Where is the Governance in Internet Governance?
In: GigaNet: Global Internet Governance Academic Network, Annual Symposium 2009
In: GigaNet: Global Internet Governance Academic Network, Annual Symposium 2009
SSRN
Working paper
In: Science & public policy: SPP ; journal of the Science Policy Foundation, Band 28, Heft 6, S. 423-426
ISSN: 0302-3427, 0036-8245
In: Science and public policy: journal of the Science Policy Foundation, Band 28, Heft 6, S. 423-426
ISSN: 1471-5430
In: Administration & society, Band 45, Heft 9, S. 1130-1157
ISSN: 1552-3039
In: Administration & society, Band 45, Heft 9, S. 1130-1157
ISSN: 0095-3997
In: Administration & society, Band 45, Heft 9, S. 1130-1157
ISSN: 1552-3039
Inconsistent regulatory objectives may cause persistent noncompliant behavior among regulated actors. Yet, little is publicly known about when, where, and how inconsistencies get solved by regulated actors. The authors tracked the norms and interventions of multiple regulatory oversight bodies trickling down the hierarchy of three utility companies. The authors interviewed and observed managers, planners, operators, and staff studying their responses to regulatory inconsistencies from the perspective of value conflict. Patterns of coping behavior have been identified across the three companies. In conclusion, the authors argue to account for coping behavior in the regulatory mind-set and they recast how coordination may further improve the effectiveness of fragmented regulatory regimes.
In: Public money & management: integrating theory and practice in public management, Band 28, Heft 3, S. 147-152
ISSN: 1467-9302
In: Journal of contingencies and crisis management, Band 17, Heft 4, S. 221-232
ISSN: 1468-5973
Somewhere around 10% of all machines connected to the Internet are thought to be infected with malicious software. This has allowed the emergence of so‐called 'botnets'– networks of sometimes millions of infected machines that are remotely controlled by malicious actors. Botnets are mostly used for criminal purposes, but they also enable large‐scale failures that might even reach disastrous proportions. We explain the rise of botnets as the outcome of the incentive structures of market players and present new empirical evidence on these incentives. The resulting externalities require some form of voluntary or government‐led collective action. Our findings have implications for the controversial debate on the appropriate policy measures, where two perspectives on cybersecurity fight for dominance: national security and law enforcement.
In: Journal of contingencies and crisis management, Band 15, Heft 1, S. 18-29
ISSN: 1468-5973
Recent years have witnessed major governmental initiatives regarding critical infrastructure protection (CIP). During that same time, critical infrastructures (CIs) have undergone massive institutional restructuring under the headings of privatization, deregulation and liberalization. Little research has gone into understanding the interactions between these two developments. In this article, we outline the consequences of institutional restructuring for the changing ways in which CIs ensure the reliability and security of their networks and services. Neither Normal Accident Theory nor High‐Reliability Theory can account for reliability under these conditions. We then investigate the implications of these findings for CIP.
In: Internet Policy Review, 7(3). DOI: 10.14763/2018.3.927
SSRN
In: A final version of this paper has been published in Internet Policy Review with DOI: 10.14763/2018.3.927 please cite as: Mahieu, R. L. P. & Asghari, H. & van Eeten, M. (2018). Collectively exercising the right of access: individual effort, societal effect. Internet Policy Review, 7(3)
SSRN
Working paper
In: Public management review, Band 15, Heft 3, S. 429-445
ISSN: 1471-9045
In: Public management review, Band 15, Heft 3, S. 429-445
ISSN: 1471-9037
In: GigaNet 7th Annual Symposium, November 5, 2012, Baku, Azerbaijan
SSRN
Working paper
In: Global environmental politics, Band 4, Heft 4, S. 36-53
ISSN: 1526-3800
Opposition to globalization by environmentalists tends to fall into two camps: a so-called "green" counternarrative & an "ecological" one. The green counternarrative assumes that we have already witnessed sufficient harm done to the environment due to globalization & thus prescribes taking action now to oppose further globalizing forces. It is confident in its knowledge about the causes of environmental degradation as they relate to globalization & certain in its wholesale opposition to globalization. In contrast, the ecological counternarrative is less certain about globalization's record of environmental harm but worries about future threats given the scale & intensity of globalization's increasing reach. Rather than call for immediate action & wholesale opposition, it seeks further research to identify -- & specific policy initiatives to avoid -- potentially massive but as yet unknown effects of globalization on the environment. Policy analysts opposing globalization are caught between the counternarratives & often subscribe to elements of each. The challenge is to find another, more compelling counternarrative in which real-time environmental harm can be treated more seriously than it is in either of the two primary counterparts. 27 References. Adapted from the source document.