A Failure to Communicate: 9/11 and the Tragedy of the Informational Commons

ABSTRACT

We investigate how networks among service organizations are integrated through a shared participant type of governance. Shared participant governance is a non-brokered type of network coordination where a network is governed by its members without a separate governance entity. We study the integrative capacity of this type of governance by measuring the effect of participation in a shared participant governance on tie formation in networks among service organizations. We analyze three networks of service organizations in three districts of Antwerp, Belgium. In each of these districts, the networks are governed by welfare meetings, defined as a shared participant type of governance. We use exponential random graph models. The results show that a shared participant type of governance has a positive effect on tie formation. We also find that the positive effect on tie formation is dependent on the active participation of centralized actors in the welfare meetings.     

The Democratic Anchorage of Governance Networks

Governance through the negotiated interaction of a plurality of public, semi-public and private actors seems to provide an efficient means for governing our increasingly complex, fragmented and multi-layered societies. However, the big question is whether governance networks also contribute to the democratic governance of society. Governance network theory and post-liberal theories of democracy claim that there are both democratic problems and potentials associated with interactive network governance. In order to be able to assess, and possibly improve, the democratic performance of governance networks, the authors of this article develop and substantiate an analytical model for measuring the democratic anchorage of governance networks in different political constituencies and in an appropriate set of democratic rules and norms. In addition, it is argued that politicians should play a key role in efforts to ensure the democratic anchorage of governance networks.     

Network Structure and Governance Performance: What Makes a Difference?

Comparing and evaluating the performance of governance networks are important tasks for researchers and practitioners of network governance and public administration. Limited by the lack of network data across space and time, the study of network performance and effectiveness at the network level is not on pace with advances in theories and methodologies in network analysis. With a novel methodology to measure clean energy governance networks using hyperlink network analysis across the contiguous United States, this article collects a large sample of self‐organizing policy networks in the same policy domain across geographic locations. This article proposes that governance networks with high overall bridging and bonding social capital perform better. Regression analyses show that network structures have statistically significant effects on governance outcomes. States with high average closeness and average clustering in their governance networks are more likely to have faster clean energy development.     

The effects of boundary spanners on trust and performance of urban governance networks: findings from survey research on urban development projects in the Netherlands

Previous research has extensively analyzed the role, and indicated the importance, of network management for the functioning and performance of public or governance networks. In this article, we focus on the influence of boundary spanning actors in such networks—an aspect less examined in the governance network literature. Boundary spanners are considered to be important for governance network performance. Building on the literature, we expect a mediating role of trust in this relationship. To empirically test these relationships, we conducted survey research (N = 141) among project managers involved in urban governance networks: networks around complex urban projects that include the organizations involved in the governance process (the formulation of policies, decision making, and implementation) in these complex projects. We found a strong positive relationship between the presence of boundary spanners and trust and governance network performance. The results indicate a partially mediating role of trust in this relationship. Furthermore, we found that these boundary spanners originated mainly from private and societal organizations, and less from governmental organizations.     

Networked Governance or Just Networks? Local Governance of the Knowledge Economy in Limerick (Ireland) and Karlskrona (Sweden)

The emergence of networked governance of knowledge activities is portrayed as one component of a more general shift from government to governance. This article suggests that a distinction can be drawn between networks and networked governance and provides some insights into the indicators that might help distinguish networked governance from networks. The distinction is applied empirically to emerging forms of local networks in ICT in Limerick and Karlskrona. Differences between the two regions can be conceptualised with reference to the governance role of local networks in steering, setting directions and influencing behaviour. The article identifies the characteristics of network arrangements that appear to be necessary for governance objectives to be satisfied; these are density, breadth and association with values such as trust, mutuality and shared identity. The article shows that there is a need to approach generalised theories of emerging models of governance with sensitivity to cross-regional variations around these characteristics. Claims regarding the emergence of new forms of governance in local spaces may be exaggerated if all types of network arrangements are taken as evidence of a transformation from government to governance.     

