the cause of these errors, we became aware that Berry, Ringquist, Fording, and Hanson have produced a series of corrections of their ideology measure, which we use for these correlations and other analysis. The corrected versions of their measures are archived at http://webapp. icpsr.umich.edu/cocoon/ICPSR-STUDY/01208.xml. The primary source of the correlation errors we discovered was a file merging error on our part restricted to the dataset designed to produce the correlations between the Berry et al. measure (1998) and the other ideology measures reported in footnote 9. We recomputed the correlation using their revised measure and correcting our merge procedure with the other measures of ideology to produce the following Spearman's correlations: The Berry et al. (1998) measure is more highly correlated with the Erikson, Wright, and Mclver (Wright 2001) measure and our out-of-sample GSS/ANES state ideology timeseries than we originally reported in our footnote 9. We gratefully acknowledge Evan Ringquist for correspondence that led us to reconsider the correlations in this footnote and the corrected Berry et al. data. Concerned that the corrected Berry et al. measure could produce fundamentally different results concerning intrastate ideological change (one of our primary interests in the paper), we re-analyzed these data to reconsider hypotheses concerning linear, curvilinear, or cyclic patterns of changes in political ideology at the state level. In revisiting our analysis of Berry, et al, data, we discovered an estimation error which affected coefficients on the original table, but not the inferences we drew from it. We replace Table 3 using the updated BRFH data and correcting our estimation. Reanalysis of the recently updated Berry et al. measure does not change our fundamental points: There is more cross-sectional than longitudinal variation in the three measures of state ideology and researchers should be cautious not to confuse the effects of cross-sectional differences with longitudinal changes. Replicating the ANOVA estimation we discuss in the original paper using the corrected Berry et al. data, we similarly find that 5.76 percent of the variation in their new data is attributable to longitudinal differences while 77.3 percent of the measures variance is attributable to differences among states. A small number of states (California and West Virginia) have seen systematic changes in state-level political ideology identified using all three measures of political ideology. We regret error in our original article but appreciate the opportunity to reconsider our conclusions in light of corrections Berry et al. have made to their measure. The fundamental point of our paper does not change. Updated versions of other tables from the article are available at http:// CORRECTION URL. REFERENCES Berry, William D., Evan J. Ringquist, Richard C. Fording, and Russell L. Hanson. 1998. Measuring Citizen and Government Ideology in the American States, 1960-93. American Journal of Political Science 42: 327-48. Wright, Gerald C. 2001. Zip File of the CBS/New York Times National Polls, Ideology Party Identification, 1977-1998. pbrace@rice.edu DUMMY TEXT A Comment on Correction: Does State Political Ideology Change Over Time? WILLIAM D. BERRY, FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY EVAN J. RINGQUIST, INDIANA UNIVERSITY BLOOMINGTON RICHARD C. FORDING, UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY RUSSELL L. HANSON, INDIANA UNIVERSITY BLOOMINGTON Brace et al. (2004: 537) assert that mass political ideology in the American states is overwhelming[ly] stable, based on their analysis of three longitudinal measures of citizen ideology: Berry et al. …

The last few decades have been marked by the emergence of a number of environmental protection regimes in the international arena. We know little about the effectiveness of these regimes, however, largely because such evaluations face the formidable obstacles of a scarcity of time series data on environmental quality, a complex mix of nonpolicy factors that affect environmental quality, and the fact that participation in nearly all international environmental agreements is voluntary, which means that policy effectiveness must be estimated from self-selected samples. In this article we assess the effects of the 1985 Helsinki Protocol for reducing sulfur dioxide emissions in Europe, paying particularly close attention to the obstacles noted above. We find that while nations ratifying the Helsinki Protocol have experienced significant emission reductions, the protocol itself has had no discernible effect on emissions. We end the article by discussing the implication of these results for the effectiveness of international environmental regimes in general .

Over the past decade activists, academics, and policymakers have devoted a great deal of attention to “environmental equity,” or the notion that sources of potential environmental risk may be concentrated among racial and ethnic minorities and the poor. Despite these efforts, the existence and extent of environmental inequities is still the subject of intense scholarly debate. This manuscript reports the results from a meta-analysis of 49 environmental equity studies. The analysis demonstrates that while there is ubiquitous evidence of environmental inequities based upon race, existing research does not support the contention that similar inequities exist with respect to economic class. © 2005 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management