Navigation/Menü: Links auf weitere Seiten dieser Website sowie Banner

Allgemeine Informationen
Veranstaltungen
Forschung
Projekte in der Förderphase 2006-2009
Projekte in der Förderphase 2010-2013
Dissertationsvorhaben
Publikationen
- SFB-Governance Working Paper Series
- SFB-Governance Lecture Series
- Schriften zur Governance-Forschung
- Publikationen von SFB-Mitgliedern
Lehre

Navigationspfad:

Home » Publikationen » SFB-Governance Working Paper Series

SFB-Governance Working Paper Series

Governance und Gewalt. Eine Untersuchung zur Krise des Regierens in Pakistan am Fall Belutschistan

Boris Wilke - 2009

Download

Abstract

Taking the province of Balochistan as an example, this paper traces the causes of the transformation of statehood in Pakistan back to the 1970s and analyses its consequences for modern governance in the future. It argues that weak institutions amid rapid social change rather than “state failure” lie at the root of Pakistan’s predicament. As the case of Balochistan aptly demonstrates, the Pakistani state’s reaction to crisis has not been retreat, but reform and centralisation of rule. Since the governmentalities of rulers and ruled are incompatible, these policies have led to an escalation of crisis and conflict.

Spoilers or Governance Actors? Engaging Armed Non-State Groups in Areas of Limited Statehood

Ulrich Schneckener - 2009

Download

Abstract

Nicht-staatliche Gewaltakteure sind eine besondere Herausforderung für Peace- und Statebuilding-Prozesse. Je nach Situation agieren bewaffnete Gruppen als „Störenfriede“ oder als Governance-Akteure. Dieses Papier verfolgt die Absicht, einen konzeptionellen Rahmen für die Analyse von nicht-staatlichen Gewaltakteuren sowie der Gegenstrategien durch internationale Akteure bereitzustellen. Zunächst werden verschiedene Profile von bewaffneten Gruppen in Form von Idealtypen unterschieden. Zweitens werden eine Reihe von Strategien im Umgang mit solchen Akteuren eingeführt und diskutiert, wobei zwischen realistischen, institutionalistischen und konstruktivistischen Ansätzen unterschieden wird. Drittens verweist das Papier auf zentrale Probleme und Grenzen dieser Ansätze. Insbesondere wird deutlich, dass sich diese Strategien – ungeachtet ihrer inhaltlichen Differenzen – auf ähnliche Profile bewaffneter Gruppen konzentrieren, während andere Formen von nichtstaatlicher Gewalt systematisch vernachlässigt werden.

Armed non-state groups pose a severe challenge for peace- and state-building processes. Depending on the situation, they may act as both spoilers and governance actors. This paper aims at presenting a framework for analysing armed groups as well as forms of engagement for international actors. It first describes various armed groups, which need to be distinguished in order to highlight specific profiles, as ideal types. Secondly, a number of strategies for dealing with these groups will be introduced and discussed by referring to realist, institutionalist and constructivist approaches. Thirdly, the conclusion will point to key problems and limits of these approaches when addressing the spectrum of armed groups. The argument here is that these approaches - despite their differences - by and large are directed to similar profiles of armed groups while other forms of non-state violence are systematically neglected.

Armed non-state groups pose a severe challenge for peace- and state-building processes. Depending on the situation, they may act as both spoilers and governance actors. This paper aims at presenting a framework for analysing armed groups as well as forms of engagement for international actors. It first describes various armed groups, which need to be distinguished in order to highlight specific profiles, as ideal types. Secondly, a number of strategies for dealing with these groups will be introduced and discussed by referring to realist, institutionalist and constructivist approaches. Thirdly, the conclusion will point to key problems and limits of these approaches when addressing the spectrum of armed groups. The argument here is that these approaches - despite their differences - by and large are directed to similar profiles of armed groups while other forms of non-state violence are systematically neglected.

Governing HIV/AIDS in South Africa. The Role of Firms

Tanja Anita Börzel, Anna Kristin Müller-Debus, Christian Thauer - 2009

Download

Abstract

Der Standortwechsel von Firmen in Länder mit niedrigen Sozialstandards wird in der Regel als treibende Kraft des abwärtsgerichteten regulativen Wettbewerbs zwischen Staaten angesehen. Es gibt allerdings eine Vielzahl von Fällen in denen genau das Gegenteil passiert: Firmen halten sich freiwillig an Sozialstandards (CSR) und üben sogar Druck auf Regierungen aus, um striktere Regulierung zu erwirken. In diesem Arbeitspapier zeigen wir, unter welchen Bedingungen Firmen zur Verwirklichung anspruchsvollerer Sozialstandards in Ländern mit geringer regulativer Kapazität beitragen. Zunächst stellen wir Hypothesen aus der bereits existierenden Literatur vor und arbeiten ihre Erklärungskraft für die hier diskutierte Problematik heraus. Das Arbeitspapier untersucht die Reaktion der südafrikanischen Textil- und Automobilindustrie auf die HIV Pandemie. Die südafrikanische Regierung hat nur begrenzte Kapazitäten aufgebracht, um sich gegen die Verbreitung des Virus zur Wehr zu setzen. Unter welchen Bedingungen versuchen Firmen den Staat im Kampf gegen HIV/AIDS zu unterstützen?

Firms relocating production to countries with lower social standards are regarded as driving force behind the regulatory ‘race to the bottom’. However, there are numerous instances in which the behavior of firms reveals just the opposite: They adhere to self-regulatory standards (CSR) and even pressure governments to issue stricter public regulations. We intend to identify the conditions under which firms contribute to higher regulatory standards in states with weak regulatory capacities, thereby following a ‘race to the top’ rather than a ‘race to the bottom’-logic. Theoretically, we set out to test in how far the existing literature can be utilized to answer this question. Empirically, the assessment concentrates on the textile and automotive industries in South Africa and HIV/AIDS abatement. Only limited state capacities have been involved in fighting HIV/AIDS in South Africa. Under which conditions do firms try to foster state capacities for the fight against the disease?

