Suchergebnisse

Joint Conference with Universidade Nacional Timor Lorosa'e (UNTL), Dili, Timor-Leste and Victoria University (VU), Melbourne.

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.

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.

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.

Adaptive governance focuses our attention on the relationships between science and management, whereby the so-called 'gaps' between these groups are seen to hinder effective adaptive responses to biophysical change. Yet the relationships between science and governance, knowledge and action, remain under theorized in discussions of adaptive governance, which largely focuses on abstract design principles or preferred institutional arrangements. In contrast, the metaphor of co-production highlights the social and political processes through which science, policy, and practice co-evolve. Co-production is invoked as a normative goal (Mitchell et al., 2004) and analytical lens (Jasanoff, 2004a and Jasanoff, 2004b), both of which provide useful insight into the processes underpinning adaptive governance. This paper builds on and integrates these disparate views to reconceptualize adaptive governance as a process of co-production. I outline an alternative conceptual framing, 'co-productive governance', that articulates the context, knowledge, process, and vision of governance. I explore these ideas through two cases of connectivity conservation, which draws on conservation science to promote collaborative cross-scale governance. This analysis highlights the ways in which the different contexts of these cases produced very different framings and responses to the same propositions of science and governance. Drawing on theoretical and empirical material, co-productive governance moves beyond long standing debates that institutions can be rationally crafted or must emerge from context resituate adaptive governance in a more critical and contextualized space. This reframing focuses on the process of governance through an explicit consideration of how normative considerations shape the interactions between knowledge and power, science and governance. ; This research was funded by a Land and Water Australia PhD scholarship and a top-up scholarship from the CSIRO Climate Adaptation Fund.

Adaptive governance focuses our attention on the relationships between science and management, whereby the so-called 'gaps' between these groups are seen to hinder effective adaptive responses to biophysical change. Yet the relationships between science and governance, knowledge and action, remain under theorized in discussions of adaptive governance, which largely focuses on abstract design principles or preferred institutional arrangements. In contrast, the metaphor of co-production highlights the social and political processes through which science, policy, and practice co-evolve. Co-production is invoked as a normative goal (Mitchell et al., 2004) and analytical lens (Jasanoff, 2004a and Jasanoff, 2004b), both of which provide useful insight into the processes underpinning adaptive governance. This paper builds on and integrates these disparate views to reconceptualize adaptive governance as a process of co-production. I outline an alternative conceptual framing, 'co-productive governance', that articulates the context, knowledge, process, and vision of governance. I explore these ideas through two cases of connectivity conservation, which draws on conservation science to promote collaborative cross-scale governance. This analysis highlights the ways in which the different contexts of these cases produced very different framings and responses to the same propositions of science and governance. Drawing on theoretical and empirical material, co-productive governance moves beyond long standing debates that institutions can be rationally crafted or must emerge from context resituate adaptive governance in a more critical and contextualized space. This reframing focuses on the process of governance through an explicit consideration of how normative considerations shape the interactions between knowledge and power, science and governance. ; This research was funded by a Land and Water Australia PhD scholarship and a top-up scholarship from the CSIRO Climate Adaptation Fund.

It is generally perceived that an Economy will experience rapid growth provided following Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) are in positive direction i.e. political instability is low, mechanisms for voice and accountability exists, control of corruption subsists and the rule of law prevails. The study aims at exploring relationship between aforementioned WGI indicators and economic growth (GDP) using estimates related to Pakistan, provided by World Bank. Moreover, researchers attempt to identify which of the WGI indicators under consideration contribute most towards economic growth. A quantitative research strategy has been adopted and statistical tools (Spearman's rho correlation and regression) have been used to test the hypotheses that researchers developed using available literature. The study concludes that out of the four dimensions of good governance, political stability contributes highly towards economic growth.