Democratic Governance: Systems and Radical Perspectives

How might we think about democratic governance? This paper distinguishes between system governance and radical democracy. System governance borrows the language of radical democracy while missing its spirit. It advocates increased participation through networks because new institutionalists suggest networks are an efficient means of service delivery. It advocates increased consultation to build consensus because communitarians suggest consensus is needed for effective political institutions. System governance is, then, a top‐down discourse based on the alleged expertise of social scientists. Radical democrats concentrate instead on the self‐government of citizens. Instead of the incorporation of established groups in networks, they promote a pluralism within which aspects of governance are handed over to associations in civil society. And instead of consultation prior to decision making, they promote a dialogue in which citizens play an active role in making and implementing public policy.     

China’s “Radicalism at the Center”: Regime Legitimation through Climate Politics and Climate Governance

The article examines whether there is reciprocity between the legitimating effects of China’s regime at home and abroad and how global governance and legitimacy interact in the case of China. This is done through an analysis of Chinese climate politics and China’s engagement in international climate negotiations and governance, especially its behavior during and after the Copenhagen Climate Summit in December 2009 and the Chinese regime’s efforts to legitimate this behavior. While China’s role in international climate governance was disputed at the Copenhagen Summit, China contributed constructively to brokering a deal with significant implications for a new climate governance architecture suiting China’s preferences and being aligned with China’s core interests. China defended the procedural logic of the current global climate governance framework and managed to contain institutional change. Based on Anthony Giddens’ proposition about “radicalism at the centre”, it is argued that China’s national and international discourse on and actions associated with climate change and the international negotiations about the new climate governance architecture seem to be able to reinforce each other and may well have a mutual legitimacy augmenting effect for the ‘radicals at the centre’ of the Chinese regime, provided that they ensure consequential logic through targeted reduction of GHG emissions and a “green transformation” of the economy.     

Which Networks Matter in Education Governance? A Reply to Ball's 'New Philanthropy, New Networks and New Governance in Education'

Stephen Ball's recent article offers an intriguing perspective on the education policy process by engaging with the political science literature on policy networks and governance. Ball opens up the possibility of a fruitful dialogue between political scientists and education researchers by introducing some challenging interpretations of recent developments in the governance of education. In this reply, I suggest that a sustained focus on understanding power in the governance process could help to build on Ball's work. I argue that understanding power is crucial to deciding which networks matter and to building explanations of the effects of networks on policy outcomes. Without a focus on power, I claim, policy studies risk conflating the existence of networks with the existence of network governance.     

Digital diasporas and governance in semi‐authoritarian states: the case of the Egyptian Copts

This article explores the potential role of diasporas and information technology (IT) in fostering good governance in semi‐authoritarian states. Following a review of the literature on good governance and information technology, the case of the Egyptian Copt community and its diaspora is explored, focusing on the activities of the U.S. Copt Association. It is argued that, whether or not it is an explicit objective, the U.S. Copt Association is supporting improved and more democratic governance in Egypt. The case confirms that heterogeneous networks of communication and people can promote good governance, even for the socially excluded and disempowered in a weakly penetrated state. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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

Abstract. 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.     

Regulatory relationships across levels of multilevel governance systems: From collaboration to competition

The European Union and the United States are paradigmatic examples of multilevel governance systems that are also regulatory states. In both settings, informal networks of regulators preceded and existed alongside supranational (federal) regulatory agencies. The literature understood their rationale as preparatory to the creation of higher level agencies. This approach, however, cannot explain why informal regulatory networks still exist, years after the establishment of higher level agencies. What explains the persistence of informal regulatory networks? The argument of this article is that in multilevel governance systems, the relationship between regulatory networks and the supranational level of governance is coevolutionary and embodies struggles for autonomy and authority: as the multilevel governance system consolidates, the character of this relationship evolves from collaborative to competitive. The argument relies on a comparative historical analysis of two voluntary networks of energy regulators from the European Union and the United States, based on 27 interviews and archival research.     

