Suchergebnisse

Dear colleagues, Welcome to the "Journal of Policy & Governance"! In my opinion, an editorial may reflect the general direction of the journal, values, strategy, priorities, goals and objectives, and so on. This is the first edition of the Journal of Policy & Governance where I act as the Editor-in-Chief. The title of the journal includes two key concepts, the "Policy" and the "Governance", and they are crucial for the target audience of the journal. That is, the field of "Policy Science": policy cycle, problem identification for analysis, policy environment, resources, stakeholders' analysis, communications (strategic, multilevel, etc.), policy tools and evaluation, etc. Also, these are values, objectives and methodology of the research and policy analysis, policy as the process and reasons for state intervention, evidence-based policy, quantitative and qualitative methods of data processing and the formation of evidence in the policy process and so on. The field of governance is also valuable for research: democratic, good, sensitive, multilevel, digital, and so on: Service State, public consultation, and interaction between government, business and civil society in the policy-making process. Common decisions, power and out of power policy makers, leadership, analysts and policy actors also require semantic and empirical content in the articles of the journal.

Public services can develop two contrasting practices of accountability: the conventional model emphasises that to be accountable is to be 'held to account', to be expected to answer questions about performance and that the answers are then evaluated by superiors measured against some standard or expectation following which praise or blame is meted out and sanctions applied. This mode of accountability is expresses hierarchy of authority. A very different process encourages dialogues of accountability between practitioners and publics, who 'give an account' offering a story that interprets and explains what has happened and why it has taken place. This paper observes these contrasting practices in the development of school governance in England and argues for the importance of dialogue to enhance learning and democratic responsiveness. ; Public services can develop two contrasting practices of accountability: the conventional model emphasises that to be accountable is to be 'held to account', to be expected to answer questions about performance and that the answers are then evaluated by superiors measured against some standard or expectation following which praise or blame is meted out and sanctions applied. This mode of accountability is expresses hierarchy of authority. A very different process encourages dialogues of accountability between practitioners and publics, who 'give an account' offering a story that interprets and explains what has happened and why it has taken place. This paper observes these contrasting practices in the development of school governance in England and argues for the importance of dialogue to enhance learning and democratic responsiveness.

El artículo analiza las dificultades de la gobernabilidad y su carácter esquivo. Se trata de un estudio sobre cómo mejorar la gobernabilidad, partiendo de la base de que en muchas ocasiones lo que existe en la práctica, son condiciones de ingobernabilidad. El razonamiento central parte de que la ingobernabilidad puede en ocasiones imperar, sin que ello implique necesariamente una fractura en la democracia en su conjunto. Se continúa con un examen de la cohesión y la perdurabilidad de las sociedades, como ejes de la gobernabilidad. Luego se prosigue con con­sideraciones acerca de las redes de gobernabilidad a nivel local y regio­nal, y con el tratamiento de la crisis de información en las sociedades fragmentadas, así como con las condiciones de inestabilidad crónica y los gobiernos locales. Se finaliza con algunas consideraciones sobre el vínculo existente entre lo local y lo global, y el posible rol de ese proceso en el manejo de crisis y la educación para la paz. ; The article analyzes the difficulties of governance and the elusive nature of governability. lts main purpose is to make suggestions as to how to increase governability. Central to the argument is the suggestion that, despite the occasional reign of ingovernability, this does not imply the fracture of democracy altogether. Cohesion and perdurability are the keys to governability. The article analyzes local and regional governa­bility networks and the management of the information crisis in frag­mented societies, as well as the conditions of chronic instability and local co-governments. The article ends with several considerations on the local-to-global links, and the potential role of this process in the mana­gement of crisis and education for peace.

Governance is presented by undefined and confused areas that tend to expand in a more or less arbitrary way in the absence of stable and reliable normative standards. All this calls into question concepts and recompositive monolithic categories of modern political-legal rationality and in the first place sovereignty. At the same time the current neo-governmental structure does not stand as a technology of power, exclusionary or alternative to other rationalities, but rather it tends to bring out all the contradictions and ambiguities of the present time. ; La gobernanza es presentada por áreas confusas e indefinidas que tienden a expandirse de una manera más o menos arbitraria en ausencia de estándares normativos estables y confiables. Todo esto pone en cuestión conceptos y categorías monolíticas recompositivas de moderna racionalidad política-legal y en primer lugar de la soberanía. Al mismo tiempo, la estructura neogubernamental actual no se sostiene como una tecnología de poder excluyente o alternativa a otras racionalidades, sino que tiende a llevar a cabo todas las contradicciones y ambigüedades del tiempo presente.

