John W. Raine

Transforming local government: innovation and modernisation

This article is based on research investigating why local authorities innovate and what happens when they do. The authors show how local authorities have responded to the current normative climate for innovation, and explore the interaction between central policy and local action. The article demonstrates the importance of the policy climate set by central government in fostering—or constraining—innovation at a local level.

Beyond Managerialism in Criminal Justice

This article reviews changes which public sector managerialism has imposed upon the criminal justice agencies, especially the courts. It presents both theoretical and empirical evidence to suggest that the relevance of managerialism is now receding as contemporary concerns and conditions are encouraging a focus on new priorities and a post-managerial style of organisation. Finally, it explores the implications for criminal justice and considers the ways in which post-managerialism is likely to develop in that context.

From Police Authorities to Police and Crime Commissioners

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to reflect on the opportunities and challenges provided by the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC), and particularly the prospects for enhanced public accountability of policing as a result. It considers how the new accountability framework might work in practice and in comparison with the existing arrangements of Police Authorities and highlights the key accountability relationships on which success is likely to depend.Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws on a range of published research on public accountability and applies the key ideas to the particular context of police governance and accountability.Findings – While the plans for directly elected PCCs have proved controversial, the overall view is that the new approach to police governance deserves its chance because it seems to offer at least some potential for stronger public accountability. Much depends on the three key accountability relationships and probably it will take some time f...

New public management and criminal justice

This article explores the main impacts on criminal justice, especially on the courts, of the managerialist strategies that have been applied across the public sector in the past decade. Some of the special conditions and circumstances of criminal justice are examined, as are the effects on the courts of the curbing of staff autonomy, of organizational autonomy and the push for greater efficiency. The authors conclude by arguing for a more mature form of public management in criminal justice.

Budgetary Models, Motivation and Engagement in Financial Collaborations

Abstract This article focuses on the financial aspects of collaborative working between public authorities and other private and voluntary sector organizations. Drawing on research on five English case studies involving local authorities, it considers the extent to which decisions to collaborate and modes of working together are shaped and mediated by financial considerations. In particular, the research highlights differences in ‘budgetary form’ (pooled or aligned), individual partner ‘motivation’ (selfless/altruistic or self-interested) and ‘level of engagement’ (active commitment or passive involvement) as key variables that help to understand how and why some financial collaborations are more successful than others.

Managerialism and beyond: the case of criminal justice

Focuses on criminal justice, and especially on the courts, as a case study to illustrate some of the main changes which public sector managerialism has imposed on public sector institutions. Presents both theoretical and empirical evidence to suggest that the relevance of managerialism is now receding as contemporary concerns and conditions are encouraging a focus on new priorities and a post‐managerial style of organization. Finally, considers the ways in which postmanagerialism is likely to develop, again using criminal justice as the case study to illustrate possibilities and their implications for the wider public sector.

Courts, Sentencing and Justice in a Changing Political and Managerial Context

This article examines the main developments over the past quarter of a century concerning courts and the sentencing of offenders. It does so in terms of an analysis of shifting political and managerial perspectives in criminal justice and tracks the twin changes, on the one hand, from post-war consensus on sentencing to the more populist stance of politicians towards the end of the 20th century and, on the other, towards a more managerialist approach in reorganizing and running the courts. A key issue identified here is the steady encroachment by an increasingly influential executive on judicial independence and the article concludes by considering prospects for the future in this regard.

Modernizing Courts or Courting Modernization

The article reviews the way in which the government-led public service modernisation agenda is affecting courts in England and Wales. The pros and cons associated with each of seven tenets of modernisation are explored and the article then argues for a modernisation programme for the courts that better reflects their distinctive circumstances and conditions, and in particular their independent status under the doctrine of the separation of powers.

Modernising courts or courting modernisation

The UK Government’s’ “modernisation” programme has impacted and will continue to impact on the Law courts and judiciary procedures. Explores these impacts in seven areas: judicial independence; quality of service; cost‐effectiveness; democracy; efficiency; speed; and government as the driver.

The Local Regulatory State: A Case of Double Standards?

Two starkly contrasting strategies are discernible in the way local authorities currently approach and go about their regulatory and enforcement responsibilities. On the one hand, a “deterrence” strategy of “pursue and punish” is robustly pursued in many local areas in relation to individuals who infringe and contravene local regulations, notably in relation to “street scene” issues of littering, waste/recycling and materials sorting/separation, smoking in public places, parking, cycling on pavements, feeding pigeons, and so on, while, on the other, a much more positive “compliance” strategy of “counsel and conduce” is widely promoted and pursued in relation to the regulation of standards in local businesses, for example, in relation to public and environmental health/hygiene, health and safety in the workplace, animal welfare, and licensing of premises. Why do local authorities operate with such apparent double standards? Why do comparatively minor infringements by local citizens so frequently result in the summary imposition of fixed penalties (which can be quite punitive for those on low incomes) while at the same time local businesses are mostly treated to a regulatory culture which is much more sympathetic and supportive in promoting compliance with the rules? This article draws on research conducted in different local regulatory settings which illustrates the two contrasting regimes in practice. It presents five propositions which help us to understand and explain the apparent double standards and it concludes by considering the steps that might be taken to ensure a more equitable and consistent local regulatory framework for the future.