The parable of the poisoned pork: Network governance and the 2008 Irish pork dioxin contamination

The 2008 contamination of Irish pork with dioxins was one of the most significant recent food safety incidents in the European Union (EU). While the contamination posed no real risk to public health, it tested the efficacy of EU food safety regulation and governance which has been considerably overhauled in the past decade. The exchange of risk information through networks of regulators is an important element of the EU food safety risk management framework. Networks are a much‐lauded form of new governance, though they are not without their problems. In this paper, we address the question of why governance networks can fail. We examine this issues using the case study of the 2008 Irish dioxin contamination and explore the reason for the failure to make more substantial use of networks in the governance of that incident. We hypothesize that the reason for such failure may be found in three inherent tensions which exist in the design and management of networks, namely flexibility/stability, inclusiveness/efficiency, and internal/external legitimacy. The paper concludes that by ensuring the external legitimacy of the EU's Rapid Alert System for Feed and Food (RASFF) through increased transparency of communications, the design of RASFF has stifled its internal legitimacy with regard to certain types of important information exchanges.     

Democracy or Good Governance? Globalization,Transnational Capital,and Georgia's Neo-liberal Revolution

Western aid donors merge democracy and good governance in theory and practice. Yet, since the 2003 Rose Revolution, Georgia's governance indicators have soared while its democracy scores have plummeted. The good governance–democracy merger constitutes an attempt by the transnational capitalist class to cultivate consent for its hegemonic project of neo-liberal globalization. This article highlights the personal and institutional networks connecting Georgian elites with the organizations involved in globalizing governance and democracy. It shows how these organizations are dominated by the representatives of transnational capital. Finally, it shows that Georgia, as an undemocratic but effective ‘governance state’, is not an exception.     

On Developing an Inter-Agency Trust Scale for Assessing Governance Networks in the Public Sector

ABSTRACT

This article presents the development and validation of a psychometric scale for assessing public sector inter-agency trust. The instrument is grounded in contemporary trust theory and methodologically adapted from a measure developed for private sector alliances. Tested using four discrete studies of governance networks, each addressing transboundary environmental issues such as climate change and fisheries, the scale exhibits reasonably valid psychometric properties while also enabling visualized analysis of networked trust distributions. Based on this work, we outline further research needs with a view to stimulating greater trust research in governance networks and facilitating more collaborative and innovative policy outcomes in the public sector.     

The immigrant presence in collaborative structures of urban politics

Participation and representation of disadvantaged groups are important, but partly still understudied aspects of democratic politics. The present article looks at the inclusion of migrant representatives in urban governance networks making use of original survey data from 40 large cities in France and Germany. We find that about half of policy-relevant urban actors in both countries and across cities cooperate with migrant associations regularly. This indicates that urban governance networks are furthering the civic and political presence of migrants. Cooperation with migrant associations is more likely when specific representative local institutions (foreigner/integration councils) exist, and is also boosted by the overall density of governance networks in a city. Politicians and local administrators remain central actors in such networks, while social welfare organizations emerge as important interlocutors with migrant associations. The article identifies and discusses differences between the two countries.     

‘If This Was a Normal Situation’: Challenges and Potentials for Deliberative Democratic Peacebuilding in Kosovo's Emerging Governance Networks

The link between public administration and conflict resolution is traditionally understood through the ‘democratic peace’ thesis, which holds that war is less likely in democracies than in non‐democracies. Limited success with post‐conflict democratisation missions has opened space for renewed research on three strands of ‘deeper democracy’: decentralisation, participation and deliberation. This article reports on the study of deliberative democratic practices in emerging governance networks in Prishtina. Through an investigation of three contentious issues in Prishtina's public spaces, research combines documentary sources with field interviews with governance actors to identify factors that enable and constrain the scope for deliberative decision‐making in governance networks. Case studies point to six main influences: ‘securitisation’, trust building, ‘mandate parallelism’, structural patterns of inclusion and exclusion, network structures and the properties of governed public spaces. In addition, two frames are found to be particularly resistant to deliberative engagement: Kosovo's status and ethnic identities. We formulate a tentative conclusion to be further investigated: in contexts where distrust is high, deliberative governance requires a rigid adherence to an overarching reference framework that can create discursive space within which relative deliberation can take place. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The European Commission as a Network Organization