"Venezuela: 4th & 5th republics" (Neira Fernández, Enrique) ; Presentation ; I. Conceptual frame ; Challenges and modernization ; Reforms of the state ; Governance ; Genuineness ; Decentralization ; Democracy ; Leadership ; Militarism ; Democratic caesarism ; Populism ; Violence ; Revolution ; Socialism ; II. The fourth republic (Before Chávez) ; A look back ; The economic thing ; The social thing ; The political thing ; The ethical thing ; III. The fith republic (In the times of Chávez) ; Introduction ; The strong man ; The process. Political ideology ; The process. Characteristics ; The beautiful revolution ; Gusty future ; Conclusion. The quadrature of the circle ; neira@intercable.net.ve ; Nivel analítico

El objetivo de este trabajo fue hacer una genealogía sobre el concepto de gobernanza, presentar diferentes conceptualizaciones sobre el tema y discutirlos a la luz de algunos elementos de la gobernanza ambiental. La metodología está basada en revisión bibliográfica y documental. Desarrollos del concepto de gobernanza son abordados e implementados por organismos multilaterales, también por pensadores de las ciencias sociales, de los movimientos sociales y de organizaciones no gubernamentales. Sobre gobernanza se pueden diferenciar tres enfoques: uno que la entiende como sinónimo de gobierno; otro que la asume como un marco normativo o conjunto de criterios que deben satisfacer los sistemas políticos para el logro de los objetivos propuestos, y finalmente, la gobernanza puede ser entendida también como la coordinación que tiene lugar en espacios no jerárquicos (redes), que promueven la participación de la sociedad civil en la deliberación de los asuntos públicos y ambientales, mediante sistemas de gobierno gestados por las propias comunidades, que muestran una nueva visión de democracia que han ido edificando, con logros en la creación de nuevas normas para la gestión de los bienes comunes y de su territorio. CC BY-NC-SA Gestión y Ambiente (2016). ; The objective of this work was making a genealogy on the concept of governance, presenting several definitions and discussing them in the light of some elements of environmental governance. The methodology is based on a bibliographic and documentary revision. Developments of this concept are addressed and implemented by multilateral agencies, and also by thinkers of social sciences, social movements and non-governmental organizations. Three approaches of governance can be distinguished: one that understands it as a synonym of government; other that defines it as a framework policy or set of criteria that must be complied by the political systems for the achievement of the proposed objectives; and the third approach states that governance can be understood as the coordination that takes place in non-hierarchical spaces (networks), which promote the participation of civil society in the discussion of public and environmental affairs, through government systems used by communities themselves. This third approach of governance reveals the new vision of democracy that these communities have been building up, with achievements related to the creation of new standards for the management of common goods and their territory. CC BY-NC-SA Gestión y Ambiente (2016).

La experiencia de la emergencia por el covid-19 en España ha supuesto una alteración de las pautas normales de gobernabilidad para dar paso a un desarrollo de la gobernanza territorial, al atribuirse el protagonismo fundamental a las Comunidades Autónomas. De este modo las esferas autonómicas han puesto de manifiesto una tendencia mantenida a lo largo del tiempo a favor de la gobernanza, donde se han superado con éxito algunos de sus inconvenientes, demostrando la adecuación institucional hacia un nuevo marco que preludia la evolución de las democracias en el siglo XXI. ; The covid-19 state of emergency experience in Spain has meant an alteration of the normal government guidelines, opening a way to the rise of territorial governance. As a result, Autonomous Communities are attributed the fundamental role. In this vein, the Autonomous Communities have revealed a tendency maintained over time in favor of governance. In this context, some of the drawbacks inherent to governance have been successfully overcome, demonstrating the institutional adaptation to a new framework that preludes the evolution of democracies in the XXI century.

Este artículo se centra en la problemática de la protección de los derechos sociales y los nuevos paradigmas de la gobernanza económica de la eurozona. Como resultado de las reformas de los últimos años de los tratados y de las recientes modificaciones en la gobernanza económica de la UE, a los gobiernos estatales no les es posible elaborar su propio sistema político y jurídico en asuntos económicos y sociales. Este trabajo analizará estas particularidades así como las limitaciones legales e institucionales que han coartado la soberanía económica de los Estados miembros.This article focuses on the issue of protection of social rights and the new paradigms of economic governance in the euro area. As a result of the recent treaty reforms and recent changes in EU economic governance, it is not possible for state governments to develop their own political and legal systems in economic and social affairs. This paper will analyze these particularities as well as the legal and institutional constraints that have curtailed the economic sovereignty of the Member States.

