Suchergebnisse

This paper explores how much statehood it takes to make governance with/out the state work. The first part discusses the relationship between governance, state, and statehood. The distinction between governance as structure and governance as process allows us to disentangle state and statehood. The second part of the paper explores the different functions statehood has for governance. While there may be functional equivalents to the shadow of hierarchy, there is more to statehood than the threat of hierarchically imposed regulation. Effective and legitimate governance may require at least some (external) form of consolidated statehood. The final part of the paper discusses varieties of statehood, arguing that the challenge for areas of limited statehood is not the lack of exclusivity of statehood but the need for an order of shared and divided statehood. The paper concludes by considering the dark sides of statehood, cautioning against building states without strengthening the rule of law and democracy. ; Das Papier diskutiert, wie viel Staatlichkeit es braucht, damit Governance mit sowie ohne Staat funktionieren kann. Im ersten Teil wird der Zusammenhang zwischen Governance, Staat und Staatlichkeit thematisiert. Der zweite Teil des Papiers untersucht die unterschiedlichen Funktionen von Staatlichkeit für Governance. Während es durchaus funktionale Äquivalente zum Schatten der Hierarchie gibt, besteht Staatlichkeit aus mehr als der Fähigkeit, einseitig kollektiv verbindliche Regelungen zu festzulegen und durchzusetzen. Effektives und legitimes Regieren verlangt deshalb zumindest eine (externe) Form von konsolidierter Staatlichkeit. Im letzten Teil werden unterschiedliche Formen von Staatlichkeit vorgestellt. Dabei wird klar, dass die Herausforderung für Räume begrenzter Staatlichkeit nicht im Mangel an Exklusivität, sondern im Bedarf an einer Ordnung für geteilte Staatlichkeit besteht. Das Papier schließt mit einer Betrachtung der Schattenseiten von (ungebundener) Staatlichkeit und warnt vor einem einseitigen ...

1\. Introduction 2\. The History of Regionalism: European Integration and Beyond 3\. The Outcome of Regionalism: Inter-, Supra- or Post-National? 3.1 From Cooperation to Integration 3.2 New and Old Regionalism 3.3 Persisting Diversity or Emerging Similarity? 4\. The Drivers of Regionalism: Old Theories and New Puzzles 4.1 The Demand for Regionalism. It Is Not Only the Economy, Stupid! 4.2 The Supply of Regionalism. Interests, Power, and Norms 5\. When Regionalism Hits Home. Policy Harmonization and Structural Change 5.1 From Second Image Reversed. 5.2 . to Europeanization and Domestic Change 6\. Conclusions Literature ; After the end of the Cold War, students of International Relations observed an expansion of inter-state activities at the regional level. Regional and sub- regional groupings appeared to gain momentum as the way in which countries cooperate and should cooperate to pursue peace, stability, wealth and social justice. The surge and resurgence of regionalism has triggered the proliferation of concepts and approaches. The focus of this paper will be on processes and structures of state-led regionalism driven by the delegation of policies and political authority to regional institutions. Based on this understanding of regionalism, the existing literature will be reviewed with regard to three general questions. These questions do not only require research across regions but also allow developing a common research agenda to accumulate knowledge generated about specific regions. First, what are the outcomes of regionalism? How can we describe and compare the results of the delegation of policies and political authority? Second, what are the drivers of regionalism? Why do some governments choose to delegate policies and political authority while others do not? Finally, what are the internal effects of regionalism? How does the delegation of policies and political authority impact back on the domestic structures of the states involved?

This paper explores the role of new modes of governance in the EU's attempts to impact upon states which are not (yet) members or which became members in the 1980s. More specifically, it summarizes the findings of comparative case studies on the involvement of non-state actors in the implementation of EU policies and EU primary Law in different types of states, "weak states" in particular, including Southern European member states, CEE candidate countries and associated states in the former Soviet Union and Northern Africa. The paper shows that new modes of governance can help bring countries closer to Europe. However, they do so only if both state and non-state actors have sufficient capacities and trust each other. Given that these conditions are often absent in accession and neighborhood countries, we should caution our expectations in new modes of governance and focus on less innovative means, such as capacity-building.

1\. Introduction 2\. Hitting its Borders: The Domestic Impact of Europe on the Western Balkans 2.1 What Does it Take? Factors Mediating the Transformative Power of Europe 2.2 Limited Statehood and the Western Balkans: The Missing Link 2.3 Statehood and Progress towards EU Accession 2.4 The EU as a State- Builder? 3\. Conclusions Literature ; The EU seeks to transform the domestic structures of the Western Balkan countries in order to foster peace, stability and prosperity in the region ridden by war and ethnic conflict. Unlike in case of the Mediterranean and Newly Independent States, the EU has even offered its South Eastern European neighbors a membership perspective. Whether the "golden carrot" is big enough, however, to draw the Western Balkans closer to Europe, is still an open question. Croatia has made sufficient progress to successfully conclude accession negotiations in the years to come. The EU rewarded domestic reforms in Macedonia and Montenegro with granting them candidate status, which Serbia is likely to receive in the near future. Albania, by contrast, appears to be more reluctant to engage in the changes necessary to get even with Macedonia and Montenegro. Bosnia Herzegovina and Kosovo, finally, are seriously lagging behind and have not even applied for membership. Can Europeanization approaches account for the differential impact of the EU in the Western Balkans? The paper argues that problems of limited statehood have seriously curbed the transformative power of the EU in the Western Balkans - despite their membership perspective. Not only has the EU exerted less pressure for adaptation on Western Balkan governments. Weak state capacities and ethnic conflicts have reduced both their willingness and capacity to implement the acquis communautaire. Given its lack of experience in state building, the EU is ill-equipped to address these problems. This results in a serious dilemma. On the one hand, the EU has offered the Western Balkans a membership perspective to stabilize the region and overcome ...