International governance is increasingly defined by multilevel governance; with short-term projects, transnational cooperation between different groups, and unclear institutional space. In this situation, a key issue is the resilience of governance arrangements or the ability of governance arrangements to respond to political and ecological shocks to the system. Using international biodiversity governance, this study explores the question: What social and political processes produce resilient governance? This study argues that the key to understanding resilient governance is the network structure within and outside of the governance arrangement. Modular network structures are able to generate ideas from multiple sources, able to solve political problems on small scales, and able to insulate institutions from political contagion. Centralized network structures, in contrast, often result in top-down learning, politicization of the entire governance arrangement, and inability to adapt in response to problems. Those governance arrangements with limited network structures are unlikely to learn at all. The network structure theory argues that network dynamics are shaped by the structure and result in different learning and different adaptive outcomes. This argument is made in the context of international biodiversity governance which presents has a number of cases of resilience in difficult to explain cases. Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 look at the network impacts in 10 different international biodiversity governance arrangements. Chapter 4, Chapter 5, and Chapter 6 explore these dynamics in the context of the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (MBC) and the Caribbean Challenge. These empirical cases present a complex and robust analysis showing that network structures, more than the governance institutions or national context, shape the resulting impact of governance arrangements. The implication of this finding is that effective institutions also need resilient modular networks in order to have lasting environmental impacts. Strong institutions can be constrained by centralized networks which limit learning opportunities following shocks. This study thus complements studies of effectiveness in international relations by providing a crucial dynamic piece of the overall situation. Response to shocks is shown to be shaped by network structure and importantly by early learning and network connections. Without these, effectiveness can be disrupted by political or environmental shocks.

ABSTRACTSchool boards are typically removed from nonprofit sector analyses because they are part of the "MUSH" set of organizations (municipalities, universities, schools, and hospitals) that both stand outside of the more typical nonprofit sector and tend to be closely affiliated with government. Nevertheless, school boards offer a unique opportunity to examine the governance of a large system of regulated activity that affects millions of citizens. How such systems should be governed has been a matter of concern for nearly 40 years. This study presents data from Alberta school board chairs regarding their perception of governance transformation being brought about by legislative changes. Five dimensions of governance are proposed as defining the current and anticipated governance domain within which school boards operate. Tensions within and between these dimensions signify symbolic boundary constructions that need to be scrutinized in anticipation of the governance transformation and boundary spanning activities of school boards required by the new legislation.RÉSUMÉLes conseils scolaires sont généralement retirés des analyses du secteur communautaire parce qu'ils font partie de l'ensemble d'organisations « MUSH » (les municipalités, les universités, les écoles et les hôpitaux); ces organisations se distinguent du secteur communautaire typique et ont tendance à être étroitement associées au gouvernement. Néanmoins, les conseils scolaires offrent une occasion unique d'observer la gouvernance d'un vaste système d'activités réglementées qui affecte des millions de citoyens. La façon dont de tels systèmes devraient être gérés fait l'objet de préoccupations depuis presque 40 ans. Cette étude présente les perceptions de présidents de conseils scolaires de l'Alberta en ce qui a trait à la transformation de la gouvernance apportée par des modifications à la loi. Cinq dimensions de la gouvernance sont proposées pour définir à la fois le domaine de gouvernance dans le cadre duquel fonctionnent actuellement les conseils scolaires et celui dans le cadre duquel il est prévu qu'ils fonctionneront. Les tensions entre ces dimensions et les tensions au sein de celles-ci indiquent des constructions de frontières symboliques qui nécessitent un examen minutieux dans le but de prévoir la transformation de la gouvernance ainsi que les activités d'expansion des conseils scolaires exigées par la nouvelle législation.

Inwiefern lässt sich der Tabubegriff für Analysen universitärer Governance nutzen? Der Beitrag formuliert eine Antwort auf diese Frage in zwei Schritten. Im ersten Schritt wird ein Tabubegriff entfaltet, der als Instrument für die organisationssoziologische Hochschulforschung dienen kann. Im zweiten Schritt wird dieser Begriff auf drei Tabus angewandt, die auf unterschiedlichen Ebenen der universitären Governance angesiedelt sind: zum einen auf der Meso-Ebene der externen, staatlichen Governance von Universitäten, zum anderen auf der Mikro-Ebene der internen, hierarchischen Governance universitärer Einrichtungen. Im Hinblick auf das zugrundeliegende Erkenntnisinteresse hat die Ausleuchtung dieser Tabus dabei insofern einen tentativ-explanativen Charakter, als der Beitrag den Versuch unternimmt, die Tabus auf basale Erwartungsstrukturen im Universitätssystem zurückführen. (HoF/Text übernommen)