Firms relocating production to countries with lower social standards are regarded as driving force behind the regulatory ‘race to the bottom’. However, there are numerous instances in which the behavior of firms reveals just the opposite: They adhere to self-regulatory standards (CSR) and even pressure governments to issue stricter public regulations. We intend to identify the conditions under which firms contribute to higher regulatory standards in states with weak regulatory capacities, thereby following a ‘race to the top’ rather than a ‘race to the bottom’-logic. Theoretically, we set out to test in how far the existing literature can be utilized to answer this question. Empirically, the assessment concentrates on the textile and automotive industries in South Africa and HIV/AIDS abatement. Only limited state capacities have been involved in fighting HIV/AIDS in South Africa. Under which conditions do firms try to foster state capacities for the fight against the disease?

Staatlichkeit und Governance im Zeitalter der europäischen Expansion.

Dominik Nagl, Marion Stange - 2009

Download

Abstract

Strukturell „begrenzte Staatlichkeit“ und nicht staatszentrierte Modi des Regierens sind keine Phänomene, die erst seit dem ausgehenden 20. Jahrhundert zu beobachten sind. Aus diesem Grund plädiert dieses Working Paper für die Übertragung des Governance-Begriffs auf vor- und frühmoderne Gesellschaften. Anknüpfend an die neuere Diskussion um frühneuzeitliche Staatlichkeit steht hier nicht die mehr oder weniger monolithische Sicht auf einen sich mit Macht durchsetzenden monarchisch-absolutistischen Staat im Vordergrund, als vielmehr die Vielfalt staatlicher Dynamiken und der daran beteiligten Akteure. Das Working Paper fragt daher nach den historisch kontingenten Entwicklungspfaden zentralisierter Herrschaftsausübung. Hierdurch soll insbesondere die Heterogenität dieses Entwicklungsprozesses beleuchtet werden, der durch eine Ungleichzeitigkeit von nebeneinander bestehenden traditionellen und neueren Regierungs- und Verwaltungsstrukturen sowie durch immer wiederkehrende Prozesse der Aushandlung von Autorität gekennzeichnet ist.

Structurally “limited statehood“ and modes of regulation that are not centered on the state are not exclusive phenomena of the late 20th and early 21st century, but have existed long before. This working paper therefore advocates the application of the concept of governance to pre- and early modern societies. Following the recent discussion about early modern statehood, the perspective adopted here does not place a powerful monarchic absolutist state at the center of its interest, but rather focuses on the diversity of state dynamics and on the actors involved in these processes. The paper thus looks at the historically contingent development paths of a centralized exercise of power. Of particular interest in this context, however, is the heterogeneity of this development which is characterized by a non-synchronism of coexisting traditional and more modern governmental and administrative structures and by recurrent processes of negotiation of authority between different actors.

Structurally “limited statehood“ and modes of regulation that are not centered on the state are not exclusive phenomena of the late 20th and early 21st century, but have existed long before. This working paper therefore advocates the application of the concept of governance to pre- and early modern societies. Following the recent discussion about early modern statehood, the perspective adopted here does not place a powerful monarchic absolutist state at the center of its interest, but rather focuses on the diversity of state dynamics and on the actors involved in these processes. The paper thus looks at the historically contingent development paths of a centralized exercise of power. Of particular interest in this context, however, is the heterogeneity of this development which is characterized by a non-synchronism of coexisting traditional and more modern governmental and administrative structures and by recurrent processes of negotiation of authority between different actors.

The European Union and the Promotion of Good Governance in its Near Abroad. One Size Fits All?

Tanja Anita Börzel, Yasemin Pamuk, Andreas Stahn - 2008

Download

Abstract

Seit dem Ende des Kalten Krieges haben Staaten und Internationale Organisationen die Förderung „Guten Regierens“ systematisch in ihre Entwicklungshilfestrategien integriert. Die EU ist dabei keine Ausnahme. Durch die EU-Osterweiterung und die Verschiebung ihrer Grenzen nach Osten spielt die Förderung von Good Governance eine besonders gewichtige Rolle in der neuen Nachbarschaft der EU. Dieser Beitrag stellt einen systematischen Vergleich der EU Good Governance Förderung im Südkaukasus an. Armenien, Aserbaidschan und Georgien sind gleichermaßen von „Bad Governance“ betroffen. Willkürliches politisches Handeln und weit verbreitete Korruption sind alltäglich in allen drei Ländern. Gleichwohl unterscheiden sie sich mit Blick auf den Grad an Staatlichkeit und die Qualität des politischen Regimes. Unser Ziel ist zu untersuchen, ob und auf welche Weise diese Varianz sich auf EU Good Governance Förderung auswirkt. Unseren Fokus legen wir dabei auf die relativ junge Europäische Nachbarschaftspolitik und die Frage, wie viel Differenzierung dieses gemeinsame Dachkonzept zulässt.

With the end of the Cold War, states and international organisations have systematically mainstreamed good governance in their development strategies for third countries. The European Union is no exception. The promotion of good governance ranks particularly high in the EU’s “near abroad”, which has become a focal point for EU foreign policy making since the 2004/2006 enlargement round. This paper seeks to systematically compare the EU’s good governance promotion approaches in the Southern Caucasus. Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia are equally marked by bad governance. Arbitrary rule and pervasive corruption are common in all three countries. Nonetheless, they significantly vary with regard to the degree of statehood, and the quality of the political regime. Our aim is to explore to what extent these variations have affected the EU’s strategy of promoting good governance. Looking at the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), a rather recent policy framework, we seek to give some answers to the question whether the EU sticks to a “one-size-fits-all” approach, or whether it has started to practice some differential treatment.

With the end of the Cold War, states and international organisations have systematically mainstreamed good governance in their development strategies for third countries. The European Union is no exception. The promotion of good governance ranks particularly high in the EU’s “near abroad”, which has become a focal point for EU foreign policy making since the 2004/2006 enlargement round. This paper seeks to systematically compare the EU’s good governance promotion approaches in the Southern Caucasus. Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia are equally marked by bad governance. Arbitrary rule and pervasive corruption are common in all three countries. Nonetheless, they significantly vary with regard to the degree of statehood, and the quality of the political regime. Our aim is to explore to what extent these variations have affected the EU’s strategy of promoting good governance. Looking at the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), a rather recent policy framework, we seek to give some answers to the question whether the EU sticks to a “one-size-fits-all” approach, or whether it has started to practice some differential treatment.

