In der vorliegenden Arbeit analysiert Maciej Chinalski den Regional Governance Ansatz und seine praktische Umsetzung in den Europäischen Grenzregionen zwischen Deutschland und Polen (Oder-Partnerschaft) sowie im Vierländereck von Österreich, Ungarn, Tschechien und Slowakei (Centrope-Region). Regional Governance gilt als eine Kooperationsform unterschiedlicher regionaler Akteure, die nach neuen Synergien suchen, um ihre Zusammenarbeit voranzutreiben. Eine Region wird dabei als Raum verstärkter Interaktionen zwischen Staat, Zivilgesellschaft und Wirtschaft verstanden.
Corporate governance (CG) needs to acknowledge the intentional part of governance, where an actor of governance uses the set of corporate governance mechanisms in order to influence the agent to create a performance that will satisfy the interest of the principal. This paper offers a conception of this activity through the concept of governance strategy. The concept is derived within the context of agency theory and applied to two empirical organisations seldom investigated in CG research: the organisation of a riding school in a democratic not-for-profit association and the organisation of multinational corporations in a business group. ; The project is financed by The Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation. An earlier version was presented at the Academy of Management Conference, Atlanta. Georgia, August 11-16, 2006. The paper has benefited from comments by Elin Smith, Kristianstad University.
Who governs when nobody governs ?" This question is addressed by looking at phenomena that have become characteristic of cities today: violence, crime, immigration, mobility. Answering this question also requires paying more attention to different forms of regulation : state, market, along with cooperative/reciprocal modes of regulation. Risk embodies these different forms : it has become a common way of framing and addressing a wide variety of urban problems, suggesting that to govern is to identify and to manage vulnerabilities through different modes of regulation. Lastly, the question points to the uncertainty that characterizes city borders : these are constantly being redefined both by demographics, urbanization and political reforms.
Who governs when nobody governs ?" This question is addressed by looking at phenomena that have become characteristic of cities today: violence, crime, immigration, mobility. Answering this question also requires paying more attention to different forms of regulation : state, market, along with cooperative/reciprocal modes of regulation. Risk embodies these different forms : it has become a common way of framing and addressing a wide variety of urban problems, suggesting that to govern is to identify and to manage vulnerabilities through different modes of regulation. Lastly, the question points to the uncertainty that characterizes city borders : these are constantly being redefined both by demographics, urbanization and political reforms.
Corporate governance has become an important issue for Chinese and Indian firms as they increasingly interact with regulators and investors from developed markets. For instance, tapping into global capital markets to raise funds to finance their domestic and international growth requires firms from China and India to demonstrate strong corporate governance credentials, so that investors do not discount their stock (LaPorta, Lopez-de-Silanes, Shleifer, & Vishny, 2000). The swift action of Chinese and Indian authorities in response to recent corporate scandals – such as the one at Satyam Computers – reveals that even governments in emerging countries such as China and India see the need to promote good corporate governance to ensure the inflow of capital and the outflow of products. Furthermore, understanding corporate governance standards and issues in China and India is also important to executives of foreign multinationals doing business in these two countries.
Das vorliegende Papier setzt sich mit der Frage auseinander, wie sich von Governance geprägte Räume theoretisch-konzeptionell erfassen lassen. Auf der Grundlage einer Differenzierung zentraler Governance-Elemente (Akteure, Strukturen und Prozesse) und anknüpfend an geographische Raumkonzepte schlagen wir drei Anwendungsstrategien zur Analyse vor: Lokalisierung, Relationierung und Regionalisierung. Mit Hilfe dieser Anwendungen lassen sich schließlich Governance-Räume auf unterschiedlichen Abstraktionsniveaus identifizieren, analysieren und theoretisieren. Der vorliegende Beitrag geht erstens davon aus, dass es zur empirischen Erfassung von Governance neuer analytischer Konzepte bedarf, die sich vom methodologischen Nationalismus lösen und mit alternativen Analyseeinheiten arbeiten. Zweitens kommt die Governance- Forschung jenseits und unterhalb des Staates langfristig nicht darum herum, die räumliche Dimension des eigenen Untersuchungsgegenstandes theoretisch und konzeptionell zu reflektieren.
Die Eurokrise hat tiefgreifende Veränderungen im Gefüge von Institutionen und Kompetenzen in der Europäischen Union angestoßen, dafür stehen der 'Fiskalpakt' und die 'excessive imbalance procedure'. Ein effi zientes Governance-System hat sich aber bisher nicht herausgebildet. Die einzelnen Politikbereiche sind zudem innerhalb der EU unterschiedlich stark integrierbar. Zwischen Bereichen, in denen Zentralisierungstendenzen wünschenswert sind und solchen, in denen das Subsidiaritätsprinzip angemessen ist, muss klar unterschieden werden. Bei der Krisenbewältigung müssen demokratische Prinzipien dringend stärker beachtet werden.