El gobierno de las universidades americanas está profundamente enraizado en los ideales de la democracia americana y en el concepto de citizen board of trustees(personas ajenas a la institución que llevan a cabo una supervisión de la Universidad o el College sin llegar a llevar el trabajo cotidiano). Estos ciudadanos no son empleados de la institución o de alguno de los gobiernos de los cincuenta Estados del país. Su tarea consiste en representar a la vez a la institución y al conjunto de los intereses de los ciudadanos.Un governing board posee diferentes e importantes responsabilidades, como la supervisión de las finanzas de la institución financieras, los programas académicos y los estándares, y el conjunto de las directrices estratégicas. Una de las más importantes responsabilidades que asumen los governing board es la protección y preservación de la independencia y la autonomía de la institución. Para que el governing board lleve a cabo con éxito sus tareas hace falta una estrecha relación de trabajo con la administración de la institución de educación superior y, en particular, con el presidente/rector. El presidente/rector es contratado y evaluado por el órgano de gobierno y es el principal gestor y portavoz. Cuenta con un gabinete de vicepresidentes/vicerrectores, y preside la administración académica y tiene la facultad de dirigir los objetivos estratégicos establecidos y aprobados por el governing board. Aunque la máxima responsabilidad resida en el governing board, algunas decisiones se podrían delegar al presidente/rector, y a la autoridad académica como las decisiones curriculares.El sistema de estructuras de multicampus, donde un Consejo gobierna múltiples instituciones, son frecuentes en los Estados Unidos de América. Algunos sistemas gobiernan todos los colegios y las universidades públicas del Estado, otros lo hacen con instituciones que tengan misiones similares, y otros siguen un criterio regional.Mientras los citizen trusteeship generalmente reflejan un enfoque descentralizado en la toma de decisiones, formando parte de la cultura política americana, hay asuntos como las cualificaciones para la selección de los miembros del consejo, una correcta orientación y educación, y competencia que les demanda tiempo y atención. Los retos actuales a los que se enfrenta la educación superior en América son tales como una mejor preparación de los profesores, así como el aumento de la producción de grados deCollege degree, y la reducción de las diferencias que existen en los resultados académicos obtenidos por las minorías demográficas, e incluso cuestionarse si las estructuras de gobierno, apoyadas por citizen boards, resulta adecuada. Hablar de reformas para reforzar el gobierno y sus habilidades para dirigir las respuestas estratégicas hacia esos retos es cada vez más frecuente. Siendo también objeto de crítica la selección, la formación, el compromiso con el interés público general o con la institución educativa, a pesar de las dudas que se refieren a su eficacia para el siglo XXI, los citizen governing boards permanecen como uno de los mejores rasgos de la educación universitaria americana. AbstractAmerican higher education governance is deeply rooted in the ideals of American democracy and in the concept of a citizen board of trustees – persons outside the institution who oversee the university or college but do not run it on a day-to-day basis. These citizens are not employees of the institution or of any of the individual 50 state governments. Their duty it is to represent both the institution and the broad public interest of citizens.A governing board has several important responsibilities, including oversight of the institution's finances, academic programs and standards, and broad strategic direction. One of the most critical governing board responsibilities is protecting and preserving the independence and autonomy of the institution. For the board to successfully carry out its responsibilities requires an effective working relationship with the college or university administration, in particular, the president. The college president is hired and evaluated by the governing board and is the lead manager and lead spokesperson. With a cabinet of vice presidents, he or she leads the academic administration and the faculty toward the strategic goals established approved by the governing board. Although ultimate responsibility rests with the governing board, many decisions should be delegated to the president, and also to the faculty for academic and curriculum decisions.Multicampus system structures, where one board governs multiple institutions, are prevalent in the United States. Some systems govern all public colleges and universities in the state, some govern institutions of similar mission, and some are regionally based. Systems are led by a system executive with constituent campuses by campus presidents. Statewide coordinating boards and agencies exist in most states, and in just under half they play a significant role in state policy development and regulation.While citizen trusteeship generally reflects the decentralized approach to decision making that is part of American political culture, there are concerns about qualifications for board members selection, adequate orientation and education, and competing demands on their time and attention. Modern challenges facing U.S. higher education, such as preparing more and better teachers, increasing college degree production, and narrowing the education achievement gaps of minority populations, also lead many to question whether governance structures undergirded by citizen boards are adequate. Talk of reforms to strengthen governance and its ability to lead strategic responses to these challenges are increasing in frequency. Although subject to criticism about their selection, training, and commitment to either the broad public interest or the institution, and despite concerns about their effectiveness for the 21st Century, citizen governing boards remain one of American higher education's best features.