Auf der Suche nach Sicherheit. Die internationale Intervention in Nordost-Afghanistan.

Jan Koehler - 2008

Download

Abstract

Das vorliegende Arbeitspapier untersucht Wirkungszusammenhänge zwischen transnationalen Konstellationen staatlicher und nicht-staatlicher Akteure und der Erzeugung von Sicherheit und Entwicklung als Governanceleistung in Nordost-Afghanistan. Ausgangspunkt der Untersuchung ist dabei die Frage, wie die afghanische Bevölkerung Veränderungen der eigenen Sicherheit sowie lokale Entwicklungsherausforderungen über die letzten Jahre wahrgenommen hat. Das Papier besteht aus zwei Teilen. Zunächst erläutert der Autor im Rahmen einer Fallstudie die relevanten internationalen, nationalen und lokalen Akteurskonstellationen in der Zielregion und bettet die Ergebenisse der quantitativen Befragungen ein in den Kontext der qualitativen Untersuchungsergebnisse zu lokalen gesellschaftlichen und politischen Entwicklungen. Zum Zweiten wird detailliert das methodische Vorgehen erläutert, welches auf kreuzperspektivischer Analyse des quantitativ und qualitativ erhobenen Materials gründet. Die Analyse zeigt, dass im heutigen Afghanistan Sicherheit und Entwicklung als Ergebnis transnationaler Governance entstehen können. Diese Governance-Leistungen sind auf die lokale Ebene beschränkt; sie erreichen nicht eine überregionale oder die nationale Ebene. Die Untersuchung zeigt allerdings auch, dass transnationale Governance-Leistungen im Unterschied zur strategischen Zielsetzung der internationalen Interventen gerade die nationalen und sub-nationalen staatlichen Institutionen schwächt und deren Legitimität beeinträchtigt, die durch die Intervention aufgebaut und gefestigt werden sollen.

This Working Paper addresses the issue of security governance in North-Eastern Afghanistan. It deals with the impact transnational constellations of state and non-state actors have on governance outputs regarding security and development. Moreover, it tries to assess the way the Afghan population perceives of changes in their own security and of development challenges in recent years. The Working Paper proceeds in two steps: The first part, the case study, maps the relevant international, national and local actors in the target region and explains the results of the quantitative survey against the findings of the qualitative research on local societal and political dynamics. The second part gives a detailed discussion of the methodological approach, which is based on triangulation of data generated from quantitative sampling and qualitative field research. The analysis shows that security and development in contemporary Afghanistan may result from transnational governance. These governance outputs are local, i.e. confined to districts and provinces rather than regions or the national level. Transnational governance outputs, however, may in fact weaken governance functions of national and sub-national state institutions. This potentially puts them in conflict with the international strategy in Afghanistan, which aims at consolidating and strengthening Afghan institutions and strengthen their legitimacy.

This Working Paper addresses the issue of security governance in North-Eastern Afghanistan. It deals with the impact transnational constellations of state and non-state actors have on governance outputs regarding security and development. Moreover, it tries to assess the way the Afghan population perceives of changes in their own security and of development challenges in recent years. The Working Paper proceeds in two steps: The first part, the case study, maps the relevant international, national and local actors in the target region and explains the results of the quantitative survey against the findings of the qualitative research on local societal and political dynamics. The second part gives a detailed discussion of the methodological approach, which is based on triangulation of data generated from quantitative sampling and qualitative field research. The analysis shows that security and development in contemporary Afghanistan may result from transnational governance. These governance outputs are local, i.e. confined to districts and provinces rather than regions or the national level. Transnational governance outputs, however, may in fact weaken governance functions of national and sub-national state institutions. This potentially puts them in conflict with the international strategy in Afghanistan, which aims at consolidating and strengthening Afghan institutions and strengthen their legitimacy.

Governance durch Interaktion nicht-staatlicher und staatlicher Akteure. Entstehungsbedingungen, Effektivität und Legitimität sowie Nachhaltigkeit

Marianne Beisheim/Harald Fuhr (Hrsg.) - 2008

Download

Abstract

In Research Area D “Welfare and Environment” of the Research Center (SFB) 700 we investigate how governance services are provided in the production of respective collective goods in areas of limited statehood. Six different projects explore how governance arrangements evolve and how effective, legitimate, and sustainable they are in delivering governance services. During a workshop in January 2008, we discussed the preliminary results of the first phase of research. This working paper documents these first findings and seeks to raise the readers’ interest in the projects’ upcoming publications. For further information on the Research Area D of the SFB 700, see www.sfb-governance.de/en/teilprojekte/projektbereich_d/.

Transitional Justice als Weg zu Frieden und Sicherheit. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen

Susanne Buckley-Zistel - 2008

Download

Abstract

Transitional Justice refers to ways of dealing with the past of violent conflicts or dictatorships in order to promote the transition to peace and security in a divided society. Against the backdrop of the concept’s increasing popularity the objective of the working paper is to investigate whether its norms and instruments do indeed contribute to improving the relationship between the parties to the conflict. Central to the analysis is the impact of its normative cornerstones justice and truth, both conceptionally and practically, and the paper illustrates that their influence on post-conflict societies is rather ambivalent and by no means inevitably promoting peace. Based on these sobering insights the working paper concludes with the appeal to consider Transitional Justice as a political concept and to maintain a critical stance towards its application.

Procedural Legitimacy and Private Transnational Governance. Are the Good Ones Doing Better?

