Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Alternativ können Sie versuchen, selbst über Ihren lokalen Bibliothekskatalog auf das gewünschte Dokument zuzugreifen.
Bei Zugriffsproblemen kontaktieren Sie uns gern.
In: Revista española de ciencia política, Heft 12, S. 189-192
ISSN: 1575-6548
In: Comunicazioni / Villa Vigoni, 8,3 2004, No. Spec.
World Affairs Online
L'Unione Europea vive oggi una situazione di difficoltà che è frutto dell' impasse subìto negli anni post Maastricht 1992. Gli anni dei Trattati hanno permesso all'Unione di poter accrescere e consolidare il proprio ruolo, in quanto organizzazione sovranazionale di Stati, sia in termini economici che politici e sociali. Tuttavia, la battuta di arresto ha comportato una serie di conseguenze tuttora in atto: l'incapacità di mettere in pratica il progetto della buona governance per sanare i deficit democratico e comunicativo; la difficoltà di riavvicinare alle proprie istituzioni i cittadini europei che, mai prima di adesso, si erano sentiti così distanti dall'Unione Europea; l'inerzia che vivono le istituzioni di fronte alla carenza di rappresentatività democratica del Parlamento Europeo. L'Unione ha dovuto impegnarsi per riformulare se stessa: ha così predisposto numerosi piani e strumenti per dare un nuova impostazione all'Europa, per rispondere alla crisi di immagine e aprirsi alla società civile. Nonostante gli sforzi, l'Unione fatica oggi a riconfermarsi quale progetto iniziale recepito in una prospettiva ottimistica. L'euroscetticismo e le circostanze esogene come la crisi finanziaria del 2008 hanno intaccato il sistema di governance, rendendo quasi impossibile per l'Unione attuare i principi espressi all'interno del Libro sulla governance, orientati alla realizzazione di democrazia partecipativa enunciata dal Trattato di Lisbona del 2009. La governance è quindi oggi un progetto ancora in fieri: è necessario che l'Unione riveda i propri meccanismi, affinché realizzi un nuovo progetto di unione politica nel rispetto dei principi di dialogo, apertura e partecipazione e smentisca il sentimento di disaffezione ed estraneità avvertito dai cittadini europei.
BASE
È da almeno un ventennio che si assiste all'uso crescente del termine governance nei più diversi ambiti istituzionali, politici e di ricerca e con significati e implicazioni differenti nei diversi contesti d'utilizzo. In particolare, nella comunità scientifica essa attraversa le contemporanee dottrine dell'amministrazione e dello stato (New Public Management, dottrine o teorie della regolazione), le teorie dell'organizzazione delle corporazioni economiche (corporate governance), i dibattiti sul governo locale e urbano, alcuni sviluppi della politica internazionale (global governance). Il contributo si propone di ricostruire queste diverse accezione segnalandone i termini di rilievo per la contemporanea riflessione politica e politologica.
BASE
Cover -- Quartino -- Contents -- List of contributors -- Chapter I - Proceduralization of EU Agencies: Theory and Practice - Conticellli e De Bellis -- Part I - Rule-making and Regulation in Public Utilities and Aviation Safety -- Chapter II - The Evolution of the BEREC Governance: Cooperation Forum or Agency-Like Body? - Mariniello -- Chapter III - Ensuring Public Participation in ACER's Rule-making: the Case of EU Network Codes - Vlachou -- Chapter IV - The Rulemaking Function of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) - Simoncini -- Part II - Accountability and Legitimacy in Banking and Financial Regulation -- Chapter V - Procedural Accountability through Formaland Informal Dialogue: the Case of the SingleSupervisory Mechanism (SSM) - Sciascia -- Chapter VI - The Orderly Resolution of Failing Banks: Administrative Guarantees in the Proceedings before the Single Resolution Board - Figliolia -- Chapter VII - Towards a "Procedural Legitimation" of EU Agencies? The Reform of the European Supervisory Authorities as a Case Study - Magliari -- Part III - Cross-cutting Issues: Soft Law and Boards of Appeal -- Chapter VIII - European Union Soft Law by Agencies: an Analysis of the Legitimacy of their Procedural Frameworks - Rocca and Eliantonio -- Chapter IX - A new era for EU Agencies' Boards of Appeal? A Preliminary Assessment of the Recent Reform of CJEU's Statute and its Implication on EU Administrative Adjudication - Alberti -- Chapter X - The Transformation of the European Administration - della Cananea -- Finito di stampare -- Volumi pubblicati.
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.
BASE
To explain the institutional developments of the EC/EU, the traditional theories of European integration used to build their arguments around two opposite and well-known models of public authority, the International Organisation one vs. the State one: But both of these yardsticks have proven to be of limited heuristic power, faced with the peculiarity of the EC/EU institutional configuration. The deadlock that classic theories run into, then, was just bypassed by the following studies, that left behind the "ontological question" to focus on middle-range fields or specific dynamics, driven by the idea that the system had a unique nature, but the way it worked could be known and named. Thus, the post-ontological studies often referred to the European institutional level as a "governance system", to indicate that the EC/EU is able to allocate values by shaping trans-boundary policy processes, but through an institutional interplay hardly referable to some conventional political model. Thus, this paper aims (1) to analyse the different contents attached to the "governance" label in European studies since the fixing Hix made when talking of a "new governance agenda" in 1998, (2) to recast the ontological question in the light of the "new governance", a theoretical framework linking Rosenau's concept of self-sustaining trans-boundary "Spheres of Authority" to policy cycles now decoupled from the nation-state jurisdictions, and (3) to define and apply this framework to the institutional development of the EC/EU, to identify the reasons beneath the common project actual stalemate.