The 1996 Intergovernmental Conference (IGC), Maastricht II,was intended to focus on the effectiveness of the policies andinstitutions of the European Union. It should not be deflectedfrom its primary purpose. The EU has a management deficit thatis at least as important as its democratic deficit. In orderto improve the effectiveness of European governance, the EuropeanCommission should be reinvented as a network organization withthe mission of designing and developing multilevel, intergovernmentalnetworks for managing European Union policies. The reasons forredefining the role of the EC is that European integration ison a pluralistic trajectory of federation among nations ratherthan amalgamation into a European federal state. The effectivenessof this mode of integration depends on building and strengtheninginterorganizational networks. The task of the Commission, asa network organization, is to strengthen collaborative advantage—theorganizational capacities to manage interdependence—ratherthan seek to impose central control. Acting as a network organizationrequires three-core competency for: (1) constructing regimes;(2) designing administrative partnerships; and (3) developingcoordination capacities.     

What about the politics? Sustainable development,transition management,and long term energy transitions

This article is concerned with governance of long term socio-technical transitions required to orient development trajectories of advanced industrial counties along more sustainable lines. It discusses the contribution that ‘transition management’ can make to such processes, emphasizes the irreducibly political character of governance for sustainable development, and suggests that the long-term transformation of energy systems will prove to be a messy, conflictual, and highly disjointed process.     

公共政策研究的新进展

近年来,公共政策研究正变得越来越多样化,出现了大量方法和理论,也表现为这些研究分散在各种特定领域的政策中。国家概念是政策理论的中心,但要将国家理论应用于政策研究却不容易“。阶段”方法是政策研究中长期以来占主导地位的研究方法之一,但它只是一种初级方法。新制度主义方法将政策制定过程推向了一种重要的比较分析方式,为解释政策的异同提供了制度解释维度,但它太笼统,考虑范围过于宽泛。而新制度主义者经常选择特定政策领域或部门进行分析,这是一个重要进展,因为政策制定是在特定部门或领域中进行的,仅仅集中关注国家及其行政、立法、司法机构是不够的。政策网络方法体现了研究者对于政策制定中国家与社会组织之间更普遍、更早的兴趣,但它除了描述外并不能帮助我们在理论发展中走得更远。理性方法是一个很有用的方法,当然它不能把理性选择作为对决策的惟一解释。在合作模式中,国家及其各个层次不再被看作合作的惟一机制,它表明市场和网络作为合作的另一种机制或原则正越来越受到重视。而时下十分流行的治理理论并没有形成真正行之有效的手段和方法,它可能仅仅是一个时髦词汇。如果把治理的要点放在使国家、市民社会、市场、网络这些不同工具和机制的互相协作上,治理就会成为一个有创造性的和深刻的分析方法。     

Escaping the International Governance Dilemma? Incorporated Transgovernmental Networks in the European Union

This article investigates the role of transgovernmental networks of national regulators in addressing collective action problems endemic to international cooperation. In contrast to recent work on transgovernmental actors, which emphasizes such networks as alternatives to more traditional international institutions, we examine the synergistic interaction between the two. Building on the broader premise that patterns of “dual delegation” above and below the nation‐state enhance the coordinating role of networks of national agencies in two‐level international governance, the article examines the formal incorporation of transgovernmental networks into European Union (EU) policymaking. The focus on authoritative rule‐making adds a crucial dimension to the landscape of EU governance innovations while connecting to the broader study of transgovernmental networks in international governance. The article develops an analytical framework that maps these incorporated networks across different sectors in terms of function, emergence, and effectiveness. Two case studies of data privacy and energy market regulation are presented to apply and illustrate the insights of this mapping.