Search results

Globalization is the "buzzword" in today's world and it has brought unprecedented impacts to the Asia Pacific region including the Philippines. The Philippines, although politically unequipped, has optimistically joined the "bandwagon" and is now struggling to reinvent its governance to cope with international and national pressures on globalization. Among these are the complexities and challenges in managing national affairs, institutionalization issues on globalization and the difficulties in reaping the fruits of participation and accountability. This article centers on two themes: the public sector capacity of the country to manage globalization, and participation and accountability in globalization. The role of the private sector and civil society in coming up with innovations and new approaches to deal with the changed situation is given emphasis. The article also tackles the policy implications of globalization and the lessons learned in the Philippines and in Asia at large.

International audience ; The beginning of this reasoning puts forward the problem of the nature of the company and of its institutional justification, particularly according to the balance "contribution – remuneration" addressed to its stakeholders and to the society, as well as the vocation of corporate governance to focus everything on economic value creation. The political sphere having lost its traditional function of sense making is then confronted with a dilemma: - to answer, according to its doctrinal logic, social problems by developing public services, - to limit this development to face the contesting of public utilities according to the argument of efficiency and, at the same time, favoring the development of companies according to the legitimacy of privatizations. These two aspects represent the dialectical argument of the place of the State in a liberal perspective with an oscillation between a 'positive' State according to the legitimacy attributed to its intervention and a 'negative' State, which has to intervene the least possible, while guaranteeing the conditions of development for companies. On front of the lack of a political answer, private initiative tends to develop, in a palliative way, with NGOs for example, NGOs which are ruled according to corporate governance, but adding this new kind of organizations with an institutional vocation to fulfill missions of public utility. Their modes of governance are inherited from corporate governance but according to a humanist and social objective. The research question of this text is to know how far the expansion of governance we experience today is related (or not) with corporate governance and what does it mean. The lines of reasoning of this text is as follows: - comments about the development of 'intermediate' organization, - the discussion of a 'broad' conception of governance, - comments on the White Paper on European Governance issued by the European Commission.

International audience ; The beginning of this reasoning puts forward the problem of the nature of the company and of its institutional justification, particularly according to the balance "contribution – remuneration" addressed to its stakeholders and to the society, as well as the vocation of corporate governance to focus everything on economic value creation. The political sphere having lost its traditional function of sense making is then confronted with a dilemma: - to answer, according to its doctrinal logic, social problems by developing public services, - to limit this development to face the contesting of public utilities according to the argument of efficiency and, at the same time, favoring the development of companies according to the legitimacy of privatizations. These two aspects represent the dialectical argument of the place of the State in a liberal perspective with an oscillation between a 'positive' State according to the legitimacy attributed to its intervention and a 'negative' State, which has to intervene the least possible, while guaranteeing the conditions of development for companies. On front of the lack of a political answer, private initiative tends to develop, in a palliative way, with NGOs for example, NGOs which are ruled according to corporate governance, but adding this new kind of organizations with an institutional vocation to fulfill missions of public utility. Their modes of governance are inherited from corporate governance but according to a humanist and social objective. The research question of this text is to know how far the expansion of governance we experience today is related (or not) with corporate governance and what does it mean. The lines of reasoning of this text is as follows: - comments about the development of 'intermediate' organization, - the discussion of a 'broad' conception of governance, - comments on the White Paper on European Governance issued by the European Commission.

AbstractIn the first decade of the 21st century, 'hydrosolidarity,' the notion that water management should include considerations of ethics and equity, has influenced international approaches to conducting environmental research and formulating water policy. Since its inception in the 1990s, the term appears frequently across a spectrum of water-related research. It has accordingly permeated discourses and publications on water management. Such rapid proliferation of the concept has helped usher in a wave of transition from conflict management to cooperative efforts between upstream and downstream basin users, as well as a complex paradigm that links both human and environmental welfare. In this paper, we trace the intellectual origins and changing conceptions of hydrosolidarity. We outline some of its applications as well as various reactions to the concept. We close by discussing how the concept can help frame negotiations between riparian states and influence treaty-making and institution-building in river basin settings.

This Living Review presents an overview of the research on European identity in the context of EU governance by focussing on central debates in the political science literature. It departs from the problems of disagreement between European citizens and their elites as well as the lack of a European demos. Against this background, the article discusses the functions of collective identity including the legitimation function and solution of collective dilemmas. Here, two perspectives pertaining to these functions are depicted: first, the issue of European public space and second, the integrative workings of European citizenship. Next, the article explores the conceptual and methodological problems of the research on European collective identity. In particular, it focuses on the conceptual ambiguity of the collective identity term and problems of operationalization and measurement. Following this, the article discusses the literature on identity technologies of the EU and identifies the shortcomings of identity technologies with regard to EU governance. Adapted from the source document.

Personal health records (PHR) are a modern health technology with the ability to engage patients more fully in their healthcare. Despite widespread interest, there has been little discussion around PHR governance at an organizational level. We develop a governance model and compare it to the practices of some of the early PHR adopters, including hospitals and ambulatory care settings, insurers and health plans, government departments, and commercial sectors. Decision-making structures varied between organizations. Business operations were present in all groups, but patients were not represented in any of the governance structures surveyed. To improve patient-centered care, policy making for PHRs needs to include patient representation at a governance level.

Abstract
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.

In the first decade of the 21st century, 'hydrosolidarity,' the notion that water management should include considerations of ethics and equity, has influenced international approaches to conducting environmental research and formulating water policy. Since its inception in the 1990s, the term appears frequently across a spectrum of water-related research. It has accordingly permeated discourses and publications on water management. Such rapid proliferation of the concept has helped usher in a wave of transition from conflict management to cooperative efforts between upstream and downstream basin users, as well as a complex paradigm that links both human and environmental welfare. In this paper, we trace the intellectual origins and changing conceptions of hydrosolidarity. We outline some of its applications as well as various reactions to the concept. We close by discussing how the concept can help frame negotiations between riparian states and influence treaty-making and institution-building in river basin settings. Adapted from the source document.

A review essay on books by (1) David Malone, The International Struggle Over Iraq: Politics in the UN Security Council 1980-2005 (OXford University Press, 2006); (2) Ramesh Thakur and Waheguru Pal Singh Sidhu [Eds], The Iraq Crisis and World Order: Structural, Institutional, and Normative Challenges (United Nations University Press, 2006); (3) Ramesh Thakur and Waheguru Pal Singh Sidhu [Eds], Arms Control after Iraq: Normative and Operational Challenges (United Nations University Press, 2006) & (4) Richard Ashby Wilson [Ed], Human Rights in the "War on Terror," (Cambridge University Press, 2005).

The security sector encompasses those institutions and organisations in the government structure that are responsible for the security of the State and its citizens from external or internal threats. Minimally, these include military and paramilitary forces, the intelligence services, national and local police services, border, customs and coast guards. In order to reduce the risk of conflict, ensure sustainable peace, provide security for citizens and create the right environment for sustainable development, the existence of a capable, responsible and accountable security sector is critical. Effective security sector governance (SSG) involves the optimum management of security institutions within accepted norms of transparency, accountability and observance of humanitarian laws. Transparency and accountability are particularly challenging issues in South Asia. Mistakes made in the past can be avoided if today's democratic governments were to address security issues constructively, by understanding one another's security sectors and sharing knowledge of governance procedures and lessons learnt.