Kooperative Politikberatung. Ein neues Beziehungsgeflecht zwischen Politik und Politikberatung?

The institutional and societal framework of policy-advice-giving is changing and so are the worlds of political consultants and policy experts in Germany and other advanced democracies. While there are several new developments which are challenging established forms of policy-advice and political consulting, the present article focuses its attention on the impact of new governance structures on policy advice and political consulting. The main argument of the article is that when government becomes governance and the number of actors and venues involved in the decision-making process increase, a new cooperative and discursive mode of policy-advice giving complements or sometimes even replaces more established forms of policy-advice-giving. We review the evolution of the debate about the role of policy-advice-giving from different perspectives, and particularly explore possible consequences of the changing nature of the state as well as of newly emerging modes of cooperative policy-advice and political consulting — both for empirical as well as conceptual research in the field. Through this, we attempt to generate a debate on the future direction of different modes of policy-advice and political consulting within a changing framework of governance structures in advanced democracies.     

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.     

Boards of trustees,agency problems,and university output

The analysis and empirical evidence in this paper indicate that the structure of the boards of trustees of state universities influences the provision of higher education. The structure of the boards is important because it helps to define the constraints on the board members and on the internal agents of the universities. An implication of this study is that public universities can be made to function more like private ones by placing them under separate governing boards.These results are especially interesting when examining the trends regarding board structures. The trend over this century across the states has been toward increasing the number of universities under the jurisdiction of a single board. This analysis suggests that the trend is a response to political pressure from educators, not from taxpayers and consumers of higher education.     

现代大学治理结构：真实命题及中国语境

大学治理结构的真实命题包括多重涵义:回应"冲突和多元利益"的治理需要,建构能够体现利益相关者组织属性和委托代理关系特点的决策权结构;大学自身不是完整意义上的办学利益主体,其"组织剩余"是由社会利益来决定的公共价值,每一种利益相关者都不应单独地对大学行使控制权;大学治理结构是比管理结构更为基础的制度结构,其根本目的是建立大学决策过程与社会权利主体的合理联系,实现社会价值平衡。大学治理结构的中国语境是:办学体制的变化为政府与高校建立具有委托代理性质的契约关系提供了法律依据和操作空间;管理体制的变化使大学决策责任骤然加重、决策权处于高度集中状态,风险也随之出现;办学经费筹资结构的变化表明大学的社会基础日益广泛化,其利益相关者组织的属性正从模糊走向清晰。我国大学已跨越前治理时期,但向治理阶段迈进必须依靠上层政治权威的推动,才可能突破"制度锁定状态",破解历史性难题。     

Private Actors and the State: Internationalization and Changing Patterns of Governance

This article investigates the implications of political and economic internationalization on patterns of governance from a statecentric perspective. The actual patterns of governance in internationalized environments can be related to the respective governance capacity of public and private actors, which hinges in turn on the strategic constellation underlying the provision of a public good. The specific strategic constellation varies in three dimensions: the congruence between the scope of the underlying problem and the organizational structures of the related actors, the type of problem, and the institutional context, all of which involve a number of factors. With this concept in mind, we identify four ideal-typed patterns of governance, enabled by different configurations of public and private capacities to formally or factually influence in various ways the social, economic, and political processes by which certain goods are provided.     

The governance of public affairs

• Government and governance are frequently treated as synonyms. Governing is what governments do in formulating and implementing policies. A burgeoning political science literature uses the term governance in a different way to describe the growing tendency of governments to govern in partnership with a range of non‐state actors and, as a purported consequence, the marginalization of governments within policy‐making processes. Here, some writers go so far as to talk about ‘governance without government’. In a forthcoming book, Rethinking Governance: Bringing the State Back In, Stephen Bell and I argue that this dominant ‘society‐centred’ perspective on governance is flawed. In our view whilst governments are indeed now more likely to forge relationships with a larger range of non‐state actors, they nevertheless remain the central players in governance arrangements. Indeed we argue that governments have been strengthened through the relationships they have developed. This article reviews some of the extant literature on governance and specifies the basic terms of our ‘state‐centric relational’ approach.

Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Institutionalization of Private Governance: How Business and Nonprofit Organizations Agree on Transnational Rules

This article assesses the recent trend of cooperation among antagonistic private actors that results in the creation and implementation of issue-specific transnational norms and rules and the subsequent shift from public to private forms of governance. Many political scientists agree that authority also exists outside of formal political structures. Private actors increasingly begin to make their own rules and standards that acquire authority beyond the international system. This observation is often referred to as private transnational governance as opposed to public or international governance. Although the concept of private governance gains prominence in academic debates, it is not clear how private governance on the global scale is constructed and maintained or what specific or general conditions are necessary for private governance to emerge. Based on the review of common theoretical propositions, this article develops an integrated model along which the necessary conditions for the emergence of private governance can be assessed and understood. As most research has hitherto focused on institutionalized cooperation between business actors (self-regulation), this article takes a closer look at those transnational systems of rule that result out of the enhanced cooperation between profit and nonprofit actors (coregulation).     

The political nature of brand governance: a discourse analysis approach to a regional brand building process

The present paper takes the empirical phenomenon of place branding as an appropriate point of view to understand the communicative process of brand governance in the realm of the public. The paper explores the modalities through which a brand governance emerges as a negotiated and contested mechanism reproduced through language. By drawing on the analytical approach of interpretative repertoires, the analysis demonstrates that a process of governance can be seen as a ‘text’ in a constant state of negotiation in which the level of involvement in the brand building process can be discursively contested, with language illustrating the ways in which different actors express their positionalities (hegemonic or subalternate). The analysis suggests that this can be seen as a power political process in which politics of space and time are expressed linguistically by the different actors involved in brand governance. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Governing beyond the Centre: A Critique of the Anglo-Governance School

One of the more intriguing theoretical discussions of recent years involves the concept of governance. There is now a substantial body of work concerning the way governance has affected the contribution of central government to the policy process. Possibly the most prominent and influential account of governance theory in British political science is offered by Rod Rhodes. His most recent writings have employed governance theory to explore the institutions, actors and processes of change within the core executive. His 'Anglo-governance' model has emerged as a prevalent and authoritative account of how new methods of governing have emerged in society. Significantly, it is maintained that a distinct shift has taken place in government, from a hierarchical organisation to a fragmented and decentralised entity that is heavily reliant on a range of complex and independent policy networks. There is undoubted evidence that government is a fractured institution that is dependent on state and non-state actors beyond the centre. This paper questions whether such features entail the emergence of a new form of governance. Central government is still highly resourced and has, at its disposal, a range of powers with which to retain influence over public sector agencies. Historical evidence also shows that the British polity has long been decentralised. Thus, it is difficult to see how recent developments have in any way transformed the capacities of the core executive. It seems that alternative ways of conceptualising the institutions, actors and processes of change in government are required. Recent efforts to develop 'organising perspectives', within the intellectual parameters of governance theory, offer a more 'conceptually cautious' treatment of the central state.     

Transaction Costs and the Perceived Effectiveness of Complex Institutional Systems

This article studies factors affecting how policy actors perceive the effectiveness of political institutions involved in complex water governance systems. The ecology of games framework argues that participants are more likely to perceive institutions as effective when the benefits of solving collective action problems outweigh the transaction costs of developing political contracts within these institutions. The authors hypothesize that transaction costs are a function of conflict, type of participation, political knowledge, scientific knowledge, and actor resources. Survey results suggest that the importance of these different sources of transaction costs varies across study sites in the Tampa Bay watershed in Florida, the Sacramento–San Joaquin River delta in California, and the Paraná River delta in Argentina. Based on the observed differences, some initial ideas are sketched about the evolution of complex governance systems from fairly simple and informal rules and networks to well‐established tapestries of many formal institutions.     

The Future of Leadership in Public Universities: Is Shared Leadership the Answer?

