The Belgian Federation at a Crossroad

In the introduction, the editors present the special issue and, in particular, the issue at stake: the future of Belgian federalism. Despite the agreement on the sixth state reform, four key issues remain for Belgium's future: decision making, distribution of powers, intergovernmental relations and the role of the parties. Drawing on past and present investigations of this topic, they present the state of the federation and, in so doing, they set the stage for the remaining papers.     

Government Shekels without Government Shackles? The Administrative Challenges of Charitable Choice

As President Bush plans to expand "Charitable Choice," civil libertarians worry that the legislation is part of a new assault on separation of church and state. Religious Right activists demand assurances that funds will not flow to groups like the Nation of Islam or Scientologists. African American pastors in urban areas—arguably the main targets of the initiative—are concerned that "government shekels" will be accompanied by "government shackles," that the costs and regulatory burdens accompanying collaborations with government will divert resources from client services and mute their prophetic voice.
Caught in the middle are public managers, who must make the legislation work in the face of significant administrative challenges. Those challenges occur in three areas: contracting procedures, contract administration, and evaluation. In each of these categories, political realities and constitutional constraints will significantly complicate the manager's job.     

政府治理特征及模式抉择

政府治理实际上是国家权力向社会的回归,政府治理的过程就是一个还政于民的过程。政府治理模式的选择,最为重要的是价值取向的确定。由此而抉择的政府治理模式才能得到社会的认同。     

中国地方治理与建设责任政府

当前 ,地方政府亟需解决的许多问题 ,都是围绕基本人权、基层民主和法治原则展开的。其中 ,强化政府责任 ,建设一个公开、透明的政府是农村地方治理的关键。要建设责任政府 ,首先 ,需要对政府的职能和责任重新定位 ;其次 ,需要明确建设法治政府的基本要求和目标 ,建立健全政府责任体系 ,严格实施行政执法责任制 ,以责任制约权力 ,积极推进建设法治政府的历史进程。     

机关党建要突出执政能力建设

党的十六届四中全会提出:“提高党的执政能力,关键在于搞好党的建设”;“机关党组织要严格组织生活,加强对党员特别是领导干部的教育和监督。”机关党建工作要按照这一要求,紧紧围绕提高五个方面的执政能力,从执政理念、执政素质、执政基础、执政方略、执政环境等新的视角,全面加强机关党的思想、组织、作风和制度建设,发挥好机关党组织的教育和监督作用,使机关党建工作的成效最终体现到提高党的执政能力、完成党的执政使命上来。     

The aftermath of Heysel: The 1985 Belgian election

The institutional approach to generalised trust creation is based on the assumption that only institutions with certain features give people reason to trust strangers. This article offers a revised version of this approach by arguing that there is an indirect rather than a direct link between the properties of institutions and trust among strangers. Referring to a neo-institutional idea of institutions, it is suggested that the potential of institutions for enabling people to trust strangers rests on institutions' power to structure individual action. The endurance and efficacy of institutions rather than their normative principles give us significant clues that our anonymous fellow citizens think about institutions as we do and accordingly feel committed to the rules of action. This, in turn, provides good reasons to believe that most of them will behave in an ‘appropriate’ manner so that we can trust them even if they are strangers.     

Governing a consensus democracy: The interplay of Pillarisation and administration

Apart from a static structure of institutional blocks erected for a certain purpose, pillarisation might also be viewed as a dynamic process accommodating not only different cultural groupings, but also varying regional, local and historical circumstances. Apart from being a sociological, political and cultural structure, pillarisation for a long time fulfilled important public administrative and executive functions within and for Dutch society. Apart from being a top‐down vehicle for separation and social control, pillarisation can also be seen as a polycentric or ‘bottom‐up’ institutional structure in which a variety of executive agencies, quangos, and other functional professional, local and regional institutions are being co‐ordinated, integrated, guided and controlled. By seeing ‘pillarisation’ as a dynamic form of network management, the question arises how ‘depillarisation’ affects the development system of intergovernmental governance in the Netherlands. More, rather than less historical knowledge of pillarisation is needed, not for understanding historical questions, but for grasping the complexities of contemporary institutional developments.     