Governance with/out government has emerged as an alternative or functional equivalent to government. While there seems to be an increasing demand, the promise of governance to compensate for the weakness or failure of government rests on a major premise. Governments have to be strong enough so that non- governmental actors have an incentive to cooperate, and governments are not afraid of being captured. If this premise held, it would result in a serious dilemma for areas of limited statehood: The greater the demand for governance with/out government, the less likely it is to emerge and to be effective, precisely because government is weak. This paper explores to what extent government and statehood are necessary to make governance with/out government work. It discusses various options of how to commit non-governmental actors to the provision of common goods without a shadow of hierarchy cast by government and concludes with suggestions for future research on governance beyond statehood. ; "Governance with/out government" wird häufig als funktionales Äquivalent zu staatlichem Regieren gehandelt. Inwiefern nicht-hierarchische Formen des Regierens Staatsversagen kompensieren können, scheint jedoch von einer wesentlichen Prämisse abzuhängen. Regierungen müssen stark genug sein, um Kooperationsanreize für nicht-staatliche Akteure zu erzeugen und gleichzeitig nicht die Gefahr des "state capture" zu fürchten. Wenn dies zutrifft, ergibt sich daraus ein ernsthaftes Governance Dilemma für Räume begrenzter Staatlichkeit. Je größer die Nachfrage nach "governance with/out government" desto weniger wahrscheinlich ist es, dass nicht-hierarchische Formen des Regierens sich herausbilden und effektiv sind, gerade weil staatliches Regieren schwach ist. Das Papier untersucht, inwiefern staatliches Regieren und Staatlichkeit notwendige Bedingungen für die Effektivität von "governance with/out government" sind. Welche Möglichkeiten gibt es außer dem durch intakte Staatlichkeit erzeugten Schatten der Hierarchie, um nicht-staatliche ...

1\. Introduction 5 2\. Europeanization in the "West": The Domestic Impact of Europe on the "Old" Member States 6 3\. Europeanization Goes East: The Domestic Impact of Europe on the CEE Accession States 9 4\. Hitting (Beyond) its Borders: The Domestic Impact of Europe on Neighbouring Countries 11 4.1 Drawing Closer to Europe 14 4.2 Prohibitive Costs but Little Pressure of Adaptation 15 4.3 Reinforcing Rather Than Transforming Domestic Structures? 21 5\. Conclusion 22 Literature 25 ; With the borders of the European Union (EU) moved eastwards, students of Europeanization have been awarded yet another real-world experiment. This paper explores to what extent existing Europeanization approaches travel beyond the EU's border to its South Eastern and Eastern neighbours, which are marked by "bad governance" with regard to both the effectiveness and democratic legitimacy of their domestic institutions. The first part outlines key insights of the literature on "Europeanization West" regarding the outcomes and the mechanism of the domestic impact of the EU. Then, I summarize the main findings of research on "Europeanization East" focusing on factors that have limited or at least qualified the domestic impact of the EU in the ten Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) countries in comparison to the EU 15 (those that were members before the 2004 enlargement). This paper discusses to what extent the concepts and causal mechanisms need even further qualification when applied to countries, such as the European Neighbourhood Countries (ENC), that are neither willing nor necessarily capable of adapting to Europe and that do not even have the incentive of EU membership to cope with the costs. I will argue that the EU is unlikely to deploy any transformative power in its neighbourhood as long as it does not adjust its "accession tool box" to countries the EU does not want to take on as members. The paper concludes with some considerations on the policy implications of the EU's approach of "move closer but don't touch" which has started ...

"Empirische Arbeiten zu 'new modes of governance' haben gezeigt, dass nicht-hierarchische Formen des Regierens unter Einbeziehung nicht-staatlicher Akteure keineswegs immer effektiv sind. Sie produzieren vor allem dann problemadäquate(re) Politiken, wenn nach wie vor die Möglichkeit der hierarchischen Steuerung besteht. Dieser Beitrag untersucht, inwiefern sich aus diesem Befund ein mögliches Paradox oder zumindest Dilemma für die Governance-Forschung ergibt. Wenn die Ineffektivität hierarchischer Steuerung den Einsatz nicht-hierarchischer Formen der Handlungskoordination erfordert, deren Effektivität (und Legitimität) wiederum vom Schatten der Hierarchie abhängt, dann bieten neue Formen des Regierens zumindest in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit keine Alternative zur klassischen hierarchischen Steuerung." (Autorenreferat)