Search results

Public services can develop two contrasting practices of accountability: the conventional model emphasises that to be accountable is to be 'held to account', to be expected to answer questions about performance and that the answers are then evaluated by superiors measured against some standard or expectation following which praise or blame is meted out and sanctions applied. This mode of accountability is expresses hierarchy of authority. A very different process encourages dialogues of accountability between practitioners and publics, who 'give an account' offering a story that interprets and explains what has happened and why it has taken place. This paper observes these contrasting practices in the development of school governance in England and argues for the importance of dialogue to enhance learning and democratic responsiveness. ; Public services can develop two contrasting practices of accountability: the conventional model emphasises that to be accountable is to be 'held to account', to be expected to answer questions about performance and that the answers are then evaluated by superiors measured against some standard or expectation following which praise or blame is meted out and sanctions applied. This mode of accountability is expresses hierarchy of authority. A very different process encourages dialogues of accountability between practitioners and publics, who 'give an account' offering a story that interprets and explains what has happened and why it has taken place. This paper observes these contrasting practices in the development of school governance in England and argues for the importance of dialogue to enhance learning and democratic responsiveness.

El artículo analiza las dificultades de la gobernabilidad y su carácter esquivo. Se trata de un estudio sobre cómo mejorar la gobernabilidad, partiendo de la base de que en muchas ocasiones lo que existe en la práctica, son condiciones de ingobernabilidad. El razonamiento central parte de que la ingobernabilidad puede en ocasiones imperar, sin que ello implique necesariamente una fractura en la democracia en su conjunto. Se continúa con un examen de la cohesión y la perdurabilidad de las sociedades, como ejes de la gobernabilidad. Luego se prosigue con con­sideraciones acerca de las redes de gobernabilidad a nivel local y regio­nal, y con el tratamiento de la crisis de información en las sociedades fragmentadas, así como con las condiciones de inestabilidad crónica y los gobiernos locales. Se finaliza con algunas consideraciones sobre el vínculo existente entre lo local y lo global, y el posible rol de ese proceso en el manejo de crisis y la educación para la paz. ; The article analyzes the difficulties of governance and the elusive nature of governability. lts main purpose is to make suggestions as to how to increase governability. Central to the argument is the suggestion that, despite the occasional reign of ingovernability, this does not imply the fracture of democracy altogether. Cohesion and perdurability are the keys to governability. The article analyzes local and regional governa­bility networks and the management of the information crisis in frag­mented societies, as well as the conditions of chronic instability and local co-governments. The article ends with several considerations on the local-to-global links, and the potential role of this process in the mana­gement of crisis and education for peace.

Governance is presented by undefined and confused areas that tend to expand in a more or less arbitrary way in the absence of stable and reliable normative standards. All this calls into question concepts and recompositive monolithic categories of modern political-legal rationality and in the first place sovereignty. At the same time the current neo-governmental structure does not stand as a technology of power, exclusionary or alternative to other rationalities, but rather it tends to bring out all the contradictions and ambiguities of the present time. ; La gobernanza es presentada por áreas confusas e indefinidas que tienden a expandirse de una manera más o menos arbitraria en ausencia de estándares normativos estables y confiables. Todo esto pone en cuestión conceptos y categorías monolíticas recompositivas de moderna racionalidad política-legal y en primer lugar de la soberanía. Al mismo tiempo, la estructura neogubernamental actual no se sostiene como una tecnología de poder excluyente o alternativa a otras racionalidades, sino que tiende a llevar a cabo todas las contradicciones y ambigüedades del tiempo presente.

"Venezuela: 4th & 5th republics" (Neira Fernández, Enrique) ; Presentation ; I. Conceptual frame ; Challenges and modernization ; Reforms of the state ; Governance ; Genuineness ; Decentralization ; Democracy ; Leadership ; Militarism ; Democratic caesarism ; Populism ; Violence ; Revolution ; Socialism ; II. The fourth republic (Before Chávez) ; A look back ; The economic thing ; The social thing ; The political thing ; The ethical thing ; III. The fith republic (In the times of Chávez) ; Introduction ; The strong man ; The process. Political ideology ; The process. Characteristics ; The beautiful revolution ; Gusty future ; Conclusion. The quadrature of the circle ; neira@intercable.net.ve ; Nivel analítico

El objetivo de este trabajo fue hacer una genealogía sobre el concepto de gobernanza, presentar diferentes conceptualizaciones sobre el tema y discutirlos a la luz de algunos elementos de la gobernanza ambiental. La metodología está basada en revisión bibliográfica y documental. Desarrollos del concepto de gobernanza son abordados e implementados por organismos multilaterales, también por pensadores de las ciencias sociales, de los movimientos sociales y de organizaciones no gubernamentales. Sobre gobernanza se pueden diferenciar tres enfoques: uno que la entiende como sinónimo de gobierno; otro que la asume como un marco normativo o conjunto de criterios que deben satisfacer los sistemas políticos para el logro de los objetivos propuestos, y finalmente, la gobernanza puede ser entendida también como la coordinación que tiene lugar en espacios no jerárquicos (redes), que promueven la participación de la sociedad civil en la deliberación de los asuntos públicos y ambientales, mediante sistemas de gobierno gestados por las propias comunidades, que muestran una nueva visión de democracia que han ido edificando, con logros en la creación de nuevas normas para la gestión de los bienes comunes y de su territorio. CC BY-NC-SA Gestión y Ambiente (2016). ; The objective of this work was making a genealogy on the concept of governance, presenting several definitions and discussing them in the light of some elements of environmental governance. The methodology is based on a bibliographic and documentary revision. Developments of this concept are addressed and implemented by multilateral agencies, and also by thinkers of social sciences, social movements and non-governmental organizations. Three approaches of governance can be distinguished: one that understands it as a synonym of government; other that defines it as a framework policy or set of criteria that must be complied by the political systems for the achievement of the proposed objectives; and the third approach states that governance can be understood as the coordination that takes place in non-hierarchical spaces (networks), which promote the participation of civil society in the discussion of public and environmental affairs, through government systems used by communities themselves. This third approach of governance reveals the new vision of democracy that these communities have been building up, with achievements related to the creation of new standards for the management of common goods and their territory. CC BY-NC-SA Gestión y Ambiente (2016).