Problems of Democratic Accountability in Network and Multilevel Governance

Abstract:  Most studies converge on the growth of processes of 'multilevel governance' (MLG) in policy making, related to the often combined trends towards supranationalism and regionalism. Such processes are usually analysed under the angle of their efficiency, while their impact on the quality of democracy is neglected. This article first defines the concepts of multilevel governance and accountability, and then identifies the various dimensions of the latter. It further argues that MLG generates novel forms of accountability, but undermines its democratic dimension mainly for the following reasons: the weak visibility of MLG networks, their selective composition and the prevalence of peer over public forms of accountability.     

Social Accountability Audits: Challenging or Defending Democratic Governance?

Current criticisms of the role of audit in society have painted a bleak picture about its use as a regulatory tool, highlighting negative consequences for democratic governance. This paper examines social accountability audits in light of these concerns. Two case studies of social certification systems are examined in detail: Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International (FLO) and Social Accountability International (SAI). These systems are evaluated using the lenses of accountability, ownership, trust, and reflexivity before concluding that social auditing processes, if done well and situated within stakeholder-based institutions such as FLO and SAI, can aid democratic and legitimate governance processes.     

论行政法上的治理责任

随着政府管理向公共治理的转型,传统由行政机关担负的管理责任也开始向多元主体共同承担的治理责任转型,治理责任对行政法治具有重要意义。治理责任是涵盖所有治理主体和整个治理过程的责任,既指向政府责任,又指向扮演公共治理角色的其他主体所应当负有的责任;既包含治理主体应当担负的事后责任,又包含保证治理主体负责的一系列制度工具。治理责任的框架可以从责任承担主体、责任对象、责任承担标准、须负责的事项、程序性要求以及责任产生的结果六个方面展开。     

德国部长问责制的构成及其实现方式

在德国官员问责法律体系中,部长基于其在德国《基本法》中特殊的法律身份,处于宪法位阶的部长问责制监督之下而不受一般公务员法意义上问责制度的制约。与一般官员问责制所表现出的法律责任属性不同,德国《基本法》框架下的部长问责属于政治问责范畴。部长问责制所表现出的特殊性与该制度在德国历史上的发展直接相关,很多具体的问责规定均系继承历史制度的基础上形成。有必要在总结历史发展的基础上对德国部长问责制的构成及其实现方式进行详细梳理。     

网络传播中的公共治理

互联网与通信技术的迅速发展,极大地变革了传播模式,形成了创新性的网络传播。同传统模式的运行要素相比,网络传播吸纳了大量的传播参与者以及信息和资源,整合了更多复杂的传播目标,模糊了传播路径。网络传播引发了对信息权、参与权和发展权的关注,对公共治理提出了更广泛和深入的参与要求。对此,需要赋予网络传播参与者相应的公共治理主体地位,在各主体间构建完善的信息交流平台,加速实现多主体参与公共治理的本土化,强化各主体对公共治理过程的监督。     

网络社会法律治理与技术治理的二元共治

互联网通过虚拟技术使人们实现了一种独特的在线生存的基本样态。它扩大了人们的社会互动范围,改变了人们的交往形式,形成了网络社会独特的时空观、权力观和人际观。中国当下坚持的集权主义、行为主义和国家主权的网络治理逻辑,正在受到技术的严峻挑战。网络技术逐步生成了一种网络自主空间,并形成了一套以技术编码和自治伦理为主的技术治理方式。技术治理方式区别于以国家为核心的法律治理方式,甚至在某些场合对法律治理方式产生制约。人们需要运用法律蕴含的价值和法律治理的有关手段,对技术治理进行有效归化。技术治理水平的提升,又为法律治理手段、边界和治理结构的调整提供动力和可持续的约束力。正确处理法律治理与技术治理之间的关系,形成二元共治结构,是提升中国网络治理水平和能力的前提。     

Accountability in Governance: The Challenge of Implementing the Aarhus Convention in Eastern Europe and Central Asia

The signing of the 1998 UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention) radically extended international law on transparency and accountability in environmental governance. For the countries of Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia (EECCA) that have now ratified, the Convention could prompt profound democratic changes. This article, based on the authors' experiences, analyses changing cultures of governance in EECCA countries. The first so-called pillar of access to information sets in place rights that directly contradict the fundamental secrecy of the former Soviet Union countries. Some officials' reluctance to share environmental information may also be linked to the economic duress of the current transition period, where information may be an official's only asset. The second pillar of public participation also poses difficulties for officials for whom the highest praise is to be considered a professional. In their belief that no one knows better than they do, they are reluctant to spend time and resources to make decision-making transparent and to involve the public. The third pillar of access to justice breaks new ground for post-socialist countries still developing their judicial systems. Though several highly sophisticated NGOs have been successful in using courts, it remains difficult for an ordinary EECCA citizen to bring an environment-related legal action. Changing these attitudes and practices will be a long and troublesome process. The Aarhus Convention will not be truly implemented until openness, transparency and accountability in environmental decision-making become everyday habits.     

