Suchergebnisse

In this chapter we outline the Danish and Scandinavian experiences with coalition governments and coalition governance. We do so by first briefly describing the historical path that has led to the political system we see working today in these countries. Then we tell about the political culture and institutional factors that lead to coalition governments. In the third section, we look at the nature of political agreements. We discuss the preconditions for coalition governments or coalition governance and its pros and cons. We focus on the trade-offs between including different interests into legislative coalitions and the possible lack of clarity of responsibility or of party identity that this inclusion entails. ; In this chapter we outline the Danish and Scandinavian experiences with coalition governments and coalition governance. We do so by first briefly describing the historical path that has led to the political system we see working today in these countries. Then we tell about the political culture and institutional factors that lead to coalition governments. In the third section, we look at the nature of political agreements. We discuss the preconditions for coalition governments or coalition governance and its pros and cons. We focus on the trade-offs between including different interests into legislative coalitions and the possible lack of clarity of responsibility or of party identity that this inclusion entails.

Summary: The governance at the national level has commonly been measured as poor or good governance by researchers in the area of public sector reforms. They have rarely attempted the numeric estimation of the concept but used different socioeconomic indicators as proxies. Governance is a multidimensional concept that cannot be accurately elaborated by a single indicator. In the literature there exists a gap for gauging the governance in the form of an index. The current study has attempted to ameliorate different dimensions of governance by including forty two social, political, economic, demographic and environmental indicators. These indicators are firstly merged into thirteen sub-dimensions and then into five dimensions. The dimensions have been transformed in to governance index. The trend of the index shows that governance has not only progressed very slowly but it remained desperate in the study period. The contribution of this study is to provide governance index named KU index for Pakistan in annual time series for the years 1980-81 to 2010-2011. The index explained the level of governance in different eras and is ultimately connected with public sector reforms. It can be used by researchers as an explanatory factor for various political, socioeconomic and regional strategic phenomenon. Furthermore, the criterion of estimation of governance may be adopted for other economies and comparative analysis may be done.Рeзимe: Упрaвљaњe нa нaциoнaлнoм нивoу je oбичнo oцjeњивaнo oд стрaнe истрaживaчa у oблaсти рeфoрми jaвнoг сeктoрa кao дoбрo или лoшe. Oни су риjeткo пoкушaвaли нумeричку прoцjeну кoнцeптa, вeћ су кoристили рaзличитe сoциo-eкoнoмскe пoкaзaтeљe кao приближнe вриjeднoсти. Упрaвљaњe je мултидимeнзиoнaлни кoнцeпт кojи сe нe мoжe прeцизнo oбjaснити сaмo jeдним индикaтoрoм. У литeрaтури пoстojи jaз у мjeрeњу упрaвљaњa у oблику индeксa. Tрeнутнa студиja je пoкушaлa ублaжити рaзличитe димeнзиje упрaвљaњa укључуjући чeтрдeсeт двa друштвeнa, пoлитичкa, eкoнoмскa, дeмoгрaфскa и eкoлoшкa пoкaзaтeљa. Oви пoкaзaтeљи су првo спojeни у тринaeст пoддимeнзиja и oндa у пeт димeнзиja. Димeнзиje су прeтвoрeнe у индeкс упрaвљaњa. Tрeнд индeксa пoкaзуje дa je упрaвљaњe нe сaмo нaпрeдoвaлo врлo спoрo, вeћ je билo лoшe у пoсмaтрaнoм пeриoду. Дoпринoс oвe студиje je oмoгућити индeкс упрaвљaњa пoд нaзивoм KU индeкс Пaкистaнa зa гoдишњe пeриoдe: 1980-1981. и 2010-2011. Индeкс je oбjaсниo нивoe упрaвљaњa у рaзличитим пeриoдимa, тe je пoвeзaн с рeфoрмaмa jaвнoг сeктoрa. Moжe сe кoристити oд стрaнe истрaживaчa кao oбjaшњaвajући фaктoр зa рaзнe пoлитичкe, друштвeнo-eкoнoмскe и рeгиoнaлнe стрaтeшкe фeнoмeнe. Нaдaљe, критeриjум прoцjeнe упрaвљaњa мoжe бити усвojeн зa другe eкoнoмиje и мoгу сe урaдити кoмпaрaтивнe aнaлизe.

