Suchergebnisse

Looks at how the rise of governance challenges many of the more traditional notions of public administration. Argues that a governance perspective provides an organizing framework for understanding the changing processes of governing. (Original abstract - amended)

The urban literature has devoted increasing attention to cross-national comparison of urban change and governance. What is lacking, however, is the development of conceptual frameworks that are adequate to embrace the greater variation in conditions encountered in cross-national research, compared with conditions within a single country. Without such a framework, comparison remains an exercise in depicting unique and unrelated cases. Urban regime theory holds potential for explaining the variety of arrangements through which policymakers in cities have coped with change, because of its sensitivity to local conditions and local actors. Its essential contribution is to focus attention on the collective action problems that have to be overcome for effective urban governance to emerge. The nature of the collective action challenge varies according to the purpose, composition, and position of potential regime partners. Substantial differences in motivating factors must be taken into account in order to apply regime analysis cross-nationally. Drawing upon differences already identified in the regime literature, the authors propose a typology of organic, instrumental, and symbolic regimes.

THE AUTHORS CONTINUE THEIR EVALUATION, BEGUN IN A PREVIOUS PAPER, OF A RADICAL DECENTRALISATION INITIATIVE IN THE LONDON BOROUGH OF TOWER HAMLETS BY CONSIDERING THE SCHEME FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF STAFF AND COUNCILLORS. DECENTRALISATION CLEARLY PRESENTS DIFFERENT ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES TO THE VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED IN ITS INTRODUCTION. IN A CONCLUDING SECTION, THE AUTHORS MOVE BEYOND THESE PARTICULAR PERSPECTIVES TO CONSIDER HOW THE EXPERIENCE OF TOWER HAMLETS CAN BE UTILIZED IN DEBATES ABOUT THE FUTURE ORGANIZATION AND ROLE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

Asks what can be learnt from the experience of another country by projecting that experience onto the particular setting and circumstances of the home country; provides evidence about the likely effects of a potentially important reform. Concludes with an assessment of the general case for experimenting with an elected mayor in British local government. (Abstract amended)

Evaluates a decentralisation initiative in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets by looking at the scheme from the perspective of staff and councillors. Considers how the experience of Tower Hamlets can be fed into debates about the future organisation and role of local government. (Abstract amended)

Considers the degree to which the initiative has improved service delivery and involved residents in decision making. Decentralisation emerges not as a 'cure-all' for the problems of local government but as presenting some advantages. A further article will examine decentralisation from the perspective of staff and councillors. (Abstract amended)