Population health is shaped not only by global and national processes but equally by decisions taken at the local level. Yet comparatively little is known about why municipal public health policies differ. This study examines how structural conditions, previously found to influence local policymaking, combine with the presence or absence of universal targeting in public health policies across Poland’s 23 largest cities. Using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis and building on the Local Welfare Regimes perspective, the analysis consistently links universal targeting in municipal public health policy to a combination of strong civil society, substantial representation of women in city councils, and the absence of an unhealthy population. As one of the first explicit applications of the LWR theory with fsQCA, the study contributes to debates on universal targeting, confirming that it can be implemented in a range of ways, while simultaneously highlighting the risk of Matthew Effects.

What determines incumbent chief executives’ re-election in local government? Most of the literature focuses on the impact of political or economic factors. Yet, given that incumbents also strive to manage the administrative performance of local government, this is an important oversight. We examine whether and to what extent incumbents’ administrative innovation, as a new administrative factor vis-à-vis conventional political and economic factors, determines incumbents’ re-election. Analyzing 292 incumbents’ re-election and vote shares in the two most recent local government elections in South Korea, we find that both political and administrative factors are significant determinants. While political determinants, such as partisan alignment with the central government and affiliation with major parties, have the largest impact, administrative innovation also has a statistically and substantively significant effect. The implications of our findings are clear: incumbents are held accountable not only for their political attributes but also for their administrative performance in local government.

The topic of this paper is fiscal equalization among municipalities in the four Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Fiscal equalization refers to transfers of financial resources to and between municipalities with the aim of mitigating regional differences in fiscal capacities and spending needs. More specifically, we ask the following research question: How does fiscal equalization impact spatial inequalities? We conduct a comparative empirical analysis of fiscal equalization policies in the Nordic countries. A main contribution is that we construct a granular dataset consisting of all municipalities in the four countries in 2020. We leverage this dataset to analyze inequalities before and after fiscal equalization. Our main finding is that equalization is strongest in Sweden and weakest in Norway, while Denmark and Finland are ranked in the middle.

Authoritarian regimes have long faced governance challenges arising from decentralization, as central governments struggle to control local government behavior due to information barriers. This paper argues that promoting the disclosure of local government information to the public is an effective strategy to alleviate issues associated with decentralization. Using a policy mandating the disclosure of local government information on social governance as a quasi-natural experiment, we examine its impact on a critical governance challenge emerging from decentralization – the decline of county seats. Using China’s county-level panel data (2015–2022) and a difference-in-differences approach, we find that local information disclosure significantly promotes county seat development. Specifically, it increases land allocation for both economic and public service purposes, thereby breaking the vicious cycle between deficient public services and economic stagnation. Heterogeneity analysis indicates that these effects are more pronounced in counties with higher citizen responsiveness and more constrained fiscal capacity.

Policymakers in cities in the United States of America (U.S.) must tailor the right bundle of policies to promote the diffusion of battery electric vehicles (BEVs). We investigate the interplay of (non-)monetary incentives on U.S. state, city and utility-related policy levels. For doing so, we deploy fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) of BEV policies in 16 cities in the U.S. to identify policy configurations that promote BEV uptake. We provide a first-ever study to systematically evaluate BEV policy bundles across different U.S. policy levels. Results indicate two policy configurations: monetary incentives received upon/after BEV purchase in conjunction with (non-)monetary incentives for home charging infrastructure extension in conjunction with recurring monetary incentives by utilities (I); the absence of recurring (non-)monetary incentives at the local level in conjunction with (non-)monetary incentives for home charging infrastructure extension in conjunction with recurring monetary incentives by utilities (II) lead to successful progress in BEV adoption.

A potentially powerful argument for police abolition appeals to root causes of crime. The root causes of crime are (e.g.) poverty and inequality caused by capitalism. By targeting crime at the roots, we can render the police obsolete and abolish them. I argue here that the root cause argument fails. Despite the suggestive metaphor, the fundamental causes of crime are deep and valuable, or in other words not uproot-able. They are essential to us, or we have good reason not to uproot them. To show this, I develop some simple models or recipes for crime inspired by Thomas Hobbes’s model of conflict in the state of nature and by contemporary theories of crime. The models suggest that at best we can manage these causes, and in turn the resulting crime. There is, however, no hope of fundamental reforms that do away with the need for social monitoring and sanctioning, or policing.

The concept of social inclusion meets the criteria of a “magic concept” because it is broadly stretched, normatively attractive, and denies the possibility of conflicting interests and logics. However, when this broad concept is operationalized in policies targeting specific groups it is often reduced in scope by narrowly defined policy designs. This paper asks how do disability policies define and operationalize social inclusion? Drawing from a critical frame analysis of all disability policies at Canada’s provincial and federal levels, six policy frames are identified that encapsulate different meanings of social inclusion for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Canadian policy design. Comparison is facilitated by engaging critiques of inclusion policy from the disability politics literature to help explain emergent trends and areas of divergence in social inclusion framing. This facilitates a discussion of policy design characteristics during the “inclusion era” of Canadian disability policy.

The COVID-19 pandemic presented a window of opportunity for policy change, but was not exploited as such everywhere. Surprisingly, in Switzerland, usually characterized by a stable political landscape and incremental policy changes, an unexpected reform, the Nursing Initiative, was adopted. This paper examines the underlying mechanisms driving this adoption, employing a cross-fertilization of the multiple streams framework with the programmatic action framework and relying on expert interviews. The analysis shows that partial streams coupling began years before the pandemic, facilitated by the strengthening of nursing care professions’ identity into a programmatic group. Switzerland’s direct democracy enabled the opening of an agenda window, allowing the programmatic group to effectively couple their policy with political dynamics in the policy process. Finally, the COVID-19 crisis acted as a decision window, opening from the problem stream and providing momentum for policy action and decision-making.

Health and well-being are fundamental to sustainable development and central to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as they entail coordinated, cross-sectoral policies that systematically and effectively integrate these considerations. This study applies a novel quantitative policy mapping method to Indonesia’s legislation from 1945 to 2024, examining how health and well-being have evolved in the policy discourse amid shifting socio-political contexts. The findings indicate that while few policy documents are specifically dedicated to health and none to well-being, these considerations are consistently embedded across legislation within the national policies. The analysis reveals a partial, often reactive alignment with the SDGs and Health in All Policies. Indonesia’s 2023 Health Law represents a notable step toward prioritizing health, yet gaps remain in strategic planning and implementation. This paper advances policy mapping methodologies and contributes to discussions on integrated, data-driven policy frameworks to support equitable and sustainable public health outcomes.

How does preference disclosure by political principals shape regulatory outcomes downstream? While existing literature approaches this question in terms of principal-agent maneuvers, we argue that how leaders reveal their policy preferences and the effect on regulatory behavior can be understood through the lens of information processing. In-depth interviews with elite actors in China’s film sector indicate that leaders facing elite contestation limit disclosure to stabilize coalition support, whereas leaders free from such contestation often comment directly and expansively on regulatory decisions, while tying their revealed preferences to “big picture” considerations beyond the business of filmmaking. The expanded scope and scale of disclosure following regime consolidation transformed the informational environment for the film sector, prompting regulators to prioritize out-of-domain issues and curtail discretionary action to mitigate political risk. The findings point to the informational determinants of regulatory behavior in comparative settings.