Leadership of public universities has come under fire—from scandals, from funding, from students, from every direction. Top‐down leadership of institutions of higher education has been described as a “disease.” Shared governance—a mechanism of faculty representation in the leadership and decision‐making processes—a seeming alternative, has been described as “a recipe for paralysis.” In this article, the authors proffer shared leadership as a potential elixir for leading public institutions of higher learning, unleashing creative potential, focusing on pressing strategic imperatives, and enabling sustainable systems that leverage true talent to maximum effect. It is time to move beyond the moribund myth of top‐down heroic leadership and beyond the bureaucratic, political quagmire of the current state of affairs in shared governance. Is shared leadership the answer?      

The politics of decarbonization and the catalytic impact of subnational climate experiments

The Paris Agreement of 2015 marks a formal shift in global climate change governance from an international legal regime that distributes state commitments to solve a collective action problem to a catalytic mechanism to promote and facilitate transformative pathways to decarbonization. It does so through a system of nationally determined contributions, monitoring and ratcheting up of commitments, and recognition that the practice of climate governance already involved an array of actors and institutions at multiple scales. In this article, we develop a framework that focuses on the politics of decarbonization to explore policy pathways and mechanisms that can disrupt carbon lock-in through these diverse, decentralized responses. It identifies political mechanisms—normalization, capacity building, and coalition building—that contribute to the scaling and entrenchment of discrete decarbonization initiatives within or across jurisdictions, markets, and practices. The role for subnational (municipal, state/provincial) climate governance experiments in this new context is especially profound. Drawing on such cases, we illustrate the framework, demonstrate its utility, and show how its political analysis can provide insight into the relationship between climate governance experiments and the formal global response as well as the broader challenge of decarbonization.     

Foreign aid and the politics of participation in economic policy reform

Research suggests that borrower ‘ownership’ of reforms is highly correlated with the success of reforms in developing countries. One of the most important components of ownership is the nature of public–private relations and consultation with interest groups. Yet participatory reform must overcome several political dilemmas, including problems of credibility, collective action, and distributive (in)justice. The characteristics of reforms also affect the possibilities for participation. Democratic governments interested in making policy reform more participatory and presumably more sustainable can draw on several strategies, including the selective use of incentives and compensation, public education and communications, capacity building in society, institutional mechanisms for consultation, and political sequencing of reforms. These strategies have implications for the foreign aid agencies who often fund reforms. They suggest that donors need to recognize the political rationality behind cross‐payments and spending to maintain important constituencies; that political sustainability may require reform sequences that are out of step with current orthodoxy; that policies ought to create winners before creating losers; that democratic consultation will require much more time in achieving consensus; and that outside actors need to refrain from intervening too directly in the political process by throwing their support behind particular interests. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Politics of Governance in Higher Education: the Case of Quality Assurance

The politics of governance in higher education is dominated by a discourse of quality assurance which assumes the external regulation of academic activity to be the natural state of affairs. This article analyses the ideological origins of that discourse and its resonance with more general trends in the public management of welfare, the nature of the opposition from traditional university values, the stages in the translation of ideological advantage into specific forms of regulation, and the consequent shifts in the balance of power between the major players in higher education. Underlying this analysis is a framework which views the governance of higher education as an arena in which there is a continuing struggle for the control of high status knowledge through the functions of standard setting, evaluation and intervention.     

Book Reviews

Four years after its formal establishment, the European External Action Service (EEAS) remains in a state of complex and overlapping areas of competence. There are interlocking layers of political and administrative governance, where the service has to interact with, and answer to, different national and intergovernmental political masters as well as supranational actors, notably the European Commission and the European Parliament. The formal political decision-making power with regard to the EU’s common foreign and security policy lies with the Council, whilst substantial competences, notably in the field of the European Neighbourhood (ENP) and trade policies, as well as development and cooperation, remain under the control of the European Commission. The EEAS’s autonomy and institutional orientation are both much debated and empirically unexplored. Based on quantitative and qualitative data, this article undertakes a behavioural analysis of EEAS decision-making. Empirical findings suggest that there are competing institutional logics at work among different groups of staff which affect their respective administrative decisional behaviour. Supranational recruits tend to be more community-minded, whereas officials with an intergovernmental background have a propensity to be more member state oriented.     