Accountable Multilevel Governance by the Open Method of Coordination?

Abstract:  In multilevel governance arrangements policies are coordinated across levels, usually in negotiations or networks of executives and representatives of special interests. Actors committed in such arrangements can hardly be held accountable by parliaments or citizens, and this is one of the main reasons for the democratic deficit of the EU. With the open method of coordination (OMC) the EU introduced a new mode of multilevel governance. The article focuses on the question whether problems of accountability can be solved by this mode. It is argued that the OMC framework includes two types of coordination. Whereas the dominating 'deliberative' mode does not improve accountability, the 'competitive' mode seems to be more promising. It supports transparency, reduces the costs of control for parliaments and stimulates public discussion on policies. However, multilevel coordination by policy competition at the lower levels of government does not work effectively under all conditions, and this therefore has to be carefully investigated.     

The Influence of Prison Staff on Inmate Conditions: A Multilevel Approach to Staff and Inmate Surveys

The current study connects survey data of inmates and correctional staff in the Dutch prison system in order to describe and explain the impact of staff orientation and staff working conditions on perceived prison circumstances of inmates. Importation and deprivation theory are combined to test an integrated model to explain perceived prison conditions. By surveying staff (N = 1750) and inmates (N = 4673) independently within the same period of time and by afterwards pairing the results on the level of the housing unit (N = 173) using multilevel techniques, it is found that inmates′ perceptions of the prison conditions vary considerably between housing units. It is also found that staff’s perceptions of prison conditions show congruency with those of inmates. Another important finding is that in housing units where the orientation of staff towards inmates is relatively supportive, inmates perceive their circumstances as more positive. Conclusions and directions for further research are provided.     

推进公民有序参与 提升执政水平思考

当下,由于公民参与不足导致我国立法民意基础薄弱,公共行政管理水平不高,司法公信力下降。我国公民有序参与不足的原因主要在于,思想观念上缺乏民主的习惯和传统,工作机制上缺乏保障民主制度落实的措施,民主参与的具体措施和群众基础不足。要推进我国公民有序参与和提升执政水平,就必须大力培养民主精神,营建民主文化,加强民主政治机制建设,加强组织领导,确保公民有序参与。     

推进政府治理能力现代化研究

本文以推进国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的总目标为研究背景,阐述了政府治理能力现代化的内涵和特征,分析了推进政府治理能力现代化的作用,探索了推进政府治理能力现代化的主要途径.     

实践《公司治理规则》的法律途径--论修订后的《德国股份法》第161条

自经济合作与发展组织(OECD)制定了《公司治理结构规则》以后,很多国家都相继制定了自己的公司治理规则。德国不仅制定了《公司治理规则》,而且通过对《股份法》的修订,从法律的角度强化上市公司对公司治理规则的遵行,以期达到完善公司治理的目的。     

从关系治理到共同体建设:重建医患信任的协同路径

医患信任本是技术信任与道德信任的有机统一,但生物医学模式使得医患之间的"关系"成为无足轻重的边缘变量,而使得医患信任只靠技术信任维系。同时,医患矛盾并非只是医患群体之间的矛盾,而与其根植的社会文化与医疗体制密切相关。当健康成为国家治理的公共目标,体制力量已经成为形塑医患关系的重要力量,医患关系的治理也就超出"行业自治"的范畴,而成为对国家治理能力的本质考验。为此,需要实现从简单的"医患关系治理"的局部治理思维到"医患共同体建设"的协同治理思维的根本性转变。其中,医患共同体是医患群体、政府部门、社会组织等多主体共同协调合作构建的蕴含着情感道德和一致目标的自洽的运行系统。只有充分协调其中涉及的行政、司法、财政、民政、市场机构和社会组织等不同行动主体的利益诉求并建立起价值共识,才能为缓解医患紧张提供系统化的解决方案。     

推进社会管理创新中的法律援助实践与探索

近年来,河北省司法行政机关把法律援助工作作为贯彻＂三项重点工作＂的重点工作来谋划,在发展理念、管理方式、服务举措、维稳机制、保障体制、队伍建设六个方面不断创新,提高服务群众、管理社会的能力水平,推动法律援助工作取得全面发展。     

Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework1

Abstract: It has been argued that the EU suffers from serious accountability deficits. But how can we establish the existence of accountability deficits? This article tries to get to grips with the appealing but elusive concept of accountability by asking three types of questions. First a conceptual one: what exactly is meant by accountability? In this article the concept of accountability is used in a rather narrow sense: a relationship between an actor and a forum, in which the actor has an obligation to explain and to justify his or her conduct, the forum can pose questions and pass judgement, and the actor may face consequences. The second question is analytical: what types of accountability are involved? A series of dimensions of accountability are discerned that can be used to describe the various accountability relations and arrangements that can be found in the different domains of European governance. The third question is evaluative: how should we assess these accountability arrangements? The article provides three evaluative perspectives: a democratic, a constitutional and a learning perspective. Each of these perspectives may produce different types of accountability deficits.