New Governance (new + governance)

Distribution by Scientific Domains


Selected Abstracts


New Governance, Compliance, and Principles-Based Securities Regulation

AMERICAN BUSINESS LAW JOURNAL, Issue 1 2008
Cristie L. Ford
First page of article [source]


"New Governance" and Associative Pluralism: The Case of Drug Policy in Swiss Cities

POLICY STUDIES JOURNAL, Issue 4 2003
Sonja Wälti
Throughout the 1990s, hierarchical administrative governance structures have been replaced by self-governing networks for various motives, one of which is to improve the authenticity and democratic quality of public decisions. Thus, "new governance" has been praised for its propensity to provide a plurality of civil society organizations with access to the decision process. This article explores these claims based on the case of drug policy in Swiss cities. We show that self-governing networks indeed seem to have increased the involvement of civil society organizations in the policy process. However, we also find evidence that self-governing networks may in the longer run induce state control over civil society organizations, thus ultimately reducing associative pluralism. They do so either by imposing a policy paradigm or by excluding actors who do not comply with the dominant paradigm from the networks. We conclude by arguing that self-organizing networks should not be dismissed, given that former hierarchical bureaucratic approaches to drug-related problems have failed even worse. Rather, their long-term effects should be subject to further examination aimed at developing adequate responses to their shortcomings. [source]


Governing Without Law or Governing Without Government?

EUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 2 2009
New-ish Governance, the Legitimacy of the EU
The way the EU is governed and the way such governance is perceived contributes centrally to the legitimacy of the European enterprise. This legitimacy underpins both the acceptance and the effects of EU activity. Legitimacy is a product of the way in which decisions are taken, and the nature and quality of such decisions. Pressures created by concerns about both forms of legitimacy affecting EU decision making partially explain the turn in legal scholarship away from the more traditional preoccupation with the analysis of legislative instruments and case-law, towards a more broadly based conception of governance which involves the examination of a more diverse range of processes and instruments. This article offers an analysis of the parameters of newness in governance. The overall argument is that some of the more innovative governance modes are not so new, whilst more recent and celebrated modes, although displaying elements of newness, are, perhaps, not that innovative. The focus of the new governance in the EU is largely on governing without law, rather than the more radical governing without government; hence the suggestion that we are experiencing only ,new-ish governance'. The article asks whether a limited conception of new governance is inevitable given the legitimacy constraints within which the EU operates, or whether the potential for developing a broader conception of governance, through wider participation and involvement of non-governmental governing capacities, might bolster legitimacy through both better processes and better outcomes. [source]


New Regulatory Approaches in ,Greening' EU Policies

EUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 1 2002
Andrea Lenschow
European environmental policy has been long characterised by traditional regulatory policy approaches. In recent years, however, the EU has begun experimenting with new forms of governance. In particular, the task of environmental policy integration (EPI) into sectoral policies has invited more flexible and participatory regulatory forms, emphasising at the same time the role of procedural guidance. This article traces the history of the EPI principle and links its effectiveness to specific governance characteristics. It argues that effective EPI is dependent on a combination of political leadership and public participation. While both terms appear in the EU's vocabulary on sustainable development and new governance, the EU is only slowly finding the appropriate forms to put them into practice. Coming from a tradition of governance by political élites, EU policy-makers are still relying too naïvely on the mobilisation capabilities of societal groups and on the power of ,good ideas'. [source]


Implementation from Above: The Ecology of Power in Sweden's Environmental Governance

GOVERNANCE, Issue 3 2001
Lennart J. Lundqvist
This paper seeks to assess the tenability of Rhodes' view of the "new governance" as "governing without government," as well as the validity of Pierre and Peters' assertions that the state is still at the center of structures and processes of governance. The case used for analysis is Sweden's ecological modernization and the implementation of Local Investment Programs for Sustainable Development. This case provides a crucial test of the contradictory propositions of Rhodes and Pierre and Peters. Contrary to Rhodes' assertions, central government held the initiative in the process of implementing Sweden's ecological modernization. In line with the arrguments of Pierre and Peters central government created new structures and processes of governance to keep its initiative over constitutionally independent expert agencies and municipal governments,exactly those actors that, in Rhodes' view, could make central governmental steering well nigh impossible. As the paper illustrates, what government gains in direct control over the process, it may well lose in terms of the end results. The case of "new governance" analyzed here thus directs attention to the critical interplay between structure, process, and end results, and to government's role in governance. [source]


Regulatory Disclosure of Offending Companies in the Dutch Financial Market: Consumer Protection or Enforcement Publicity?

LAW & POLICY, Issue 4 2010
JUDITH VAN ERP
Regulatory disclosure of names of offending companies is increasingly popular as an alternative to traditional command and control regulation. The goals and intended effects of disclosure are not always clear, however. Do regulators wish to increase their transparency, or do they intend to name and shame? This article aims to contribute to a better understanding of the underlying working mechanism of regulatory disclosure of offenders' names through a case study of the Dutch Authority for Financial Markets' disclosure policy. It distinguishes two types of disclosure strategies: consumer oriented and firm oriented. The case study shows that although informing consumers was the primary purpose of disclosure as intended by the Dutch legislature, the purpose in practice has shifted to informing companies about the regulators' enforcement policy. The nature of the disclosed information makes it unlikely that disclosure adequately prevents financial risk taking by consumers. Instead of empowering consumers, disclosure has been incorporated in a traditional deterrence logic, turning out not to be an example of new governance but instead a modern version of command and control enforcement publicity. [source]


"New Governance" and Associative Pluralism: The Case of Drug Policy in Swiss Cities

POLICY STUDIES JOURNAL, Issue 4 2003
Sonja Wälti
Throughout the 1990s, hierarchical administrative governance structures have been replaced by self-governing networks for various motives, one of which is to improve the authenticity and democratic quality of public decisions. Thus, "new governance" has been praised for its propensity to provide a plurality of civil society organizations with access to the decision process. This article explores these claims based on the case of drug policy in Swiss cities. We show that self-governing networks indeed seem to have increased the involvement of civil society organizations in the policy process. However, we also find evidence that self-governing networks may in the longer run induce state control over civil society organizations, thus ultimately reducing associative pluralism. They do so either by imposing a policy paradigm or by excluding actors who do not comply with the dominant paradigm from the networks. We conclude by arguing that self-organizing networks should not be dismissed, given that former hierarchical bureaucratic approaches to drug-related problems have failed even worse. Rather, their long-term effects should be subject to further examination aimed at developing adequate responses to their shortcomings. [source]