BASE
In: Revista española de ciencia política, Heft 6, S. 225-226
ISSN: 1575-6548
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.
BASE
This Ph.D thesis entitled "Impairment of goodwill and corporate governance" explores the association between the impairment of goodwill according to the international and US accounting standards (IAS 36 and SFAS 142) and the corporate governance system. In brief, the research question aims at verifying if and how different corporate governance actors influence the impairment test choices. Indeed, the impairment of goodwill involves across-the-board most firm functions. The procedures needed to carry out the impairment test cannot be limited only to the accounting domain, being instead necessary merging the competences in the strategic and operational management, in organization and finance with the accounting-related ones. Underlying the impairment of goodwill there are indeed assumptions that are used for both the ordinary and the strategic decisions. The valuations underlying goodwill impairments are meaningful, revealing about internal politics and they are portentous of the management past (because goodwill originates from business combinations) and future (because goodwill is the expression of the expected benefits deriving from the synergies created or from the invisible intangibles of the acquired entity) strategy. The result of the periodic impairment test constitutes a signal of the future strategy of the firm or of the effectiveness of past strategies. Also, the assumptions underlying the impairment procedure derive from the forecasts, which are predicted at different levels within the firm. The development of my research takes into account a conceptual, historical and doctrinal analysis of the goodwill write-offs, mainly in the Italian accounting literature and with a brief overview on the International accounting literature. The reason to explore the evolution of the goodwill notion and treatment through the accounting history moves from the dense and puzzling debate that since the nineteenth century characterised the accounting panorama, leading the goodwill to be one of the most controversial assets. By common consent the process underlying the valuation of goodwill is associated to the entire process to determine the company economic value. From the introduction of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142 (SFAS 142) in the United States and of International Accounting Standard 36 (IAS 36) in the International Accounting Standards adopter countries, follows several critiques and reservations from academics, practitioners, standard setters and regulators. As far afield as that in recent years both the US Public Company Accounting Oversight Board and the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group questioned whether prior amortisation process was more relevant and reliable. The corporate governance system may moderate the use of discretionary accounting choices, enforcing the overall reliability of financial reporting. On the one hand I investigate the impact that the internal corporate governance mechanisms have on the impairment test. On the other hand I verify whether the external corporate governance mechanisms are able to affect the decision of impairment. Within the internal corporate governance mechanisms I explore the board of directors, the managerial incentives, the insider ownership and the chief financial officer perception on the impairment of goodwill. Within the external corporate governance mechanisms I explore the institutional ownership, state ownership, external auditor and the analysts forecasts likely associations with discretional impairment of goodwill. This study is mainly grounded on the positivist agency theory, supposing that the agent, whether is the management, or the external auditor or different types of shareholders acts in its own interests which usually may not correspond to the best interests of the principal (Jensen and Meckling, 1976; Fama and Jensen, 1983; Jensen, 1983; Eisenhardt, 1989). The empirical analysis comprises the use of diverse research methods such as archival and survey method. This thesis provides a threefold theoretical contribution, contributing to the studies on accounting history, on accounting and on corporate governance. First, it develops a path within the Italian accounting tradition that might be considered as trailblazing of the modern accounting standards. I retrace different approaches on the evaluation issues and on the concept of goodwill that some of the most influential Italian "Economisti Aziendali" emphasised in their writings. From the specific attention devoted to the long-lived assets financial evaluations one can appreciate the multidimensionality of our "Economia Aziendale", including operations, management and control. As a matter of fact, the impairment of assets constitutes the trait d'union between various functions within the firm, involving beyond accounting also strategy, finance, operation, internal and external control. I thus carefully explore the past accounting literature on the goodwill-related issues, employing a constructive and historical method that led me to build a personal interpretation. Second, as underlined by prior literature, the manipulation of goodwill write-offs makes allocating financial resources highly inefficient, both at the firm and at market levels, and compromises the role of financial reporting as an external control system (Beatty & Weber, 2006; Ramanna and Watts, 2012). Given the important economic and market implications, managers, directors, chief financial officers, shareholders and external auditors carefully assess the estimates underlying the goodwill write-offs (Gu and Lev, 2011; Ramanna and Watts, 2012). Despite this, prior research has not yet systematically investigated whether the corporate governance system influences the write-offs decisions. As a matter of fact, in literature there are conflicting findings on managerial incentives in manipulating the earnings through specific accruals and in detail through assets write-offs. Third, as far as I know there are still unexplored areas of corporate governance's influence on impairment of goodwill.
BASE