Multilevel Governance in Europe
In: L' Europe en formation: revue d'études sur la construction européenne et le fédéralisme = journal of studies on European integration and federalism, Band 353 - 354, Heft 3, S. 197-205
ISSN: 2410-9231
181 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: L' Europe en formation: revue d'études sur la construction européenne et le fédéralisme = journal of studies on European integration and federalism, Band 353 - 354, Heft 3, S. 197-205
ISSN: 2410-9231
In: Review of international political economy, Band 13, Heft 5, S. 725-749
ISSN: 1466-4526
In: West European politics, Band 32, Heft 1, S. 235-236
ISSN: 0140-2382
In: European view: EV, Band 9, Heft 1, S. 97-103
ISSN: 1865-5831
In the current economic and social crisis affecting Europe, dialogue is of great importance. The reaction of the EU to the present situation is evident from various discussions and documents. Following the ambitious Lisbon Strategy, a document created during a period of economic growth for most of the Member States, we now have before us the Europe 2020 Strategy. In this article, the author explores the contents of this strategy in light of the implementation of its goals of multilevel governance.
In: The European journal of development research, Band 18, Heft 2, S. 299-318
ISSN: 1743-9728
In: The European journal of development research: journal of the European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), Band 18, Heft 2, S. 299-318
ISSN: 0957-8811
In: Canadian journal of political science: CJPS = Revue canadienne de science politique, Band 41, Heft 2, S. 329-354
ISSN: 1744-9324
Abstract.While an important component of incumbent support, the effect of economic conditions on vote choice (economic voting) can be undermined by the presence of multilevel institutions; voters are faced with the prospect of evaluating economic conditions and governments at different levels simultaneously. This paper tests the applicability of a model which seeks to account for how and how well voters cope with the complexity of multilevel governance. The accountability-centred model suggests that federal and provincial governments should only be evaluated for those actions and outcomes that they can reasonably be seen to have influence over. Additionally, it is asked whether high information respondents are better able to navigate some of the complexities of Canada's multilevel system. Analyses are conducted using data from the 1993 and 1997 Canadian Election Studies.Résumé.Les conditions économiques constituent un facteur d'appui électoral important pour les dirigeants politiques. Il semble, toutefois, que l'impact de ce facteur soit amoindri dans les États présentant plusieurs niveaux de gouvernement. Dans les sociétés ayant des institutions multi-paliers, les électeurs ont en effet le défi d'attribuer les performances économiques aux divers paliers de gouvernement. Cet article teste un modèle théorique qui tente d'expliquer comment les électeurs se comportent face à la complexité de la gouvernance multi-paliers au Canada. Le modèle, centré sur la responsabilité des dirigeants, suggère que les gouvernements fédéral et provinciaux devraient uniquement être jugés pour les décisions et résultats politiques sur lesquels ils exercent manifestement une influence. Cet article examine, en outre, la question de savoir si les électeurs bien informés saisissent mieux la complexité de la gouvernance multi-paliers lorsqu'ils évaluent la performance des dirigeants. L'analyse se fonde sur les données de l'Étude électorale canadienne de 1993 et de 1997.
In: International studies review, Band 9, Heft 2, S. 304-306
ISSN: 1468-2486
In: Canadian journal of political science: CJPS = Revue canadienne de science politique : RCSP, Band 41, Heft 2, S. 329-354
ISSN: 0008-4239
In: Governance: an international journal of policy and administration, Band 20, Heft 3, S. 423-444
ISSN: 1468-0491
Climate change policy has commonly been framed as a matter of international governance for which global policy strategies can be readily employed. The decade of experience following the 1997 signing of the Kyoto Protocol suggests a far more complex process involving a wide range of policy options and varied engagement by multiple levels of governance systems. The respective experiences of the United States and Canada suggest that formal engagement in the international realm of policy is not a good indicator of domestic policy development or emissions reductions. The different contexts of intergovernmental relations, varied resources available to subnational governments for policy development and implementation, and role of subnational leaders in policy formation have emerged as important factors in explaining national differences between these North American neighbors. Consequently, climate change increasingly presents itself as a challenge not only of international relations but also of multilevel governance, thereby creating considerable opportunity to learn from domestic policy experimentation.
In: Governance: an international journal of policy and administration and institutions, Band 20, Heft 3, S. 423-444
ISSN: 0952-1895
World Affairs Online
In: Edinburgh Student Law Review, August 2010
SSRN
In: Publius: the journal of federalism, Band 39, Heft 1, S. 210
ISSN: 0048-5950
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 12, Heft 2, S. 141-159
ISSN: 2468-0958, 1075-2846
World Affairs Online
In: Politics & policy: a publication of the Policy Studies Organization, Band 34, Heft 4, S. 726-747
ISSN: 1555-5623