Marianne Beisheim/Klaus Dingwerth - 2008

Download

Abstract

Im Dezember 2006 fand am SFB 700 ein Workshop statt, dessen Teilnehmer/innen die Frage diskutierten, inwiefern die Legitimität und die Effektivität transnationaler Politiknetzwerke und Public Private Partnerships zusammenhängen. Das vorliegende Arbeitspapier war die Grundlage für diese Diskussion. Es geht davon aus, dass Legitimität eine wichtige Vorausset-zung für den Erfolg privater Steuerung ist. Offen ist jedoch die Frage, wie dies funktioniert. Im Papier versuchen wir, entsprechende Kausalmechanismen zu entwickeln. Zunächst konzeptionalisieren wir die abhängige Variable „Erfolg“ als die gelungene Steuerung des Verhal-tens der beteiligten privaten Akteure im Sinne der vereinbarten Normen (compliance). Im nächsten Abschnitt stellen wir verschiedene Quellen und Formen der Legitimität vor und dis-kutieren, warum wir prozedurale Legitimität als einem zentralen Erfolgsfaktor für private Governance sehen. Auf dieser Basis entwickeln wir Überlegungen zu den aus unserer Sicht drei zentralen Kausalmechanismen, wie sich prozessuale Legitimität in Regeleinhaltung über-setzt: (1) Aneignung durch inklusive, faire und repräsentative Partizipation; (2) Lernen und Überzeugung über Deliberation und den Bezug auf Argumente; (3) Soziale Kontrolle auf der Basis von Transparenz und Verantwortlichkeit. Unsere Überlegungen zu den Kausalzusam-menhängen plausibilisieren wir in einer kurzen empirischen Studie zur Global Reporting Ini-tiative (GRI). Dort zeigt sich, dass Inklusivität und Deliberation besonders wichtig sind, um eingangs Legitimität zu erlangen, Transparenz und Rechenschaftspflichten um Legitimität zu erhalten.

Private governance schemes deploy a significant share of their resources to advocate their legitimacy. Assuming that their primary concern is to ensure their own success, this suggests that the initiators of private governance schemes presume a strong relation between a scheme’s perception as legitimate on the one hand and its success on the other. Based on this observation, this article explores the general hypothesis that the procedural legitimacy of private governance schemes – defined in terms of inclusiveness, transparency, and deliberativeness – enhances their prospects for success. We particularly focus on how right process may translate into effectiveness. To this end, the article identifies three mechanisms: the development of ownership based on inclusive, fair and representative participation; social learning and persuasion based on deliberative procedures; and social control based on transparency and accountability. The three mechanisms are subjected to a plausibility probe in an illustrative case study of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), a private governance scheme in the field of corporate sustainability politics. All in all, the study shows how the GRI’s success can be related to procedural legitimacy. In particular, it suggests that while inclusiveness and deliberation are mostly relevant to gain legitimacy, transparency and accountability are primarily relevant to maintain the legitimacy of private transnational governance schemes.

Private governance schemes deploy a significant share of their resources to advocate their legitimacy. Assuming that their primary concern is to ensure their own success, this suggests that the initiators of private governance schemes presume a strong relation between a scheme’s perception as legitimate on the one hand and its success on the other. Based on this observation, this article explores the general hypothesis that the procedural legitimacy of private governance schemes – defined in terms of inclusiveness, transparency, and deliberativeness – enhances their prospects for success. We particularly focus on how right process may translate into effectiveness. To this end, the article identifies three mechanisms: the development of ownership based on inclusive, fair and representative participation; social learning and persuasion based on deliberative procedures; and social control based on transparency and accountability. The three mechanisms are subjected to a plausibility probe in an illustrative case study of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), a private governance scheme in the field of corporate sustainability politics. All in all, the study shows how the GRI’s success can be related to procedural legitimacy. In particular, it suggests that while inclusiveness and deliberation are mostly relevant to gain legitimacy, transparency and accountability are primarily relevant to maintain the legitimacy of private transnational governance schemes.

Governance und Raum. Theoretisch-konzeptionelle Überlegungen zur Verräumlichung von Governance

Gudrun Benecke/Zeljko Branovic/Anke Draude - 2008

Download

Abstract

This article develops an analytical framework to capture the spatial dimension of governance. By differentiating between main elements of governance (actors, structures and processes) and applying geographical concepts of space we suggest three strategies of application: localization, relationalization and regionalization. Applying these strategies enables researchers to identify, analyze and theorize the spatial dimension of governance on different levels of abstraction. In sum this article firstly argues that empirical work on governance needs to dismantle the methodological nationalism approach and work with alternative units of analysis such as space conceptions.

Von Ko-Produktion von Staatlichkeit zur Co-Performance of Governance

Gunnar Folke Schuppert - 2008

Download

Abstract

Die Erbringung bestimmter Dienstleistungen und Güter wie etwa Sicherheit und Infrastruktur, die wir klassischerweise vom Staat und seiner Verwaltung erwarten, erfolgt heute regelmäßig kooperativ und arbeitsteilig. Soweit dabei nicht-staatliche Akteure als „Provider of Statehood“ auf die Bühne treten, ist der Staat – vermeintlich paradoxerweise – nicht mehr der alleinige Garant für das Gelingen gemeinwohlförderlicher Staatlichkeit. Der Beitrag analysiert diese „Ko-Produktion von Staatlichkeit“ als ein bereits historisch bewährtes Modell zur Bereistellung bestimmter Governance-Produkte und fragt nach der Beschaffenheit der nicht-staatlichen Akteure. Desweiteren untersucht er, welche vor allem als Regelungsstrukturen verstandenen Governancemodi zur Organisation des Zusammenwirkens von privaten und staatlichen Akteuren in Frage kommen. Hier werden Beleihung und Konzession als überkommene, aber wandelbare rechtliche Gußformen diskutiert und das Phänomen der Public Private Partnerships beleuchtet. Schließlich werden verschiedene Theorieangebote aus Politik-, Verwaltungs- und Rechtswissenschaft auf Ihre Eignung für die Konstellationen arbeitsteiliger Staatlichkeitsproduktion hin untersucht.

Public goods such as security and infrastructure are usually expected to be provided by the state and its administration. But the state is – seemingly a paradox – not the sole provider of statehood anymore. Other actors stepped on the stage. The paper analyzes this co-operative supply of goods and services under a governance perspective and asks as to who these nonstate co-producers of statehood actually are. It then examines which regulatory structures are particularly suitable for the organization of the cooperation between state and private actors. The traditional, but changeable legal forms Beleihung and Konzession are discussed as well as the phenomenon of public private partnerships. Finally, different approaches from political and legal theory and their specific contribution to a better understanding of modern cooperative statehood are examined.

