DEMOCRATIC MECHANISMS

We introduce democratic mechanisms as a set of rules that must obey liberal democracy's fundamental principles of equal voting and agenda rights. We show that an appropriate combination of three rules may yield efficient provision of public projects: first, flexible and double majority rules, where the size of the majority depends on the proposal, and taxed and non‐taxed individuals need to support the proposal; second, flexible agenda costs, where the agenda‐setter has to pay a certain amount of money if his proposal does not generate enough supporting votes; third, a ban on subsidies. We highlight that universal equal treatment with regard to taxation is undesirable. Finally, we illustrate how simple constitutions involving fixed super majority rules yield socially desirable outcomes if the agenda‐setter is benevolent. (JEL: D62, D72, H40)     

Child and Youth Coaching in families experiencing complex and multiple problems: A longitudinal evaluation study

Studies investigating services for families experiencing complex and multiple problems have emphasized the need for more child-centred support. The aim of this longitudinal study was to investigate whether providing child-centred services (Child and Youth Coaching) combined with family-focused services (Ten for the Future) is effective for children growing up in families experiencing complex and multiple problems. Children's psychosocial skills, emotional and behavioural problems, and the quality of their pedagogical environment were measured at baseline, 6 months and 12 months. Parent and coach reports of children indicated for Child and Youth Coaching (n = 57) and nonindicated children (n = 18) were analysed using repeated measures multilevel models. Both parents and coaches reported improved psychosocial skills of children, but changes were only significant for coach reports. In both reports, no significant decrease in emotional and behavioural problems was observed for both indicated and nonindicated children. Many children still experienced considerable problems at case closure. Furthermore, no significant improvement in quality of the pedagogical environment was observed in both groups. Given the limitations in this study, more research is needed to identify whether these findings can be replicated and attributed to the Child and Youth Coaching and Ten for the Future programmes.