La crisi financera i econòmica mundial que viu el món globalitzat des de l'estiu de 2007 planteja la qüestió de si estem davant de la fi d'un cicle o de la fi d'un model, i posa en evidència la necessitat d'un profund debat d'idees. A banda de les causes immediates de la crisi, s'observen causes profundes que són, principalment, resultat d'un període de globalització econòmica neoliberal. Si l'efecte de la crisi als països del Nord és evident i palpable, el seu impacte als països menys desenvolupats és devastador, la revisió del Consens de Monterrey, encaminada a concretar el finançament per a l'assoliment dels Objectius de Desenvolupament del Mil·lenni, va quedar frustrada pel naixement del G20. L'abordatge polític de la crisi posa en qüestió els lideratges mundials. Si bé el G20 va voler monopolitzar el debat, finalment les Nacions Unides, de la mà del president de l'Assemblea General, el pare d'Escoto, va poder convocar la Conferència sobre la Crisi Financera i Econòmica i els seus Efectes Sobre el Desenvolupament (juny de 2009). Malgrat que els seus resultats són molt menors, i no s'hi van acordar moltes de les recomanacions del mateix president i de la Comissió Stiglitz, les conclusions de tot plegat apunten a una imprescindible reforma del sistema i de la governança de l'economia financera mundial. El "G192", es va posar, doncs, sobre la taula un model de governança democràtica mundial per abordar un crisi global d'impacte sobre la ciutadania mundial. The financial and economic crisis that has been rocking the globalised world since the summer of 2007 raises the question of whether we are looking at the end of a cycle or the end of a model and highlights the need for a thorough debate of ideas. In addition to the immediate causes of the crisis (such as the bursting of the housing bubble and the toxicity of the financial markets), several deep-rooted causes can be found, most resulting from a period of neo-liberal economic globalisation. Whilst the crisis has had a clear and tangible impact on the countries of the North, it has been calamitous for less developed countries. The damage is compounded by the fact that the review of the Monterrey Consensus, intended to find the necessary financing to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, was thwarted by the emergence of the G20. The political hijacking of the crisis casts doubt on global leadership. Although the G20 monopolised the debate, in the end, the United Nations (UN), under the leadership of the president of the General Assembly, Father Miguel d'Escoto, managed to convene the Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Development (June 2009). Despite the conference's modest results and the fact that no agreement was reached on many of the recommendations made by the president or the 'Stiglitz Commission', the conclusions as a whole point towards a crucial need to reform the system and governance bodies of the global financial economy. To this end, within the context of the UN, or 'G192', a model of global democratic governance was tabled to address a global crisis with an impact on global citizens ; Postprint (published version)

La crisi financera i econòmica mundial que viu el món globalitzat des de l'estiu de 2007 planteja la qüestió de si estem davant de la fi d'un cicle o de la fi d'un model, i posa en evidència la necessitat d'un profund debat d'idees. A banda de les causes immediates de la crisi, s'observen causes profundes que són, principalment, resultat d'un període de globalització econòmica neoliberal. Si l'efecte de la crisi als països del Nord és evident i palpable, el seu impacte als països menys desenvolupats és devastador, la revisió del Consens de Monterrey, encaminada a concretar el finançament per a l'assoliment dels Objectius de Desenvolupament del Mil·lenni, va quedar frustrada pel naixement del G20. L'abordatge polític de la crisi posa en qüestió els lideratges mundials. Si bé el G20 va voler monopolitzar el debat, finalment les Nacions Unides, de la mà del president de l'Assemblea General, el pare d'Escoto, va poder convocar la Conferència sobre la Crisi Financera i Econòmica i els seus Efectes Sobre el Desenvolupament (juny de 2009). Malgrat que els seus resultats són molt menors, i no s'hi van acordar moltes de les recomanacions del mateix president i de la Comissió Stiglitz, les conclusions de tot plegat apunten a una imprescindible reforma del sistema i de la governança de l'economia financera mundial. El "G192", es va posar, doncs, sobre la taula un model de governança democràtica mundial per abordar un crisi global d'impacte sobre la ciutadania mundial. The financial and economic crisis that has been rocking the globalised world since the summer of 2007 raises the question of whether we are looking at the end of a cycle or the end of a model and highlights the need for a thorough debate of ideas. In addition to the immediate causes of the crisis (such as the bursting of the housing bubble and the toxicity of the financial markets), several deep-rooted causes can be found, most resulting from a period of neo-liberal economic globalisation. Whilst the crisis has had a clear and tangible impact on the countries of the North, it has been calamitous for less developed countries. The damage is compounded by the fact that the review of the Monterrey Consensus, intended to find the necessary financing to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, was thwarted by the emergence of the G20. The political hijacking of the crisis casts doubt on global leadership. Although the G20 monopolised the debate, in the end, the United Nations (UN), under the leadership of the president of the General Assembly, Father Miguel d'Escoto, managed to convene the Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Development (June 2009). Despite the conference's modest results and the fact that no agreement was reached on many of the recommendations made by the president or the 'Stiglitz Commission', the conclusions as a whole point towards a crucial need to reform the system and governance bodies of the global financial economy. To this end, within the context of the UN, or 'G192', a model of global democratic governance was tabled to address a global crisis with an impact on global citizens ; Postprint (published version)