Public goods such as security and infrastructure are usually expected to be provided by the state and its administration. But the state is – seemingly a paradox – not the sole provider of statehood anymore. Other actors stepped on the stage. The paper analyzes this co-operative supply of goods and services under a governance perspective and asks as to who these nonstate co-producers of statehood actually are. It then examines which regulatory structures are particularly suitable for the organization of the cooperation between state and private actors. The traditional, but changeable legal forms Beleihung and Konzession are discussed as well as the phenomenon of public private partnerships. Finally, different approaches from political and legal theory and their specific contribution to a better understanding of modern cooperative statehood are examined.

Economic Governance

Christoph Trebesch - 2008

Download

Abstract

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.

This paper discusses the concept of Economic Governance. It summarises the growing body of economic literature on governance and institutions to make it more accessible for related debates in Germany, particularly in the field of Political Science. I categorise forms of private Economic Governance and provide many examples from the existing body of research. I also discuss how the market mechanism has been exploited as a public policy tool. The article shows that private agents substitute lacking public order and institutions with private modes of Governance. Especially in developing countries, economic actors have learned to create their own organisational environment needed for their transactions, e.g. private mechanisms to enforce property rights or contracts. Yet, many types of private ordering in markets can also be found in more developed economies.

This paper discusses the concept of Economic Governance. It summarises the growing body of economic literature on governance and institutions to make it more accessible for related debates in Germany, particularly in the field of Political Science. I categorise forms of private Economic Governance and provide many examples from the existing body of research. I also discuss how the market mechanism has been exploited as a public policy tool. The article shows that private agents substitute lacking public order and institutions with private modes of Governance. Especially in developing countries, economic actors have learned to create their own organisational environment needed for their transactions, e.g. private mechanisms to enforce property rights or contracts. Yet, many types of private ordering in markets can also be found in more developed economies.

From Public-Private Partnership to Market

Gudrun Benecke/Lars Friberg/Markus Lederer/Miriam Schröder - 2008

Download

Abstract

Die Bewältigung des Klimawandels ist heute eine der bedeutendsten politischen Herausforderungen. Das Kyoto-Protokoll ist der am weitesten fortgeschrittene Prozess der internationalen Staatengemeinschaft im Hinblick auf die Herausforderungen des Klimawandels. Einer der interessantesten und innovativsten Bausteine des Kyoto-Protokolls ist der Clean Development Mechanismus (CDM). Seit seiner Initiierung ist dieser so genannte flexible Mechanismus der Schlüssel zur Schaffung von volatilen und boomenden Märkten für Zertifikate für die Reduktion von Kohlenstoffemissionen (CERs). Diese Zertifikate, kurz CERs, sind die ersten international gehandelten Güter, die durch ein internationales Umweltabkommen geschaffen wurden. Während des Prozesses der Marktetablierung sind private Akteure wie Firmen, Projektverifizierer, Carbon Funds und Zertifikatshändler zu den führenden Akteuren des globalen Kohlenstoffmarktes aufgestiegen. Dennoch ist der Markt weiterhin stark von den politischen Rahmenbedingungen abhängig. Die Nachfrage wird durch die Festlegung von Emissionsreduktionen für Nationalstaaten und deren Emissionsallokationen geschaffen. Der vorliegende Artikel untersucht die Transformation des Markts, der zunächst von öffentlichen Akteuren initiiert, durch Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) angestoßen, sich zu einem Markt entwickelt, wo sich die Regierungen nach und nach zurückziehen und private Akteure immer stärker Governancefunktionen wahrnehmen. Weiterhin wird der Status quo des CDM evaluiert und auf verbleibende Forschungsfragen hingewiesen.

Tackling climate change is by now recognised as a policy challenge of utmost importance. The Kyoto Protocol is the most advanced multilateral effort to tackle climate change. One of the most interesting and innovative building blocks of the Kyoto Protocol climate regime is the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Since its inception this so-called flexible mechanism has been key in establishing a volatile and booming market for carbon emission reductions (CERs), which are the first internationally traded commodity created by an international environmental agreement. Within the process of market establishment and function, private actors such as companies, project verifiers, carbon funds and traders have become leading actors in the global carbon market. The market continues to be intimately policy dependent as demand derives from the stringency of emission allocations and future nation state commitments for greenhouse gas reductions. This article investigates the transformation of a market that has been initiated by public actors, kick-started by public-private partnerships (PPPs) and that has evolved into a market in which governments are withdrawing and private actors are increasingly taking up their governance function. It furthermore evaluates the status quo of the CDM and finishes with open questions for research.

Tackling climate change is by now recognised as a policy challenge of utmost importance. The Kyoto Protocol is the most advanced multilateral effort to tackle climate change. One of the most interesting and innovative building blocks of the Kyoto Protocol climate regime is the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Since its inception this so-called flexible mechanism has been key in establishing a volatile and booming market for carbon emission reductions (CERs), which are the first internationally traded commodity created by an international environmental agreement. Within the process of market establishment and function, private actors such as companies, project verifiers, carbon funds and traders have become leading actors in the global carbon market. The market continues to be intimately policy dependent as demand derives from the stringency of emission allocations and future nation state commitments for greenhouse gas reductions. This article investigates the transformation of a market that has been initiated by public actors, kick-started by public-private partnerships (PPPs) and that has evolved into a market in which governments are withdrawing and private actors are increasingly taking up their governance function. It furthermore evaluates the status quo of the CDM and finishes with open questions for research.

Fostering Environmental Regulation? Corporate Social Responsibility in Countries with Weak Regulatory Capacities. The Case of South Africa.