Inhalt: - 1. Einleitung - 2. Ein friedensstrategisches Vakuum? - 3. Wandel in den Internationalen Beziehungen - 4. Der Sicherheitsbegriff im Global-Governance-Ansatz - 5. Bestehende Global Governance-Strukturen im Bereich "Frieden und Sicherheit" - 6. Fazit: Gemeinsame Sicherheit als friedensstrategisches Leitbild - Literatur
Current discourses in science, technology and innovation policy describe a shift from formal, governmental, or statutory regulation to non-hierarchical, informal, and cooperative self-regulatory approaches. They narrate a turn from government to governance, described as a "governance turn." Governance as a new and popular mode of regulation, deliberation and shared responsibility is often linked to favored attributes of science and technology development, and policy making such as democracy and responsibility. This article analyzes the connection between governance and ideas of accountable and democratic science and technology development in the case of nanosciences and nanotechnologies. For this purpose, soft law measures, self-regulatory initiatives, and public engagement projects in Europe and the U.S. were analyzed using the concept of social robustness (Nowotny et al. 2001). The study showed that most of the analyzed governance approaches and engagement projects only partially met aspects of social robustness, and that the governance and deliberative turn in science and technology policy has not led, so far, to greater democracy and responsibility in nanoscience and nanotechnology development. As a consequence, the delegation of techno-political decision making to less socially robust governance approaches might lead to a vacuum in science and technology policy and affect not only academic knowledge production but also the innovative force of a society.
It has now become quite obvious that the Internet has brought significant changes to our society and a break on how we lived before its emergence. It is still too early to assess the impact on society of the new services at our disposal, such as the capacity to communicate faster and cheaper on a global scale, access information and, perhaps more importantly, to produce and disseminate information in a way that is accessible to all. It is clear that the advent of the Information Society implies changes in our society that constitute a point of no return. However, contrary to what happened when we entered the Industrial Age about three centuries ago, when the changing process was slow and led by older individuals, these days the entrance into the Information Society is taking place rapidly and the decisive players are younger people. The global nature of the Internet, the possibility of producing and distributing any type of content in digital form at almost zero cost, as well as the vast number of people who use the web, have highlighted the need for new forms of intervention in a sector where there are many types of players. It is in this context that the problem of Internet Governance becomes a very current issue, inasmuch as one feels the need to guarantee a diversity of rights and duties, which may appear difficult to reconcile. This paper presents a brief overview of the main players and initiatives which, in the field of Internet Governance, have tried to contribute to turning this network into a factor for social development and democraticity on a global scale.
Das europäische Verwaltungsrecht steht vor Koordinierungsproblemen, die es mit einer eigenen Perspektive auf Governance einzufangen hat. Am Beispiel der europäischen Regulierungsverbünde in den Netzwirtschaften wird deutlich, wie neue Formen exekutiver Zusammenarbeit, die auf die Institutionalisierung horizontalen Vertrauens ausgerichtet sind, entstehen. Das hat Konsequenzen. Stärker als bisher müssen Entkoppelungen von Politik und Recht in den Beobachtungsrahmen eingestellt werden. Recht, so argumentiert der Beitrag, hat horizontalen Freiheitsgefährdungen auch dort zu begegnen, wo der Rückgriff auf den Willen eines kollektiven Makrosubjekts aus-scheidet, universelle Vernunft aber nicht zu haben ist.
Progress in measuring governance is assessed using a simple framework that distinguishes between indicators that measure formal rules and indicators that measure the practical application or outcomes of these rules. The analysis calls attention to the strengths and weaknesses of both types of indicators as well as the complementarities between them. It distinguishes between the views of experts and the results of surveys and assesses the merits of aggregate as opposed to individual governance indicators. Some simple principles are identified to guide the use and refinement of existing governance indicators and the development of future indicators. These include transparently disclosing and accounting for the margins of error in all indicators, drawing from a diversity of indicators and exploiting complementarities among them, submitting all indicators to rigorous public and academic scrutiny, and being realistic in expectations of future indicators.
Das vorliegende Papier definiert und diskutiert das Konzept der Economic Governance. Die Kernfrage des Papiers ist, in welcher Form wirtschaftliche Akteure Governance-Leistungen – wie etwa Vertragssicherheit oder Eigentumsrechte – bereitstellen können. Außerdem werden Beispiele aufgeführt, wie der Marktmechanismus gezielt bei politischer Steuerung eingesetzt wird. Dabei wird die aktuelle ökonomische Literatur zu Governance und Institutionen gezielt für die deutsche Governance-Debatte zusammengefasst. Das Papier zeigt, dass private Akteure gerade in Entwicklungsländern fehlende Staatlichkeit durch eigene Governance-Formen ersetzen. Sie schaffen sich selbst die nötigen Rahmenbedingungen ihrer wirtschaftlichen Transaktionen. Auch in entwickelten Ländern gibt es eine Vielzahl solch privater Steuerungsformen wirtschaftlicher Akteure. Diese können als Economic Governance verstanden werden, allerdings nur, wenn sie intentional auf die Ordnungsbildung der Wirtschaft Einfluss nehmen. Die "spontane" Bereitstellung von Gütern und Dienstleistungen durch Märkte kann nicht zu Governance gezählt werden.
The widespread use of Service Oriented Architectures (SOA) is beginning to create problems derived from the governance of said structures. To date there is not a single effective solution to solve all existing challenges to govern this type of infrastructure. This paper describes the problems encountered when designing a SOA governance solution in a real e-Government scenario. More specifically, we focus on problems related to specification and automated analysis of government policies. We propose a novel SOA governance specification model as a solution to these problems. We have named this model WS-Governance. in order to ease its adoption by SOA practitioners it: i) shares WS-Policy guidelines and is compatible with it, ii) has XML serialization as well as a plain-text one and iii) has a CSP based semantics that provides a precise description as well as facilitating the automation of some editing and WS-Governance related activities such as consistency checking.