The displacement of the modern term ofgovernment for the postmodern one ofgovernance, reveals a new postmodern languagein which one is left to guess that both notions,government and governance, tend to be opposed.Corporate governance signifies the seizure ofpower of financial capitalism over industrialcapitalism, which is nothing more than, on theone hand, to lean towards the maximumprofitability for the shareholders, to raise the valueof everything on the market without moralconsiderations, to, force the actors to look forpermanent risk and to adapt more flexiblehierarchical relations in the administration of thecompany; and on the other, the marginalizationof the working class. Governance has reachedthe political matters turning itself into the modelof public management par excellence, it meansthat the government, diminished to it's basic formguides a civil society, which acquires an importantrole in the creation and follow-up of the differentpolicies, that is to say, that the governmentacquires a flexible form of regulation, it is therewhere political governance leads us, to thealleged self-regulation of private interests thatadded-together are able to shape the generalinterest. Indeed it is a question of a new form ofdomination marked by a political failing, wherethe civil society plays in opposition to the State.Governance is leaning towards a fearsome trapto the democracy, insofar as it is presented as anextension of democracy embodied in a betterparticipation of civil society, destroying the publicperson formed by the union of all others and thebecoming representative of particular interests. ; El desplazamiento del término moderno de gobierno por el postmoderno de gobernanza, pone de manifiesto un nuevo lenguaje postmoderno en el que se deja entrever que ambas nociones, gobierno y gobernanza, tienden a oponerse. La gobemanza corporativa designa la toma del poder del capitalismo financiero sobre el capitalismo industrial, que no es otra cosa que, por un lado, propender por la rentabilidad máxima para los accionistas, valorizar todo en el mercado sin consideraciones morales, obligar a los actores a la búsqueda de riesgo permanente y flexibilizar las relaciones jerárquicas en la Administración de la empresa; y por el otro, la marginación de la clase obrera. La gobernanza ha llegado a los asuntos políticos convirtiéndose en modelo de gestión pública por excelencia, ella trata que el gobierno reducido a su mínima expresión guie a una sociedad civil que adquiere un papel importante en la creación y seguimiento de las diferentes políticas, es decir, que el gobierno adquiere una forma flexible de regulación, es allá donde la gobernanza política nos conduce, a la supuesta autorregulación de los intereses privados que sumados pasan a configurar el interés general. En realidad se trata de una nueva forma de dominación marcada por un desvanecimiento político, donde la sociedad civil juega en contra del Estado. La gobernanza le está tendiendo una temible trampa a la democracia, en tanto se presenta como una ampliación de la democracia materializada en una mejor participación de la sociedad civil, destruyendo la persona pública que se forma por la unión de todos los otros y convirtiéndola en representante de intereses particulares

En el presente texto se analiza la semántica de la governance, el proceso de deconstitucionalización del mando, y la reconfiguración del léxico y de las categorías fundamentales de la política a partir de la de-soberanización y de la gubernamentalización de dispositivos institucionales y normativos. Para ello, se vincula reconstrucción genealógica y descripción analítica, las líneas fundamentales de articulación del debate politológico y la obra de Michel Foucault.

The aim of the study was to identify the legal mechanisms for the establishment of e-government and the development of e-governance from the perspective of international law and national legislation of countries where the level of e-governance is very high. Empirical and theoretical methods of scientific knowledge, as well as the comparative analysis were used for a comprehensive coverage of the research topic. It is found that the community-oriented principles are the basis for the functioning of e-government with a view to the digital transformation values. The establishment of digital government in different countries with a very high level of e-governance has its own peculiarities related to the status of the national legal framework, institutional capacity and economic development, information policy and information security. It was established that the e-governance should be improved by eliminating the digital gap, raising the level of digital literacy, creating a single competent authority to regulate public e-governance policy, introducing a network system of access to e-government services, and establishing a system for training civil servants on the provision of electronic services. Further research on e-governance may be focused on follow-up study and argumentation in order to determine effective legal tools of its regulation.

This article discusses election governance based on public participation with qualitative research methods, the approach used in case studies in West Nusa Tenggara (NTB) Province, the region is one of thirty-four province in Indonesia. Governance is an approach that is considered relevant, because election governance is its manifestation. The results show that the Regional of General Election Commission of NTB as the authority of election organizers succeeded in building a model of election governance based on public participation through three strategies, namely the movement to protect suffrage, family-based voter education, and voter education based on educational institutions. These three models are designed through three approaches, namely multi-stakeholder partnership, convergence, safety and public health of disaster areas. The methods of implementation include; short videos about elections, consistent use of mass media and continuous election classes. The impact of the public participation-based election governance model in NTB is that the number of public participation in 2019 Elections increased to 82 percent compared to 2014 Election of 77.32 percent where the model has not been implemented. The obstacles faced in building participatory-based election governance are two, namely; the issue of legitimacy provided by the Electoral Law and has not been made the education of voters as core business of General Commission Election, while voter education is an effective instrument in developing public participation. The solution is necessary to change article 3 and article 15 (Presiden Republik Indonesia, 2017) on the elections to include participation as the principle of organizing elections. In addition, voter education should be the core business from the national to the regions.

