It is proposed that government, being the tangible expression of the legitimate authority within an organised society, has undegone a long transformational journey since its very emergence. The various evolutionary forms and features of the government have been the product of its meaningful and viable responses to the changing expectations of the people as well as to the challenges they faced in an ever-changing environment. The exclusive domain of the state over the period became a shared space with inclusion of other actors and stakeholders, and an era of governance was ushered in since the 1980s. The much celebrated success of the liberal democracy and its market-led open economy heralded as an era of good governance. However, the universal model of good governance fails to take into account the local constraints of a society. Thus, the idea of good governance has to face various types of challenges in the developing as well as underdeveloped societies.
This paper reviews governance and public governance related to an emerging area of policy interest – social innovation. The European Commission's White Paper on European Governance (2001) focused on openness, participation, accountability, effectiveness and coherence in public policy as characteristics of good governance. The EC has prioritised social innovation to address policy problems. Yet, the extant literature and research on social innovation is sparse. The paper questions whether it is a new mode of governance which contributes to good governance or a continuum of neoliberal reforms of the state which alters the relationship between the state, market and civil society.
This book seeks to pose and explore a question that sheds light on the contested but largely cooperative nature of Arctic governance in the post-Cold War period: how does power matter - and how has it mattered - in shaping cross-border cooperation and diplomacy in the Arctic? Each chapter functions as a window through which power relations in the Arctic are explored. Issues include how representing the Arctic region matters for securing preferred outcomes, how circumpolar cooperation is marked by regional hierarchies and how Arctic governance has become a global social site in its own right, replete with disciplining norms for steering diplomatic behaviour. This book draws upon Russia's role in the Arctic Council as an extended case study and examines how Arctic cross-border governance can be understood as a site of competition over the exercise of authority
The Lake Governance book will focus on comparative analysis of governance structures by examining policy, legal and institutional structures of current transboundary commissions to develop a common framework for good governance of transboundary lakes. Cooperation among nations sharing natural resources is important for sustainable use of the shared resources. Lakes contribute a big part to GDP in most of the countries and in some cases are also responsible for providing fisheries (for food, source of protein and livelihood) Climate change and associated risks and uncertainties add more complexity to the problems. This book will explore current water governance challenges, knowledge gaps and recommend a framework for good lake governance.
The Lake Governance book will focus on comparative analysis of governance structures by examining policy, legal and institutional structures of current transboundary commissions to develop a common framework for good governance of transboundary lakes. Cooperation among nations sharing natural resources is important for sustainable use of the shared resources. Lakes contribute a big part to GDP in most of the countries and in some cases are also responsible for providing fisheries (for food, source of protein and livelihood) Climate change and associated risks and uncertainties add more complexity to the problems. This book will explore current water governance challenges, knowledge gaps and recommend a framework for good lake governance.
Executive SummaryGovernment post-Brexit will face sustained and difficult challenges as the UK adjusts to its new situation. Yet these challenges risk being exacerbated by fundamental changes in UK political debate that are affecting the perceived legitimacy and effectiveness of the system and structures of government. These include erosion of the clear distinction entrenched for the last 150 years between political choices by elected representatives and impartial administration by the civil service; the disruption of traditional deliberative processes by digital and social media; and increased centralisation of decision-making in No. 10 Downing Street combined with inadequate scrutiny of that decision-making either by the Cabinet or by Parliament.The centralisation of executive power reduces its perceived legitimacy across the UK, with devolved government in Scotland and Wales seen as contingent on the Westminster Parliament and Northern Ireland under control by central government. Fiscally, the UK has become the most centralised democratic country in the world. As government faces up to the challenge of unwinding membership of the legal and regulatory framework developed during 45 years of EU membership, it is vital that the UK's political structures restore their legitimacy and efficiency.Necessary reforms start with greater transparency about how government really works today. A PM's Department should be created, separate from the Cabinet Office; senior appointments including the Chief of Staff and 'Advisors', as well as instructions from No. 10 to departments, should be subject to effective Parliamentary scrutiny. Legally entrenched structures are required to confirm that devolved powers cannot simply be overridden by the Westminster Parliament. Greater fiscal autonomy should be guaranteed to local government.Finally, politicians should choose either to recommit explicitly to the original system whereby the civil service remains separate from politics and take steps to make it effective; or acknowledge the drift towards greater political control of the civil service and introduce safeguards to minimise political abuse, for example by taking steps to increase scrutiny of appointments and expenditure.
Algorithmic governance as a key concept in controversies around the emerging digital society highlights the idea that digital technologies produce social ordering in a specific way. Starting with the origins of the concept, this paper portrays different perspectives and objects of inquiry where algorithmic governance has gained prominence ranging from the public sector to labour management and ordering digital communication. Recurrent controversies across all sectors such as datafication and surveillance, bias, agency and transparency indicate that the concept of algorithmic governance allows to bring objects of inquiry and research fields that had not been related before into a joint conversation. Short case studies on predictive policy and automated content moderation show that algorithmic governance is multiple, contingent and contested. It takes different forms in different contexts and jurisdictions, and it is shaped by interests, power, and resistance.
Corporate governance is a recent concept that encompasses the costs caused by managerial misbehavior. Corporate governance is concerned with how organizations in general, and corporations in particular, produce value and how that value is distributed among the members of the corporation, its stakeholders. The interrelation of value production and value distribution links the ubiquitous technological aspect (the production of value) with the moral and ethical dimension (the distribution of value). Corporate governance is concerned with this link in general, but more specifically with the moral and ethical dimensions of distributing the generated value among the stakeholders. Value in firms is created by firm-specific investments, and the motivation and coordination of value enhancing activities and investment is protected by the power concentrated at the pyramidal top of the organization. In modern companies, it is the CEO and the top management deciding how to create value and how to distribute it among the relevant stakeholders. Due to asymmetric information and the imperfect nature of markets and contracts, adverse selection and moral hazard problems occur, where delegated (selected) managers could act in their own interest at the costs of other relevant stakeholders. Corporate governance is a two-tailed concept. The first aspect is about identifying the (most) relevant stakeholder(s), separating theory and practice into two different and conflicting streams: the stakeholder value approach and the shareholder value approach. The second aspect of the concept is about providing and analyzing different mechanisms, reducing the costs induced by moral hazard and adverse selection effects, and to balance out the motivation and coordination problems of the relevant stakeholders. Corporate governance is an interdisciplinary concept encompassing academic fields like finance, economics, accounting, law, taxation and psychology, among others. Like countries differ according to their institutions (i.e. legal and political systems, norms, and rules), firms differ according to their size, age, dominant shareholders or industries. Thus concepts in corporate governance differ along these dimensions as well. And while the underlying characteristics vary in time, continuously or as an exogenous shock, concepts in corporate governance are dynamic and static, offering a challenging field of interest for academics, policy makers and firm managers.
