Publication Type: Paper/Poster Proposal
Abstract: Western North Carolina is home to the Great Smokies and extensive mountain forestland. The region is also in the pathway of industrial air pollution from the Tennessee Valley and the Ohio River Valley. The present research explores variables that predict regional residents’ beliefs about the quality of their air. Do respondents believe the manifest visual impression, which is a clean and undeveloped landscape, or are they aware of the realities of significant air quality problems in the community? 439 respondents were surveyed and asked to provide an estimation of the number of air quality days rated as code yellow or worse in the last year. This open-ended count estimation produced a skewed distribution, as estimates are bounded by zero but unbounded above. A form of non-linear regression modeling known as Poisson Regression was employed, which accounts for this non-normal count estimation data. All variables included in the analysis were demonstrated to be significant predictors of beliefs about regional air quality, including basic demographic variables and both television and newspaper exposure. The media exposure variables allow modeling of beliefs about regional air quality using information processing and cultivation theories. This paper discusses non-linear modeling and its broader application as a valuable tool for enhancing survey research methodology.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: On August 6, 1997, Korean Air Flight 801 crashed in Guam, United States territory, killing 228 passengers and crew. During a 16-day coverage of the air disaster, journalists from the United States and South Korea reported the cause of the crash very differently. Korean journalists framed the cause on a combination of bad weather, faulty navigation devices, and negligence on the part of the Guam air traffic controllers but American journalists highlighted pilot error as the most probable cause. The comparative textual analysis of the news stories in the New York Times and NBC Nightly News of the United States, and JoongAng Ilbo and KBS News at 9 of South Korea, as well as depth interviews with the journalists who covered the crash, traces the divergent reporting to national interest, dissimilar interpretations of information from news sources, and preconceived personal biases held by these journalists. Through different news frames, they constructed different social realities of the same air disaster.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: “Clusters” and “learning regions” are high on most national agendas for creating economic growth and helping disadvantaged regions catch up. The role of the public sector is often that of an “anima-teur”, supporting “innovation systems” by arranging favorable institutions and other background conditions. In Sweden new regional partnerships were set up to coordinate policies and make the welfare state more supportive of the needs of businesses, inspired by the European union structural funds. To some extent these policies go against the Swedish tradition of a unified welfare state op-erating independently of business interests. Furthermore, the aim is that the partnerships should be “learning systems”, i.e. that they should guide and control their activities through an elaborate set of evaluations, creating a system of “self-regulation” for economic growth.

The paper is based on a study of how far the partnerships have implemented the new policy. Its em-phasis is on describing and explaining differences among the regions. The evaluations that have been commissioned by the 21 regional partnerships give evidence of how well the partnerships function and where tensions reside. The most creative and challenging evaluations have been com-missioned in regions where regional actors have agendas of their own, i.e. where the national policy of “devolution” fits with regional ambitions. Only one regional partnership has attempted to keep track of economic indicators and use these to adapt their strategies.

The study is relevant from several perspectives, e.g. the reform of the welfare state, adoption of EU-policies by member states, implementation of new governance structures, the working of a weak network structure partly in conflict with strong national policy sectors (such as the national labor market board, AMS). It also brings out the contradictions in the national policy, simultaneously wanting “devolution” and still maintaining central control. The regions differ in the level of consen-sus that has developed and the ways that “policy entrepreneurs” can help such consensus develop. Yet, it is doubtful whether even the strongly cooperating regions will make an impact on clusters or innovation systems.

Clusters are supposed to develop as a kind of “learning regions”. The question here is if networks of public and private actors can be a “learning government” to support learning among businesses. Since networks are traditionally seen as a weak form of governance, the expectation of a learning capability seems particularily demanding, especially in a country with few traditions of government being involved with – or even subordinate to – the needs of business.

Publication Type: Proceeding

Publication Type: Proceeding