Jana Hönke/Nicole Kranz/Tanja A. Börzel/Adrienne Héritier - 2008

Download

Abstract

Das Engagement und somit auch der Einfluss multinationaler Firmen in Entwicklungs- und Schwellenländern sind oftmals umstritten. In Hinblick auf umweltschädliche Auswirkungen gibt es vielfältige Belege dafür, dass Firmen schwache staatliche Regulierung im Umweltbereich ausnutzen; häufig mit verheerenden Folgen. Im Rahmen von freiwilligen CSR-Standards sind in letzter Zeit zunehmend Anstrengungen unternommen worden, um solchen Entwicklungen entgegenzuwirken. In unserer Recherche untersuchen wir das Wechselspiel freiwilliger CSRNormen mit öffentlicher Regulierung in Ländern begrenzter Staatlichkeit. Wir gehen dabei von folgender Frage aus: Fördern multinationale Unternehmen, die sich zu internationalen CSR-Normen verpflichtet haben, diese Standards auch aktiv in den Ländern, in denen sie operieren? Anhand der Situation im Bereich Umweltpolitik in Südafrika und beispielhaft anhand der Bergbau-, und Lebensmittelindustrie sollen zwei Fragen beantwortet werden: Erstens, bringen sich Firmen, die freiwillige Umweltstandards unterzeichnet haben, aktiv in die Förderung kollektiver Umweltregulierung ein und unter welchen Bedingungen? Und zweitens, falls sie dies tun, welche Modelle setzen sich durch: engagieren sich Firmen durch Einflussnahme auf den Staat, durch private Selbstregulierung oder in Formen öffentlich-privater Koregulierung?

The engagement and influence of multinational business in the developing world and in countries in transition is often highly contested. With regard to their environmental impact, there has been ample evidence for business taking advantage of situations of weak environmental regulation and the devastating effects thereof. More recently, however, certain efforts to counteract such tendencies have emerged with voluntary standards in the context of transnational norms of corporate social responsibility. Our research takes a closer look at the interaction of such voluntary CSR norms and public regulation in countries with limited regulatory capacities. In fact, we ask a rather bold question: Do multinational businesses that are subscribing to international CSR norms also actively promote such standards in countries in which they operate? Looking at the situation of environmental governance in South Africa and taking the mining as well as the food & beverage industry as examples, this paper seeks to answer two questions. First, are companies who have subscribed to voluntary environmental standards actually engaging in fostering collective environmental regulation and under which conditions? And second, if they do, which schemes of engagement prevail: do companies engage in fostering collective regulation rather via the state, private self-regulation or in forms of public-private co-regulation?

The engagement and influence of multinational business in the developing world and in countries in transition is often highly contested. With regard to their environmental impact, there has been ample evidence for business taking advantage of situations of weak environmental regulation and the devastating effects thereof. More recently, however, certain efforts to counteract such tendencies have emerged with voluntary standards in the context of transnational norms of corporate social responsibility. Our research takes a closer look at the interaction of such voluntary CSR norms and public regulation in countries with limited regulatory capacities. In fact, we ask a rather bold question: Do multinational businesses that are subscribing to international CSR norms also actively promote such standards in countries in which they operate? Looking at the situation of environmental governance in South Africa and taking the mining as well as the food & beverage industry as examples, this paper seeks to answer two questions. First, are companies who have subscribed to voluntary environmental standards actually engaging in fostering collective environmental regulation and under which conditions? And second, if they do, which schemes of engagement prevail: do companies engage in fostering collective regulation rather via the state, private self-regulation or in forms of public-private co-regulation?

Grundbegriffe der Governanceforschung. Ein Beitrag aus dem Teilprojekt A1

Sonderforschungsbereich 700 (Hrsg.) - 2007

Download

Abstract

Assessing the Contribution of International Actors in Afghanistan

Jan Koehler/Christoph Zürcher - 2007

Download

Abstract

Welche Wirkung zeigt die Arbeit internationaler Sicherheits- und Entwicklungsakteure in Afghanistan? Wie bewertet die afghanische Bevölkerung die erzielten Resultate? Wie hoch ist die Legitimität, welche internationale Akteure bei der ländlichen Bevölkerung genießen? Wodurch sehen sich die Afghanen bedroht? Zur Klärung dieser und weiterer Fragen will diese Studie beitragen. Sie wurde von einem Forscherteam der Freien Universität Berlin, Sonderforschungsbereich 700, in Kooperation mit dem Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Referat Evaluierung, durchgeführt.

This paper is based on a representative survey among 2034 households in North East Afghanistan, conducted in spring 2007. The main results of the survey can be summarized as follows: Many Western observers claim that the security situation in North Afghanistan is rapidly deteriorating. We find that this sentiment is not shared by the majority of the rural population. An overwhelming majority thinks that security has very much increased over the last two years. Most Afghans credit foreign forces as well as the Afghan government with this progress. Despite substantial progress in security one fifth of all households feel that their physical security is threatened. They feel that the main threat does not stem from Taliban or other armed forces but from organized crime. Five percent also said that they feel threatened by foreign forces. International development agencies are widely credited by Afghans for bringing along positive and widespread changes in basic services for many communities, most notably with regard to drinking water, roads and schooling. Progress in other fields seems to be slower. Afghans tend to think that international development agencies have had little impact on progress in the agricultural sector and in improving access to electricity. Afghans also support activities of international actors that are usually associated with western values which are often seen as being at odds with Afghan values. Even in a rural context there is much support for state schooling, girls’ enrollment in schools, and off-farm job opportunities for men and women. Despite these positive assessments of foreign involvement, many Afghans remain cautious. 43% of households thought that the presence of foreign troops in general posed a threat to the local way of life and Islamic values in the community, and 21% of respondents thought that foreign developmental aid threatens the local way of life and Islamic values. Taken together, this is still a supportive environment for development cooperation, because most Afghans seem to value the concrete benefits of the foreign presence, despite widespread cultural or ideological wariness. We find statistical evidence that development aid has a positive impact on attitudes towards the peace building mission. Communities that have broadly profited from development aid show greater support for international actors and their objectives. Development aid, however, does not lead to a lower threat perception. Levels of received aid do not influence the levels of threats that people perceive, indicating that development aid per se has little impact on objective security threats. Threat perceptions differ between districts. People in Aliabad feel more threatened, and they fear the Taliban. People in Imam Sahib feel least threatened, and here the main threat is, as in other districts, organized crime. We also found no evidence that development aid has so far increased Afghan state capacities in the perception of respondents. The state is virtually absent as a problem solver and service provider. Most Afghans think that the state has not contributed to the provision of basic services and does not look after the needs of the rural population. This perception is hardly affected by levels of received development aid.