Governing Campus Speech: a Bottom-Up Approach

I review arguments favoring bans on problematic speech (e.g., hate speech) on campus. Contrasting such calls for top-down regulation, I explore the potential for a “bottom-up approach” to campus speech governance to address vexing concerns pertaining to campus speech without violating free speech and academic freedom principles. I examine the political economy and epistemological dynamics inherent within the two forms of governance. I argue that, relative to a centralized top-down approach, a decentralized bottom-up approach to speech governance avoids political dynamics that bend toward the inappropriate use of power. Further, I argue that a bottom-up approach leaves the discursive space contestable, and therefore more open to new discovery and correction. Recognizing that a bottom up approach is no panacea, I also consider open questions and concerns that warrant further inquiry.     

党的执政资源与执政能力建设

提高党的执政能力必须丰富党执政的经济、政治与思想文化资源。我们必须大力发展先进生产力,不断丰富党执政的经济资源;必须建设社会主义政治文明,不断丰富党执政的政治资源;必须大力发展先进文化,不断丰富党执政的思想文化资源。     

Governing the ungovernable: The challenge of a global disaggregation of authority

The processes of globalization have led to a proliferation of spheres of authority and significant challenges for global governance. In this paper is discussed the concept of spheres of authority, the factors that encourage their proliferation, and the prospects for global governance in a world of disaggregated authority. The proliferation of spheres of authority does not mean that global governance is impossible, but that it will not result from a global government. Instead, governance will emerge from the interaction of overlapping spheres of authority; regulation will be achieved not through centralized authority but through the spread of norms, informal rules, and regimes.     

Government versus Opposition at the Polls: How Governing Status Affects the Impact of Policy Positions

We argue that governing status affects how voters react to extreme versus moderate policy positions. Being in government forces parties to compromise and to accept ideologically unappealing choices as the best among available alternatives. Steady exposure to government parties in this role and frequent policy compromise by governing parties lead voters to discount the positions of parties when they are in government. Hence, government parties do better in elections when they offset this discounting by taking relatively extreme positions. The relative absence of this discounting dynamic for opposition parties, on the other hand, means that they perform better by taking more moderate positions, as the standard Downsian model would predict. We present evidence from national elections in Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, 1971–2005, to support this claim.     

Federalism achieved: The Belgian elections of may 1995

The general election held on 21 May 1995 crowned Belgium's much heralded and long awaited federalisation, for the first time applying a recently reformed constitution's blueprint for national, regional and linguistic community governance. By Belgian standards, the event was an exceptional exercise in democracy: 6.3 million voters chose representatives to a new and much smaller Chamber of Representatives, a refashioned Federal Senate, three autonomous regional parliaments (Flanders, Wallonia, Brussels‐Capital), and a Community Council for the country's German‐speaking population. The result was an astounding reprieve for two scandal‐plagued Socialist parties and a deliverance from electoral disaster for Jean‐Luc Dehaene's centre‐left coalition government.     

The Effect of Transparency on Trust in Government: A Cross‐National Comparative Experiment

Transparency is considered a key value for trustworthy governments. However, the effect of transparency on citizens’ trust across national cultures is overlooked in current research. This article compares the effect of transparency on trust in government in the Netherlands and South Korea. The effect is investigated in two similar series of three experiments. The authors hypothesize that the effect of transparency differs because the countries have different cultural values regarding power distance and short‐ and long‐term orientation. Results reveal similar patterns in both countries: transparency has a subdued and sometimes negative effect on trust in government. However, the negative effect in South Korea is much stronger. The difference in the magnitude of transparency's effect suggests that national cultural values play a significant role in how people perceive and appreciate government transparency.     

执政体制:概念、结构和特征

构建科学的执政体制,是党的执政能力建设的重要内容,是实现科学执政的基础条件。党的执政体制就是党在执政过程中政党、国家和社会政治团体之间政治权力的配置、设置及其形成的规章制度和行为规范的总和。党的执政体制结构指党与其他政治主体之间所形成的政治关系体系,包括党与国家政权的关系、党与民主党派的关系、党与人民群众的关系等。党的执政体制具有阶级性、整体性、动态性的特征。