Suchergebnisse

Working paper on INCAS blog : https://incas.hypotheses.org/ ; The article aims to shed light on how changes in the corporate governance system for Japanese firms since the 1990s have influenced presidential turnover. We analyzed the determinants of presidential turnover between 1990 and 2013 for a random sample of 500 firms listed on the First Section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange. Though our analysis found that presidential turnover sensitivity to corporate performance has not changed, we did show that ROE and the stock return are displacing ROA as corporate performance indices to which presidential turnover is most sensitive. Furthermore, while presidential turnover sensitivity to ROA is highest in firms that are believed to be most under the influence of main banks, firms with high foreign institutional investor shareholding ratios are more sensitive to ROE. These results are consistent with the curtailment in the scope of main bank activity and the increase in foreign institutional investors that have occurred since the latter half of the 1990s. The influence of outside directors, who had begun to increase from the mid-2000s, varied depending on how many sat on each board. The sensitivity of presidential turnover to performance tends to be lower in firms that have one or two outside directors and higher in firms with three or more outside directors.

Various schools of research in public policy (the literature on 'governance' and its continental counterparts) are converging to focus on the growth of policy styles based on cooperation and partnership in networks, instead of on vertical control by the state. This article focuses on issues of democratic accountability and responsiveness with these governance arrangements. It argues that until recently the legitimacy of governance networks was not at the forefront of theoretical developments, even though the 'democratic deficit' of governance is problematic both for normative and for pragmatic reasons. There is now increased sensitivity to this problem, but the remedies presented in the literature are unsatisfactory, and critiques of governance presuppose a somewhat idealised image of representative democracy in terms of accountability or responsiveness of decision-makers. They also fail to offer adequate solutions to some of the central legitimacy problems of policy-making in complex societies. (European Journal of Political Research / FUB)

Empirical studies analyzing the determinants of U.S. presidential popularity have delivered quite inconclusive results concerning the role of economic variables by assuming linear relationships. We employ penalized spline smoothing in the context of semi-parametric additive mixed models and allow for flexible functional forms and thus possible non-linear effects for the economic determinants. By controlling for the well-known politically motivated covariables, we find strong evidence for non-linear and negative effects of unemployment, inflation, and government consumption on presidential approval. Additionally, we present new results in favor of non-parametric trivariate interaction effects between the macroeconomic covariables.

The article attempts to identify common explanatory factors and internal causal mechanisms behind the poor democratic performance of post-communist semi-presidential regimes. It attributes poor democratic performance to constitutionally powerful presidents supported by single-party-majority cabinets. Under this situation, omnipotent presidents enact media-related law unhindered, tightly regulate the media, prevent the opposition from disseminating election information, and thus increase the ruling party's probability of winning elections. Through quantitative analysis and comparative case studies of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, this paper verifies the convergent pathway from powerful presidents' media control to poor democratic performance. In conclusion, powerful post-communist presidents endanger democracy via media control.

Advocates "associative democracy" as an alternative to traditional ideologies of the Left and Right. Far from being a utopian idea, Hirst suggests, "associative democracy" offers new forms of economic and social governance as supplements to representative democracy and market economies.

Das Leitbild "Gewährleistungsstaat" bestimmt auch die Reformagenda des Arbeitsmarkts, wo es sich in Formeln wie "Fördern und Fordern" oder "Von der aktiven zur aktivierenden Arbeitsmarktpolitik" niederschlägt. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird dieses Leitbild am Beispiel der Neugestaltung der Arbeitsmarktpolitik, insbesondere der Reform der Bundesanstalt für Arbeit auf nationaler Ebene und der Offenen Methode der Koordinierung auf europäischer Ebene getestet. Zielsetzung und praktische Erfahrungen dieser Reformen werden zum einen mit den normativen Prämissen des "Gewährleistungsstaates" verglichen, zum anderen dienen sie zu einer weiteren Schärfung und Modifikation dieser Prämissen. Das Thema wird in drei Schritten angegangen: Erstens werden die in der gegenwärtigen Diskussion erkennbaren Gemeinsamkeiten des Leitbildes auf den Bereich von Arbeitsmarkt und Beschäftigung übertragen. Zunächst sieht es so aus, als ob sich der Wandel vom Wohlfahrts- zum Gewährleistungsstaat cum grano salis mit dem Slogan "Von der aktiven zur aktivierenden Arbeitsmarktpolitik" umschreiben ließe. Die Ambitionen des "Gewährleistungsstaats" gehen jedoch darüber hinaus und streben letztlich eine neue Verantwortungsteilung zwischen Staat, Wirtschaft und Zivilgesellschaft an. Im zweiten Schritt werden zwei konkrete Arbeitsmarktreformen geprüft, um zu sehen, inwieweit sie dem Leitbild entsprechen und welche Umsetzungsprobleme sich ergeben: die Neugestaltung der aktiven Arbeitsmarktpolitik, insbesondere die Umgestaltung der "Bundesanstalt für Arbeit" zu einem modernen Dienstleister am Arbeitsmarkt, und die Offene Methode der Koordinierung im Rahmen der Europäischen Beschäftigungsstrategie. Abschließend werden die Ergebnisse unter der Perspektive zusammengefasst, inwieweit die Erfahrungen aus diesen Reformen zu einer Schärfung des Leitbildes beitragen oder gar eine Modifikation nahe legen. (ICA2)

Abstract.Various schools of research in public policy (the literature on 'governance' and its continental counterparts) are converging to focus on the growth of policy styles based on cooperation and partnership in networks, instead of on vertical control by the state. This article focuses on issues of democratic accountability and responsiveness with these governance arrangements. It argues that until recently the legitimacy of governance networks was not at the forefront of theoretical developments, even though the 'democratic deficit' of governance is problematic both for normative and for pragmatic reasons. There is now increased sensitivity to this problem, but the remedies presented in the literature are unsatisfactory, and critiques of governance presuppose a somewhat idealised image of representative democracy in terms of accountability or responsiveness of decision‐makers. They also fail to offer adequate solutions to some of the central legitimacy problems of policy‐making in complex societies.

Enduring depopulation and ageing have affected the liveability of many of the smaller villages in the more peripheral rural municipalities of the Netherlands. Combined with a general climate of austerity and structural public budget cuts, this has led to the search of both communities and local governments for solutions in which citizens take and obtain more responsibilities and higher levels of local autonomy in dealing with local liveability challenges. This PhD-thesis explores how novel forms of governance with high levels of civic self-reliance can be understood from the perspectives of the involved residents, local governments and the supposed beneficiaries. It also discusses the dynamics, potentials and limitations that come to the fore. To achieve this, firstly, it focusses on the development of role shifts of responsibilities and decision-making power between local governments and citizens in experimental governance initiatives over time and the main factors that enhance and obstruct higher levels of civic autonomy. Then it investigates the influence of government involvement on a civic initiatives' organisation structure and governance process, and by doing so on the key conditions of its civic self-steering capacity. In addition, it examines how novel governance forms with citizens in the lead are experienced by the community members to whose community liveability they are supposed to contribute. Lastly, it explores the reasons why citizens do not engage in such initiatives.