A tension exists between the interests of states in protecting national security through border controls and those of communities in cross-border regions, to whom frequent border crossing is part of daily life – a necessary part of achieving their own wellbeing. The interplay between these two sets of interests has shaped particular 'border regimes' with varying degrees of selectivity in measures of the control of movements of people. In Mozambique, the securing of borders since the early 1990s in order to tackle unauthorised migration and organised crime has revealed a tension with border communities – the manifestation of which is regionally specific elements related to commuters (those crossing the border for shopping, schooling or medical care). This thesis applies qualitative research methods to a study of this multilevel (social, economic, cultural, security and political) problem of border governance in Mozambique. Empirical data, drawing on the interpretations and meanings of those who live in cross-border areas, as well as of government officials, are drawn on to reach a deeper understanding of the types of cross-border interactions and challenges that exist. Opportunities and constraints emanating from the demands of regional integration and international models of border governance are also analysed, in terms of their implications for those responsible for border control. By contrasting the national security orientation of border control and examining some of the localised cross-border consequences of its practices on communities living in cross-border regions, the study aims to contribute to a growing body of knowledge on the impact of border control practices on communities in cross-border regions. In order to achieve this, three regions were selected as cases studies, each representing a regional case: the Mozambique-Malawi border (Mandimba); the Mozambique-Zimbabwe border (Machipanda); and the Mozambique-South Africa border (Ressano Garcia). Key findings indicate that, despite some similarities (ethnic, language, religious), each border region is unique in the way that it contains specific aspects of crossing which demand a contextualised approach to border and security. These specific elements include the use of transboundary resources and access to socio-economic facilities (schools, hospitals, mills, markets, jobs). These elements have persisted since colonial times to post-independence and post-war Mozambique. They neither fit into a truncated view of constructivism on security and borders nor into a sovereign-oriented border governance. Drawing on these findings, the study concludes by proposing a human development (or human security) approach to border controls, giving due attention to people's experiences and needs in daily life.

Global debate over alternative approaches to governing the Internet has been wide ranging, but increasingly has pivoted around the wisdom of "multistakeholder governance." This paper takes controversy around a multistakeholder versus an alternative multilateral approach as a focus for clarifying the changing context and significance of Internet governance. A critical perspective on this debate challenges some of the conventional wisdom marshaled around positions on the history and future of Internet governance. By providing an understanding of the dynamics of Internet governance, this paper seeks to illuminate and engage with issues that are of rising importance to the vitality of a global infrastructure that is becoming more central to economic and social development around the world. Based on the perspective developed in this paper, a multistakeholder process appears best suited for helping a widening array of actors, including multilateral organizations, to connect a worldwide ecology of choices that are governing the Internet.

Internationale Konferenzen sind ein wichtiger Bestandteil des globalen Regierens: Hier werden internationale Normen und Regeln ausgehandelt. Die Blütezeit dieser Konferenzen ist jedoch vorbei: Andere Governance-Formen gewinnen immer weiter an Bedeutung.

Governance is the movement of governing. It relates to decisions that deϐine expectations, grant power, or verify performance. It consists either of a separate process or of a speciϐic part of management or leadership processes. Sometimes people set up a government to administer these processes and systems. In terms of distinguishing the term governance from government - "governance" is what a "government" does. It might be a geopolitical government (nation-state), a corporate government (business entity), a socio-political government (tribe, family, etc.), or any number of different kinds of government. But governance is the kinetic exercise of management power and policy, while government is the instrument (usually, collective) that does it. The term government is also used more abstractly as a synonym for governance. Awarded for Best e-Governance, Gujarat is a frontline State in the implementation of e-governance policies & projects and setting up of key infrastructure for E Governance. Gujarat Government focuses on growth and development of new & emerging technology areas. It has been increasingly using the ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) to offer citizen based service as per convenient location with an initiative to improve the reach, make services more transparent and reduce response time with reducing costs. The Government is also pro active in its Initiatives and ranks ϐirst state in the country to have made e-Governance functional in all its Municipalities and Municipal Corporations.

In the communication and knowledge based globalvillage, under the conditions of dynamic Change inan economy driven world, education has become acomplex and challenging endeavor, both for individualsand organizations. Learning has changeddramatically: knowledge and skills are quickly outdatedand devaluated, giving education a new meaningwithin an individual biography; schools, universitiesand other providers of education go throughorganizational revolutions, who are challenging theirself-concept and management; governments areunder pressure to reshape Educational Governanceaccording to new paradigms with the overall goalto sustain national or regional competitiveness. Arekey actors in the education system ready to face thesechallenges and to modernize their organizations?Starting from an overview on the Complexity of Learningin modern societies, generalizable consequencesare reviewed in a case study on Germany. It leads toa framework for a necessary research project incountries such as Indonesia, which are still aheadof educational reform. The focus is on the organizationalmeso and macro level that is playing the keyrole in Educational Governance.Keywords: Change Management, DemographicChange, Educational Governance, Globalization