Suchergebnisse

AbstractGlobalization redefines the relationship between law and space, resulting in the emergence of transnational administrative law in a globalizing legal space. I aim to shed light on transnational administrative law by examining how administrative law relates to the process of European integration. I argue that the idea of administrative legitimation is at the core of this relationship. In the European Union, transnational administration grounds its legitimacy on the fulfilment of administrative law requirements. However, given that in the European Union, administrative legitimation is rooted in Europe's constitutional transformation, I caution against the projection of Europe's experience onto global governance.

Maintaining mostly a national and EU‐level focus, the transnational dimension has been overlooked in the policy instrumentation literature. Seeking to fill this gap, this article researches the factors that shape the choice and evolution of policy instruments in transnational administrations, namely above and beyond the state. In an empirical analysis of budget support, it finds that the preference of the European Commission for this development aid instrument is dependent upon transnational agency and EU domestic habitat. This is evidenced in three steps. First, conflicting global objectives and institutional strategies of re‐legitimization provided transnational administrative agency with power and leverage to promote managerial norms over developmental ones. Second, transnational knowledge networks have provided the European Commission venues of socialization to maintain its monopoly over the instrument. Third, the de‐politicized transnational logic of budget support as a managerial tool is correlated to an increased politicization by some EU member states.

Der Beitrag präsentiert zentrale Ergebnisse der DFG Forschergruppe "International Public Administration" (IPA). Zentrale These ist, dass es sich bei internationalen Verwaltungen um einen eigenen Verwaltungstypus handelt. Dies gilt weniger im Hinblick auf Besonderheiten formeller Strukturen, sondern vielmehr in Bezug auf organisationsspezifische Verhaltensmuster, in denen sich internationale von nationalen Verwaltungen unterscheiden. Die in diesem Schwerpunktheft versammelten Beiträge fokussieren diese Unterschiedlichkeit und beschäftigen sich insbesondere mit der Frage, was die beobachtbaren Verhaltensmuster internationaler Bürokratien für den politikgestaltenden Einfluss von Verwaltungen jenseits des Nationalstaates bedeuten. Anschließend wird diskutiert, welche Implikationen sich aus der Beschäftigung mit internationalen Verwaltungen für die disziplinäre Verwaltungswissenschaft ergeben. Dabei vertreten wir die These, dass sich nationale Verwaltungen den hier untersuchten internationalen Bürokratiemustern umso stärker annähern, je mehr diese in einem Kontext transnationaler Einflüsse operieren. Daran knüpfen wir abschließend ein Plädoyer für die systematische Integration internationaler Bürokratieanalysen in eine Wissenschaft der Verwaltung als Teilbereich der Erforschung der Transformation von Staatlichkeit.

AbstractIn this framing article for the special issue we contrast the aims and ambitions of three core approaches to elites in transnational policy networks and highlight where they have productive overlaps. The core approaches employ three distinctive theoretical lenses in their investigations: fields, hegemony, and institutions. We discuss how these approaches trace elites in transnational policymaking and associated methods, such as network analysis, sequence analysis and field theory, which highlight different aspects of how elites in transnational policy networks operate. Most of the contributions are concerned with mapping out elite careers and why career trajectories matter for field and network positions in transnational policymaking. While the contributions share this in common, we highlight the different ways in which the approaches can be used to dissect the same issues. Our contributions include pieces on the Trump administration, the professional ecologies of transnational policy elites, the treatment of transboundary political problems, the characteristics of technocratic elites, the racial and gender composition of transnational elites, and professional competition over transnational policy issues.

Providing you with a wide-ranging introduction to key international issues in crime and its control, this book covers all essential theories, and clearly explains their relevance to the world today. Going beyond just looking at organized crime, the book covers a range of topics including: •Human rights •Terrorism •Trafficking •Cybercrime •Environmental crime •International Law Plenty of case studies and examples are included throughout, including the Bali 9, Rana Plaza and the shooting of Charles De Menezes, and tips on further reading make it easy to know where to go to engage with more debates in the field. Making sure you're up to date with current issues, this book will be essential reading for students in Criminology and Criminal Justice, as well as those in Law and International Relations.