Shaping the Constitutional Dialogue on Federalism: Canada's Supreme Court as Meta-Political Actor

This article challenges the view that the Supreme Court hasbecome the predominant authority on the constitutional distributionof rights and entitlements among governments in the Canadianfederation. By assuming this position of supremacy, criticscontinue, the Court has usurped key policy functions that belongto political actors, a move that has undermined democratic governancein Canada. Against this view, we argue that the management ofCanada's federal constitutional architecture is a responsibilitythe courts share with key political actors. We describe theCourt's role as meta-political, whereby the Court's federalismjurisprudence supplements rather than subverts the constitutionalrole of political actors. We develop our thesis in relationto two subnational constituencies with a distinctive constitutionalstatus in Canada: the province of Quebec and Aboriginal FirstNations.     

From bureaucratic centralism to self‐regulation: The reform of higher education in Spain

Theories of self‐regulation in higher education claim that autonomous institutions are better able to fulfil their educational and scientific goals. The reforms initiated in Spain in thel970s and which finally crystallised in the Ley de Reforma Universitaria (University Reform Act) in 1983 have taken this path, granting autonomy to the universities and acknowledging that the policy network has been enlarged through the incorporation of new actors (students, junior lecturers, regional political elites), and that this is no longer the exclusive domain of the university professors. However, this article argues that the reforms have not had the expected results insofar as quality is concerned: deregulation has been introduced without establishing the conditions for the institutions to become fully responsible for their decisions, so encouraging the persistence of self‐interested and often anti‐scientific attitudes among many academics.     

Institutionalized Discontent

Examining past experiences of student activism at Berkeley this article suggests that the present storm of political correctness sweeping American universities represents more than just another of the periodic crusades that have disrupted academic life over the years. The current wave of activism is different largely because the ever-present minorities of militant faculty and student activists have gained significant reinforcements in their struggle to transform the culture and mission of higher education. Over the last several decades federal regulations and funds have created an alternative bureaucracy within universities that is devoted, not to the core academic mission of teaching and research, but to improving the social climate of university life. The legitimacy and power of the social climate bureaucracy depend on heightening the perception that academic life involves a dangerous environment, from which students need protection – a service provided through creating safe spaces, helping students to recognize micro-aggressions, training them in sexual assault prevention, conducting sensitivity training for faculty and the like. Devoted to heightening this perception of the university campus as a hostile environment, the climate bureaucracy has become a source of institutionalized discontent.     

Understanding the ABC of University Governance

University governance is complex and contested. In view of the seemingly unceasing rise of commercial values within public universities, this contribution argues the case for a holistic, mission‐related integrated governance approach for the Australian public university sector. The ‘ABC of University Governance’, as proposed for broad‐scope governance within the sector, involves an integrated emphasis on the three key components of governance: academic governance, business governance and corporate governance. Respectively, these components of public university governance are concerned with scholarship, performance and conformance. Placing academic governance first in the ABC of university governance reminds us all of the vital role and importance of scholarship, which should never be downplayed or underestimated in public universities.     

A Cartography of a Global Civil Society Advocacy Alliance: The Case of the Global Call to Action against Poverty

The last few decades have witnessed the emergence of global civil society advocacy networks as major players in global governance. The Global Call to Action against Poverty (GCAP) is one of the recent phenomena in this arena and epitomizes high-level involvement of a multiplicity of actors in GCAP, with various multilateral governance institutions, as well as states. This article analyses the origins of GCAP, motivations for its formation, evolution, and operations, with specific references to its structures and architecture. It argues that alliances are very different from ‘normal’ forms of organizations because they are made up of diverse forms of organizations, coming together voluntarily to achieve a specific purpose and therefore are by their very nature complex, unstable, and difficult to co-ordinate. The result of such, within GCAP, is an organization that is somewhat amorphous and exhibits both aspects of anti-systemic protest (in Polanyian terms) as well as a pacifying force (part of the hegemonic historic block in Gramcsian terms). I argue that the loose nature of global civil society alliances is a positive contributor to mass mobilization but causes frustrations in decision-making and actions. This, in effect, calls for a more bureaucratized and institutionalized architecture, albeit with a potential to alienate some constituencies. A key lesson from GCAP's evolution, structures, and strategies, I posit, is that it is not possible to push through individual positions without compromising so as to accommodate others.