This paper is based on a representative survey among 2034 households in North East Afghanistan, conducted in spring 2007. The main results of the survey can be summarized as follows: Many Western observers claim that the security situation in North Afghanistan is rapidly deteriorating. We find that this sentiment is not shared by the majority of the rural population. An overwhelming majority thinks that security has very much increased over the last two years. Most Afghans credit foreign forces as well as the Afghan government with this progress. Despite substantial progress in security one fifth of all households feel that their physical security is threatened. They feel that the main threat does not stem from Taliban or other armed forces but from organized crime. Five percent also said that they feel threatened by foreign forces. International development agencies are widely credited by Afghans for bringing along positive and widespread changes in basic services for many communities, most notably with regard to drinking water, roads and schooling. Progress in other fields seems to be slower. Afghans tend to think that international development agencies have had little impact on progress in the agricultural sector and in improving access to electricity. Afghans also support activities of international actors that are usually associated with western values which are often seen as being at odds with Afghan values. Even in a rural context there is much support for state schooling, girls’ enrollment in schools, and off-farm job opportunities for men and women. Despite these positive assessments of foreign involvement, many Afghans remain cautious. 43% of households thought that the presence of foreign troops in general posed a threat to the local way of life and Islamic values in the community, and 21% of respondents thought that foreign developmental aid threatens the local way of life and Islamic values. Taken together, this is still a supportive environment for development cooperation, because most Afghans seem to value the concrete benefits of the foreign presence, despite widespread cultural or ideological wariness. We find statistical evidence that development aid has a positive impact on attitudes towards the peace building mission. Communities that have broadly profited from development aid show greater support for international actors and their objectives. Development aid, however, does not lead to a lower threat perception. Levels of received aid do not influence the levels of threats that people perceive, indicating that development aid per se has little impact on objective security threats. Threat perceptions differ between districts. People in Aliabad feel more threatened, and they fear the Taliban. People in Imam Sahib feel least threatened, and here the main threat is, as in other districts, organized crime. We also found no evidence that development aid has so far increased Afghan state capacities in the perception of respondents. The state is virtually absent as a problem solver and service provider. Most Afghans think that the state has not contributed to the provision of basic services and does not look after the needs of the rural population. This perception is hardly affected by levels of received development aid.

Transnational Public-Private Partnerships in International Relations

Eine überarbeitete Version erscheint als: Schäferhoff, Marco/Campe, Sabine/Kaan, Christopher 2009: Transnational Public-Private Partnerships in International Relations. In: International Studies Review 11:3 (forthcoming). - 2007

Regieren in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit: Zur Reisefähigkeit des Governance-Konzeptes

Thomas Risse - 2007

Download

Abstract

Ein zentrales theoretisches Problem des wissenschaftlichen Diskurses über Governance be-steht darin, dass die sozialwissenschaftlichen Konzepte vor dem Hintergrund der Erfahrung des Regierens in modernen und hoch entwickelten demokratischen Nationalstaaten der OECD-Welt formuliert wurden. Hieraus ergeben sich konzeptionelle Probleme hinsichtlich ihrer Anwendbarkeit auf historische und gegenwärtige Räume begrenzter Staatlichkeit. Diese Räume befinden sich vornehmlich außerhalb der OECD-Welt und sind kulturell, religiös aber auch im Hinblick auf Akteurskonstellationen und Handlungsmodi anders strukturiert als der moderne Nationalstaat westlicher Prägung. Der Beitrag behandelt diese „Reisefähigkeit“ des Governance-Konzeptes in andere Weltregionen und kulturellen Kontexte. Inwieweit sind die westlich geprägten Begrifflichkeiten auf diese übertragbar, und welche Probleme stellen sich dabei? Was können wir umgekehrt für die sozialwissenschaftliche Governance-Diskussion aus den Erfahrungen mit dem Regieren in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit lernen?

It constitutes a major problem of the discourse on governance that the respective social science concepts have been formulated against the background of governance in modern and highly industrialized democratic nation-states of the OECD world. This leads to conceptual problems with regard to the applicability to historical and contemporary areas of limited statehood. These areas are mostly located outside the OECD world and differ structurally from modern Western nation-states with regard to cultural, religious aspects as well as concerning configurations of actors and modes of action. The paper discusses the extent to which the governance concept “travels” in different world regions and cultural contexts. To what extent are Western concepts transferable, and which problems arise? And what can we learn for the debate on governance in the social sciences from the experiences in areas of limited statehood?

It constitutes a major problem of the discourse on governance that the respective social science concepts have been formulated against the background of governance in modern and highly industrialized democratic nation-states of the OECD world. This leads to conceptual problems with regard to the applicability to historical and contemporary areas of limited statehood. These areas are mostly located outside the OECD world and differ structurally from modern Western nation-states with regard to cultural, religious aspects as well as concerning configurations of actors and modes of action. The paper discusses the extent to which the governance concept “travels” in different world regions and cultural contexts. To what extent are Western concepts transferable, and which problems arise? And what can we learn for the debate on governance in the social sciences from the experiences in areas of limited statehood?

Governance, Normativität und begrenzte Staatlichkeit

Bernd Ladwig/Tamara Jugov/Cord Schmelzle - 2007

Download

Abstract

Das vorliegende Working Paper versteht unter Governance eine Perspektive auf Regieren: Governance dient der intentionalen Handlungskoordination unter einer Mehrzahl von Akteuren durch kollektiv bindende Entscheidungen. Der Mehrwert des Governance-Begriff s liegt in der Betonung der Kontingenz der Modi des Regierens und der beteiligten Akteure. Wir argumentieren, dass der Governance-Begriff schwach normativ ist. Der „dichte Begriff “ des Regierens meint stets eine regelgeleitete Verteilung von Gütern im Unterschied zu Übeln. Jedes Regieren, das diesen Namen verdient, garantiert ein Mindestmaß an Erwartungssicherheit hinsichtlich überlebenswichtiger und Sozialität überhaupt ermöglichender Sachverhalte für eine defi nierte Gesamtheit von Regelungsadressaten. Die Übertragbarkeit dieses Governance- Begriff s auf Räume zerfallen(d)er Staatlichkeit ist aus zwei Gründen fraglich. Zum einen fehlt hier eine Instanz, die die Inklusion aller Betroff enen in die Governance-Leistungen letztverantwortlich garantieren kann, zum anderen ist in fragmentierten Gesellschaften umstritten, wer überhaupt dem Kreis der Regelungsadressaten angehört. Hieraus erwachsen normative und handlungstheoretische Probleme.

