Suchergebnisse

Der Begriff "multilevel governance" bzw. Steuerung und Koordinierung im Mehrebenensystem wird in der politikwissenschaftlichen Literatur erst seit einiger Zeit häufiger gebraucht. Mehrebenensysteme der Politik entstehen, wenn zwar die Zuständigkeiten nach Ebenen aufgeteilt, jedoch die Aufgaben interdependent sind, wenn also Entscheidungen zwischen Ebenen koordiniert werden müssen. Die in der Föderalismusdiskussion vielfach negativ bewertete "Politikverflechtung" stellt somit ein wesentliches Merkmal von "multilevel governance" dar. Gegenstand der vorliegenden politikwissenschaftlichen Analyse sind die Ursachen, die Formen und die Folgen der Verflechtung. Ein zentrales Merkmal der Mehrebenenpolitik ergibt sich aus der Tatsache, dass mit Ebenen eine bestimmte Organisation von Politik, sei es einer Gebietskörperschaft oder einer internationalen Form der Staatenzusammenarbeit oder der Staatenverbindung, umschrieben wird. Es handelt sich damit um komplexe Konfiguration, die aus der Verbindung von Strukturen und Prozessen innerhalb von Ebenen (intragouvernemental) und zwischen Ebenen (intergouvernemental) gebildet werden. Die konkrete Form eines Mehrebenensystems resultiert aus der Kombination von institutionellen "Regelsystemen" der jeweiligen Ebenen und den Beziehungen zwischen ihnen. Diese Regelsysteme erzeugen bestimmte Funktionslogiken der Politik, die mehr oder weniger miteinander kompatibel sind. (ICA2)

Theorists are becoming aware that social movements operate in both domestic & international environments, for which reason mutual benefits could be derived from exchanges of ideas between social movement & international relations studies & theories. While most writing about transnational opportunity views international institutions as presenting constraints rather than opportunities, this chapter, focusing on human rights issues, contends that certain forms of transnational contention can take advantage of opportunities available in international institutions in campaigns against states. For example, feminist groups & groups of indigenous peoples have often found the international arena more receptive to their demands than domestic political institutions. Specific cases of such cooperation around the world are presented. The framework for understanding the beneficial interaction of domestic & international politics presented in this chapter aims to provide a dynamic & interactive understanding of how the international & the domestic relate to influence the choices & outcomes of transnational networks activity; & to consider & explain the emergence of new forms of dynamic multilevel governance. Figures. J. Stanton

"This chapter analyses the Europeanization of German interest groups and patterns of interest intermediation. It puts the impact of the EU in the context of other factors influencing interest group organization and behaviour and situates Germany among other member states. While several analysts regard the degree of fit between the EU and the German mode of interest intermediation as a decisive influence on the responses of these groups to European integration, this chapter argues that it is mainly organizational capacities that explain interest group strategies in the EU multi-level system. The argument is tested in the following steps. First, the chapter provides an overview of the EU and the German systems of interest groups, of the prevalent modes of interest intermediation, and of associational self-regulation at both levels. Based on survey data of German, British, French, and EU business associations, as well as large firms, the general strategies of German interest groups in the EU are outlined. Next, a cluster analysis serves to distinguish fives types of interest groups according to their access to political institutions, their access to information from these institutions, and their political activities during the policy cycle: niche organizations, occasional (national) players, (national) traditionalists, EU players, and multilevel players. The composition of the clusters and the organizational characteristics of the cluster members are used as evidence to establish more precisely the adaptation of German, British, and French groups to the EU. They are used to test the proposition that organizational capacities matter greatly when it comes to representing interests in the EU multi-level system." (author's abstract)

"This contribution adopts a state- and regulation-theoretical approach to the welfare state in Europe and the more general issue of whether the EU operates more as a marionette or regisseur. I argue that the concepts of welfare and competition state are too vague to provide a useful account of recent transformations in European statehood and propose instead that a transition is now well under way from different forms of Keynesian national welfare state to different forms of Schumpeterian workfare postnational regime. I also reject the two competing descriptions of the European Union and suggest an-other, namely, that the EU is a co-dependent co-regisseur of the multilevel metagovernance of the contradictory and conflictual process of Europeanization in a still emerging world society. In this context I further argue that, while the EU is the dominant metagovernance instance within Europe in this regard, it is only a nodal instance of multilevel metagovernance on the global stage." (extract)

Bromley reiterates his original contention concerning the revelatory potential of studying the EU (European Union)'s governance. The book's discussion of divergent formats is reviewed for insight into the workings of integration. Hix's summary of the pertinent differences in intergovernmental & supranational models is quoted. An argument for the EU as a functional federal state is illustrated, & debate over characterization of the EU as a regulatory state is reviewed. Nation states are compared with the EU through first an intergovernmental, then multilevel filter. Exploration of the EU's authority & credibility turns from questions of models to arguments by Rosamond, Majone, Scharpf, & Thompson regarding regulatory function, market efficiency, redistribution, & political community. 3 Tables, 8 References. M. C. Leary