ABSTRACT This study aims to examine the effect of the implementation of good village governance in Indonesia, its competence and performance, based on the level of fraud and its fund management. Data was collected by conducting a survey of 1,080 management-level respondents in village government. The results found that the poor implementation of the good village governance reveal a high level of fraud in the management of funds. This condition was reflected in the lack of equitable development and the failure to alleviate poverty.

La Corporación Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga, en adelante "UNAB" o la "Universidad", es una institución sin ánimo de lucro de carácter privado dedicada al servicio de la educación. Tiene como propósito la formación en el marco de principios democráticos y liberales y propende por el mejoramiento del país. En su calidad de Institución de Educación Superior desarrolla funciones de docencia, investigación y extensión en áreas que incluyen educación técnica, tecnológica, de pregrado y posgrados, así como la investigación científica o tecnológica y la producción, desarrollo y transmisión del conocimiento y la cultura. Para la UNAB el gobierno corporativo, entendido como el conjunto de principios y reglas a través de las cuales se asignan derechos y responsabilidades a los órganos de gobierno y se definen sus marcos de actuación, es un instrumento para mejorar su desempeño misional, y generar valor para sus grupos de interés. El presente Código de Gobierno Corporativo es un documento de carácter autorregulatorio que refleja el compromiso de la UNAB con el fortalecimiento de su modelo de gobierno. El Código describe de manera general los principales elementos del sistema de dirección y control de la Universidad. En este sentido, actúa como articulador de todos los elementos de gobierno corporativo definidos por la Universidad que se desarrollan de manera más detallada en otros documentos internos tales como: los Estatutos, los reglamentos de los órganos de gobierno, y el Código de ética. Este documento está estructurado con base en la Constitución Política, la Ley, los Estatutos de la Corporación y estándares locales e internacionales de gobierno corporativo. ; INTRODUCCIÓN A. MIEMBROS DE LA CORPORACIÓN I.Sobre la Sala General de Miembros II.Deberes y derechos de los miembros de la Sala General II.Previsiones operativas de la Sala General B. CONSEJO DE BENEMÉRITOS C. JUNTA DIRECTIVA I.Deberes y derechos de los miembros de la Junta Directiva II.Sobre el Presidente y los Vicepresidentes de la Junta Directiva III.Sobre el Secretario de la Junta Directiva IV. Sobre las reuniones y operatividad de Junta Directiva V. Sobre la inducción, evaluación y remuneración de la Junta Directiva VI. Sobre los Comités de la Junta Directiva D.ALTA DIRECCIÓN E. ARQUITECTURA DE CONTROL I.Auditoría interna II.Gestión de riesgos III.Revisoría Fiscal F. TRANSPARENCIA Y REVELACIÓN DE INFORMACIÓN G. DISPOSICIONES ÉTICAS I.Disposiciones sobre conflictos de interés II.Disposiciones sobre transacciones entre partes vinculadas III. Línea Ética H.RESOLUCIÓN DE CONTROVERSIAS I.DISPOSICIONES FINALES ; The Autonomous University of Bucaramanga Corporation, hereinafter "UNAB" or the "University", is a private non-profit institution dedicated to the service of education. Its purpose is to train within the framework of democratic and liberal principles and aims for the betterment of the country. As an Institution of Higher Education, it develops teaching, research and extension functions in areas that include technical, technological, undergraduate and postgraduate education, as well as scientific or technological research and the production, development and transmission of knowledge and culture. For UNAB, corporate governance, understood as the set of principles and rules through which rights and responsibilities are assigned to the governing bodies and their frameworks of action are defined, is an instrument to improve their missionary performance, and generate value for your stakeholders. This Corporate Governance Code is a self-regulatory document that reflects UNAB's commitment to strengthening its governance model. The Code describes in a general way the main elements of the management and control system of the University. In this sense, it acts as an articulator of all the elements of corporate governance defined by the University that are developed in more detail in other internal documents such as: the Bylaws, the regulations of the governing bodies, and the Code of Ethics. This document is structured based on the Political Constitution, the Law, the Bylaws of the Corporation and local and international standards of corporate governance.