Suchergebnisse

"Erfolgreiche Entwicklung setzt Good Governance voraus. Dies wird von IWF und OECD, von VN und EU seit langem betont. Dass Bad Governance dagegen eine ernsthafte globale Herausforderung ist, hat die Welt spätestens am 11. September 2001 erkannt. Indes lässt sich keiner der beiden Begriffe klar und einheitlich definieren. Während Good Governance etwa auf die Dynamik und Güte politischer Prozesse der Entscheidungsfindung, die Zivilgesellschaft sowie die vom Volkssouverän übertragene Macht verweist, steht Bad Governance u.a. für schlechte Regierungsführung und negative Performance in der politischen Entscheidungsfindung, eine gestörte Interaktion zwischen staatlichen und nichtstaatlichen Akteuren sowie die mangelnde Berücksichtigung vorstaatlicher Strukturen. Länder mit wirtschaftspolitischer Bonität, soliden rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen, transparenter Verwaltung und effizienter Korruptionskontrolle stehen solchen gegenüber, die als schwierige Partnerschaften oder poor performers, als failed, fragile oder crisis states von sich reden machen. Sicher ist ein Engagement in Ländern der erstgenannten Gruppe einfacher als eines in solchen der zweitgenannten. Doch sollte die Stabilisierung gerade der schwierigen Partner ein sowohl deutsches als auch internationales Anliegen sein. Der kommende G8-Gipfel in Heiligendamm und sein afrikanischer Schwerpunkt stellen hier gewiss eine wertvolle Chance dar." (Autorenreferat)

What does good governance exactly mean? Should it be promoted in order to enhance democracy? Or to create markets? Should we look only at formal institutions or also at civil society? Beyond the technical definitions lies a much more complex political debate, involving notions that are usually not considered by politicians and policy makers.

Recent empirical research confirms that companies with demanding governance standards achieve higher market valuations. Due to the complexity of specific corporate governance matters, there is a rising need for a systematic and quantitative evaluation approach for corporate governance. In Germany, a Corporate Governance Scorecard has been developed that fulfils the key goals defined by analysts and investors. It has a standardised format, can be applied efficiently, is available at no cost and enables self‐assessments by companies as well as sector‐specific comparisons. The German Scorecard has not only found good reception at the national financial community, but has also been adapted around the world, especially in emerging countries.

Recent efforts to reform the international financial architecture have focused attention on the way in which decision-making occurs within an increasingly globalised structure of financial governance. I explore an important development within this structure: the emergence of what may be identified as a global financial public sphere. This article considers the formation & foundation of the global financial public sphere, & discusses its relationship to the globalised structure of financial governance. The argument of the paper is that a strengthened public sphere is both an increasingly significant attribute of financial governance & a welcome development, but one that is not yet fully consolidated. 68 References. Adapted from the source document.

Recent efforts to reform the international financial architecture have focused attention on the way in which decision-making occurs within an increasingly globalised structure of financial governance. I explore an important development within this structure: the emergence of what may be identified as a global financial public sphere. This article considers the formation and foundation of the global financial public sphere, and discusses its relationship to the globalised structure of financial governance. The argument of the paper is that a strengthened public sphere is both an increasingly significant attribute of financial governance and a welcome development, but one that is not yet fully consolidated.