Commissioning Economic Equality? Lessons from Scotland

Q3 Social Sciences
Rosalind Dixon, J. Lavery
{"title":"Commissioning Economic Equality? Lessons from Scotland","authors":"Rosalind Dixon, J. Lavery","doi":"10.1177/0067205X231187976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Scottish Poverty and Inequality Commission (hereafter ‘the Commission’) is a relatively new fourth branch institution with responsibility for addressing both poverty and inequality in Scotland. Nonetheless, it has made important, if modest and incremental, inroads in achieving these objectives, by encouraging the collection and use by government of relevant data in policy-formation; and the expansion and acceleration in the roll-out of important substantive policies focused on alleviating child poverty. The question this raises is what underpins this institutional success. The article draws attention to three key factors: the Commission’s distinctive combination of independence and a collaborative approach to policymaking, supported by a ‘triangular’ relationship between the government, Commission and civil society; its expertise and perceived legitimacy; and the unique policy context presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. These factors, it suggests, also offer useful lessons for constitutional and institutional designers elsewhere — about both the promise and contingency and four branch solutions to problems of economic exclusion and disadvantage.","PeriodicalId":37273,"journal":{"name":"Federal Law Review","volume":"51 1","pages":"315 - 332"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Federal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0067205X231187976","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Scottish Poverty and Inequality Commission (hereafter ‘the Commission’) is a relatively new fourth branch institution with responsibility for addressing both poverty and inequality in Scotland. Nonetheless, it has made important, if modest and incremental, inroads in achieving these objectives, by encouraging the collection and use by government of relevant data in policy-formation; and the expansion and acceleration in the roll-out of important substantive policies focused on alleviating child poverty. The question this raises is what underpins this institutional success. The article draws attention to three key factors: the Commission’s distinctive combination of independence and a collaborative approach to policymaking, supported by a ‘triangular’ relationship between the government, Commission and civil society; its expertise and perceived legitimacy; and the unique policy context presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. These factors, it suggests, also offer useful lessons for constitutional and institutional designers elsewhere — about both the promise and contingency and four branch solutions to problems of economic exclusion and disadvantage.
委托经济平等?苏格兰的教训
苏格兰贫困和不平等委员会(以下简称“委员会”)是一个相对较新的第四分支机构,负责解决苏格兰的贫困和不平等问题。尽管如此,它通过鼓励政府收集和使用政策制定方面的有关数据,在实现这些目标方面取得了重要的进展,尽管是适度和渐进的进展;扩大和加速推出以减轻儿童贫困为重点的重要实质性政策。由此引发的问题是,是什么支撑着这种体制上的成功。本文提请注意三个关键因素:委员会独特的独立性和协作决策方法的组合,由政府、委员会和民间社会之间的“三角”关系支持;它的专业知识和公认的合法性;以及2019冠状病毒病大流行带来的独特政策背景。报告认为,这些因素也为其他地方的宪法和制度设计者提供了有益的经验——既涉及前景,也涉及偶然性,以及针对经济排斥和经济劣势问题的四种分支解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Federal Law Review
Federal Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信