Suchergebnisse

Many of today's public policies aimed directly or indirectly at regulating the behaviors of individuals and organizations provide for the implementation of a certain type of instrument which can be qualified as a label. They share some features with what the literature tends to identify as proper standards (e.g., they aim at defining the best practices, they may represent - at least - a symbolic resource for those who adopt them), but they also have some peculiarities, which we will present here. In this paper, we propose to analyze the characteristics and dynamics underpinning this mode of governance as part of a study of two particular public policy domains chosen for their complementarity as well as their contrasts: the fight against obesity, and sustainable consumption. In both of these fields, labels have become a preferred mode of governance - and even, we might say, a kind of standard. Based on Foucault (2004), we emphasize the fact that the logics of distinction, which regulate utilities and sanctions in a particular social field, are instrumentalized by public policy as an incentive to the actors to deliberately take action whose value is endorsed by a label. Hence, the aim and outcome of this mode of governance are not the uniformity of a field, but the ongoing creation of increasingly demanding labels that only some of the participants can hope to obtain.

Many of today's public policies aimed directly or indirectly at regulating the behaviors of individuals and organizations provide for the implementation of a certain type of instrument which can be qualified as a label. They share some features with what the literature tends to identify as proper standards (e.g., they aim at defining the best practices, they may represent – at least – a symbolic resource for those who adopt them), but they also have some peculiarities, which we will present here. In this paper, we propose to analyze the characteristics and dynamics underpinning this mode of governance as part of a study of two particular public policy domains chosen for their complementarity as well as their contrasts: the fight against obesity, and sustainable consumption. In both of these fields, labels have become a preferred mode of governance – and even, we might say, a kind of standard. Based on Foucault (2004), we emphasize the fact that the logics of distinction, which regulate utilities and sanctions in a particular social field, are instrumentalized by public policy as an incentive to the actors to deliberately take action whose value is endorsed by a label. Hence, the aim and outcome of this mode of governance are not the uniformity of a field, but the ongoing creation of increasingly demanding labels that only some of the participants can hope to obtain.

Our methods of governance are shifting. We increasingly rely on an interconnected web of public, private, and nonprofit actors working across organizational, institutional, and sectoral boundaries to deliver public services. Our understanding of these new practices, however, is reliant on models of individual rationality and social behavior developed for hierarchical organizational forms. I argue that collectivist models of decentralized, self-organizing social forms may advance our understanding of modern governance practices and balance tensions in three areas: perspectives on organizations (structure or process), between individual liberty and collective responsibility, and whether increasing freedom or control over individuals enhances organizational efficiencies.

In recent years, the use of the term "governance" has risen exponentially, often replacing the kindred term government. While the two terms are sometimes used interchangeably, many scholars have sought to distinguish them by giving "governance" a broader and less political meaning. This approach, however, tends to underestimate the essential role of the state and to overlook the central importance of politics. On the whole, democracies tend to be better governed than autocracies, but there are exceptions to this rule. The distinction between good and bad government has long been understood by people everywhere, even in societies where there has been no notion of popular participation. The relationship between democracy and good governance is a very complex one, and a serious analysis of it leads toward the realm of political philosophy.