Der vorliegende Beitrag thematisiert die Problematik der wissenschaftlichen Selbstregulierung gegenüber staatlichen Administrationen im nationalen Kontext und auf europäischer Ebene. Es werden politische Entscheidungsprozesse erörtert, die für Forschungsorientierungen und Finanzierung der Wissenschaften grundlegend sind. Insbesondere wird dabei analysiert, wie die Interessen der Wissenschaftler gegenüber den politischen Institutionen organisiert sind und welcher Grad an Freiräumen ihnen vom Staat eingeräumt wird. Diese Strukturen werden anhand der europäischen Großforschungseinrichtungen untersucht. Da es sich um mehrere (mit einer Ausnahme) zwischenstaatliche Organisationen handelt, erlaubt die Analyse nicht nur einen Gesamtüberblick über die Wissenschaftsinteressenvermittlung auf europäischer Ebene, sondern auch Einsichten in die Evolution von neokorporatistischer Konzertation zu komplexer pluralistisch-föderalistischer Interessenvertretung. (ICE)

Der måles, registreres og overvåges. Vandkvalitet, biologisk mangfoldighed, undervisningskvalitet, økonomisk vækst, korruption, sundhed og lykke er blot nogle få af de områder af menneske- og samfundslivet der gøres til genstand for registreringer, også kaldet indikatorer, der som mere eller mindre synlige og mere eller mindre effektive agenter farer rundt i den politiske proces, fra de administrative apparaters planlægning af direktiver til broadcast-mediernes rapporter om hvilke lande der ligger højst eller lavest på alle listerne over korruption, uddannelsesniveau, bruttonationalprodukt, CO2-udledning etc. Dette paper udspringer af et større EU-projekt om indikatorers rolle i politik og administration (Policy Influence of Indicators), og det beskæftiger sig med den indikator der går under betegnelsen Økologisk Fodspor og dens rolle i politiske processer på EU-plan. Hvordan fungerer Det Økologiske Fodspor som vidensteknologisk genstand, hvordan bliver den repræsenteret i en transnational og EU-orienteret offentlighed, og hvordan er den gennem disse repræsentationer forbundet med EU-politiske aktører? ; Like all sorts of states and developments of the natural and social world are measured, surveyed, and indexed so is sustainable development made the object of measurements and inscribed into indicators. Indicators are an integral part of policy processes and public communication from anonymous planning in administrative bodies to broadcast media reporting how countries are ranked in the newest index of corruption, wealth, or happiness. The question this paper rises is how sustainable development indicators, and more specifically the Ecological Footprint is represented and at work in public media. An actor-network theoretical approach is applied, according to which indicators are viewed as non-material objects. Indicators are carriers of agency and through their appearance in media they connect to other fields of agency. The agency that emanates from the Ecological Footprint seems mainly to connect to the formation of public sentiments regarding planetary problems, consumer habits, and global equity, whereas its connections to policy making - through its media appearances - are rather weak.

This article investigates the effects of embedding into transnational networks of regulatory agencies (TRNs) on the administrative identifications held by national agency officials. Drawing on an organisational-institutional approach, the article discusses two contending empirical expectations linked to the notion of institutional primacy and transnational segmentation respectively. Whereas the first suggests that agency officials' administrative identifications are primarily and predominantly oriented toward their domestic institutional surroundings, and that this feature is robust in the face of increased transnational collaboration, by contrast, the notion of transnational segmentation assumes that transnational identifications are likely to be present among national agency officials and particularly among those who maintain contacts and participate vis-à-vis TRNs. Employing survey data gathered among Norwegian agency officials, the article assesses the relative strength of different identifications and provides insights into the effects of transnational embedding vis-à-vis this behavioural property.