			Home About us Contact

Governance Network (governance + network)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Humanities and Social Sciences	60%

Selected Abstracts

DEMOCRACY AND GOVERNANCE NETWORKS: COMPATIBLE OR NOT?

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, Issue 3 2007
ERIK-HANS KLIJN
This paper investigates the relationship between representative democracy and governance networks at a theoretical level. It does so by offering four conjectures and their implications for theory and practice. The incompatibility conjectures rests on the primacy of politics and sees governance networks as a threat. The complementarity conjecture presents governance networks as a means of enabling greater participation in the policy process and sensitivity in programme implementation. The transitional conjecture posits a wider evolution of governance forms towards network relationships. The instrumental conjecture views governance networks as a powerful means through which dominant interests can achieve their goals. Illustrative implications for theory and practice are identified, in relation to power in the policy process, the public interest, and the role of public managers. The heuristic potential of the conjectures is demonstrated through the identification of an outline research agenda. [source]

Social Citizenship in the European Union: Nested Membership

JCMS: JOURNAL OF COMMON MARKET STUDIES, Issue 1 2001
Thomas Faist
The ,European social dimension' offers a strategic entry point for analysing the development of citizenship in the European Union (EU). The first part of this contribution discusses the functions of social citizenship in this emerging multi-level governance network. Second, the analysis deals with two prominent and stylized paradigms that have sought to grasp the new multiple-level quality of social citizenship in the EU: residual and post-national concepts of membership in liberal democracies and advanced welfare states. Although each of these approaches captures selected elements of social citizenship, they are unable to deal with rights and duties in multiple governance levels in a satisfactory way. Therefore, the discussion moves to an alternative concept,nested citizenship. This means that European citizenship is nested in various sites: regional, state and supra-state forms of citizenship function in complementary ways,while the associated norms, rules and institutions are subject to constant revision and further development on all governance levels. Third, the analysis shows that the concept of nested citizenship can help to overcome the fruitless dichotomy of Euro-optimism and Euro-pessimism concerning social policy and citizenship. This discussion suggests a conception of European social citizenship as a common project, evolving towards common present- and future-oriented understandings of substantial rights and democratic principles in the EU. [source]

New Labour's Third Way: pragmatism and governance

BRITISH JOURNAL OF POLITICS & INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, Issue 3 2000
Michael Temple
The article critically examines New Labour's development of the concept of the Third Way. Despite the apparent centrality of ,social democracy' to the Third Way, it is proposed that a more pragmatic approach dominates, in that outputs and not ideology are driving the new agenda of governance under New Labour. This is seen to have its roots in the new ways of working the party has embraced in local governance, where public?,private partnerships have become the norm and a new ethos of public service has emerged. In contrast with the top-down approach to setting output targets favoured by Tony Blair, the Third Way offers the possibility of a more experimental, pragmatic and decentralised decision-making process,and the local governance network (with elected local councils as pivotal and legitimising actors) is presented as the ideal agent to deliver this. [source]

Cooperative forms of governance: Problems of democratic accountability in complex environments

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL RESEARCH, Issue 4 2003
YANNIS PAPADOPOULOS
Various schools of research in public policy (the literature on ,governance' and its continental counterparts) are converging to focus on the growth of policy styles based on cooperation and partnership in networks, instead of on vertical control by the state. This article focuses on issues of democratic accountability and responsiveness with these governance arrangements. It argues that until recently the legitimacy of governance networks was not at the forefront of theoretical developments, even though the ,democratic deficit' of governance is problematic both for normative and for pragmatic reasons. There is now increased sensitivity to this problem, but the remedies presented in the literature are unsatisfactory, and critiques of governance presuppose a somewhat idealised image of representative democracy in terms of accountability or responsiveness of decision-makers. They also fail to offer adequate solutions to some of the central legitimacy problems of policy-making in complex societies. [source]