Suchergebnisse

The aim of our research is to examine the new trends in the hybridity research area and clarify the convergence of interests among state actors, private actors and civil society actors. Hybridity is conceived as a 'multidimensional phenomenon' and 'new paradigm' in tourism industry. The effective collaboration among public sector – private sector – civil society can be attained likelihood with taking into account regional governance and multilevel governance. In this study, it is argued that there is an inter-relationship between hybridity, multilevel governance and decentration.

The article analyzes how business interests responded to European integration. It draws on survey data of eight hundred German, French, British, & European Union (EU) trade associations as well as thirty-four large firms. The argument is that the multilevel governance approach to European integration captures the realities of EU interest intermediation better than neofunctionalism & intergovernmentalism. The article suggests that the strategies of interest organizations depend mainly on their location in the EU multilevel system & on their governance capacities. I distinguish two kinds of governance capacities: negotiation capacities & organizational resources. The analysis proceeds in the following steps: After outlining the three theories of European integration & presenting their implications for interest groups, a brief overview of the relative importance for interest organizations of EU & national institutions over time is provided. Then, cluster analysis techniques serve to identify types of interest groups according to their lobbying strategies in the multilevel system: niche organizations, occasional players, traditionalists, EU players, & multilevel players are distinguished. The composition of these clusters & the characteristics of their members support the multilevel governance approach & indicate that multilevel players have greater governance capacities than organizations in the other clusters. 5 Tables, 5 Figures, 1 Appendix, 61 References. Adapted from the source document.

The article analyzes how business interests responded to European integration. It draws on survey data of eight hundred German, French, British, and European Union (EU) trade associations as well as thirty‐four large firms. The argument is that the multilevel governance approach to European integration captures the realities of EU interest intermediation better than neofunctionalism and intergovernmentalism. The article suggests that the strategies of interest organizations depend mainly on their location in the EU multilevel system and on their governance capacities. I distinguish two kinds of governance capacities: negotiation capacities and organizational resources. The analysis proceeds in the following steps: After outlining the three theories of European integration and presenting their implications for interest groups, a brief overview of the relative importance for interest organizations of EU and national institutions over time is provided. Then, cluster analysis techniques serve to identify types of interest groups according to their lobbying strategies in the multilevel system: niche organizations, occasional players, traditionalists, EU players, and multilevel players are distinguished. The composition of these clusters and the characteristics of their members support the multilevel governance approach and indicate that multilevel players have greater governance capacities than organizations in the other clusters.

Marine and coastal environment are under pressure from several pollution sources. Most of the environmental law was developed on a sectoral basis and does not reflect the interdependence of the various issues and their solutions. Since the adoption of Blue Book, EU legislation to protect the marine environment has been progressively implemented in many relevant areas: Fisheries, Shipping, Tourism, energy, etc. The Integrated Maritime Policy covers several cross-cutting policies, more specifically blue growth, marine data and knowledge, maritime spatial planning, integrated maritime surveillance, and sea basin strategies. Oceans and sea are influenced by many activities, interests and policies and are interlinked. A holistic, integrated approach is the best way to handle maritime affairs, with States cooperation not only on an EU States basis but also with third States and International Organizations. International Organizations provide an essential forum for international cooperation in relation to environmental issues. In this context they have two important roles to play: environmental policy-making and the development of international environmental law.

International governance is increasingly defined by multilevel governance; with short-term projects, transnational cooperation between different groups, and unclear institutional space. In this situation, a key issue is the resilience of governance arrangements or the ability of governance arrangements to respond to political and ecological shocks to the system. Using international biodiversity governance, this study explores the question: What social and political processes produce resilient governance? This study argues that the key to understanding resilient governance is the network structure within and outside of the governance arrangement. Modular network structures are able to generate ideas from multiple sources, able to solve political problems on small scales, and able to insulate institutions from political contagion. Centralized network structures, in contrast, often result in top-down learning, politicization of the entire governance arrangement, and inability to adapt in response to problems. Those governance arrangements with limited network structures are unlikely to learn at all. The network structure theory argues that network dynamics are shaped by the structure and result in different learning and different adaptive outcomes. This argument is made in the context of international biodiversity governance which presents has a number of cases of resilience in difficult to explain cases. Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 look at the network impacts in 10 different international biodiversity governance arrangements. Chapter 4, Chapter 5, and Chapter 6 explore these dynamics in the context of the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (MBC) and the Caribbean Challenge. These empirical cases present a complex and robust analysis showing that network structures, more than the governance institutions or national context, shape the resulting impact of governance arrangements. The implication of this finding is that effective institutions also need resilient modular networks in order to have lasting environmental impacts. Strong institutions can be constrained by centralized networks which limit learning opportunities following shocks. This study thus complements studies of effectiveness in international relations by providing a crucial dynamic piece of the overall situation. Response to shocks is shown to be shaped by network structure and importantly by early learning and network connections. Without these, effectiveness can be disrupted by political or environmental shocks.