This article views “governance” as a special perspective on collective binding decision-making among a plurality of actors. The surplus value of this concept (as debated in the German scientifi c community) consists in accentuating the contingency of its modes and actors. We argue that “governance” is conceptually normative in a weak sense. Governance is a “thick term” referring to rule-guided distribution of public goods in contrast to public bads. It must guarantee security of expectations regarding basic goods for a defi ned entirety of addressees. Transferring this concept to areas of limited statehood poses two problems: Firstly, those areas lack an authority that is ultimately responsible for including all persons concerned in the benefi ts of governance. Secondly, in divided societies it is contested who is part of the community of addressees. This causes normative problems and dilemmas of collective action.

This article views “governance” as a special perspective on collective binding decision-making among a plurality of actors. The surplus value of this concept (as debated in the German scientifi c community) consists in accentuating the contingency of its modes and actors. We argue that “governance” is conceptually normative in a weak sense. Governance is a “thick term” referring to rule-guided distribution of public goods in contrast to public bads. It must guarantee security of expectations regarding basic goods for a defi ned entirety of addressees. Transferring this concept to areas of limited statehood poses two problems: Firstly, those areas lack an authority that is ultimately responsible for including all persons concerned in the benefi ts of governance. Secondly, in divided societies it is contested who is part of the community of addressees. This causes normative problems and dilemmas of collective action.

Der Governance-Raum als Analysefaktor - Am Beispiel von "Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit"

Matthias Kötter - 2007

Download

Abstract

Der im Rahmen des Sonderforschungsbereichs 700 „Governance in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit: Neue Formen des Regierens?“ entstandene Beitrag entwickelt Kriterien für die Vergleichbarkeit von Governance unter verschiedenen soziokulturellen wie historischen Bedingungen. Zunächst wird vorgeschlagen, den Governance-Begriff auf empirisch ermittelbare Faktoren (Governance-Leistungen, -Akteure, -Handlungsmodi) zu beschränken, die sich in einem Mapping abbilden lassen. Da dieses Vorgehen Auslassungen im Bereich der normativen Bewertung und Bewertbarkeit mit sich bringt, wird als weiterer Analysefaktor der Begriff des Governance-Raums vorgeschlagen. Mit diesem Begriff lassen sich all die gesellschaftlichen Bedingungen erfassen, unter denen Governance-Leistungen erbracht werden, die einer spezifischen Form von Governance ihre besondere Prägung verleihen. Die Governance-Forschung kann dadurch ihr Potenzial im Bereich der vergleichenden Regierungsanalyse erweitern, ohne dass auf die mitgedachten normativen Maßstäbe verzichtet werden müsste. Das Forschungsprogramm des SFB 700 legt diese theoretische Erweiterung sogar nahe, wenn es nach Governance „in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit“ und nicht lediglich „unter den Bedingungen begrenzter Staatlichkeit“ fragt und den Raum-Bezug von Governance damit explizit herstellt.

The paper, composed for the Research Center (SFB) 700 „Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood: New Modes of Governance?” shall develop standards for the comparison of governance under different socio-cultural and historical settings. First, the governance concept is narrowed down to empirically determinable factors such as the governance output, the factual actors and their modes of production and coordination. The lack of normativity deriving from this practice shall be overcome by adding the concept of „governance space” to the proposed mapping. The governance space covers all those circumstances that are characteristic for governance in a society at a certain point of time. Thus, the concept of governance gains high potential for comparative governance analysis without having to let go normative standards. The research programme of SFB 700 already tends to this solution when it explicitly analyzes „governance in areas of limited statehood” and not only „under the circumstances of limited statehood“.

The paper, composed for the Research Center (SFB) 700 „Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood: New Modes of Governance?” shall develop standards for the comparison of governance under different socio-cultural and historical settings. First, the governance concept is narrowed down to empirically determinable factors such as the governance output, the factual actors and their modes of production and coordination. The lack of normativity deriving from this practice shall be overcome by adding the concept of „governance space” to the proposed mapping. The governance space covers all those circumstances that are characteristic for governance in a society at a certain point of time. Thus, the concept of governance gains high potential for comparative governance analysis without having to let go normative standards. The research programme of SFB 700 already tends to this solution when it explicitly analyzes „governance in areas of limited statehood” and not only „under the circumstances of limited statehood“.

Wer regiert wie? Für eine äquivalenzfunktionalistische Beobachtung von Governance in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit

Anke Draude - 2007

Download

Abstract

This article problematises the idea of the western concept of governance being applied to areas outside the OECD world. The aim of this article is to develop a research approach which is appropriate for these areas. To this end the article first of all casts light on Eurocentric premises of the concept of governance. It deals with the central dichotomy between state and private actors. The omnipresence of this differentiation is then explained with the help of Foucault‘s, Luhmann‘s and Derrida‘s (de-)constructivist theories. From the viewpoint that Eurocentrism is inevitable, but that it has a varying degree of influence on the observer, the author then outlines an equivalence functionalist approach to governance research, which poses questions about the nature of a task performed, about the “way” in which it is performed and by “whom”. In this way, European dichotomies with regard to actors and modes of action in governance can be avoided.

How to Capture Non-Western Forms of Governance: In Favour of an Equivalence Functionalist Observation of Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood

Anke Draude - 2007

Download

Abstract

This article problematises the idea of the Western concept of governance being applied to areas outside the OECD world. The aim of this article is to develop a research approach which is appropriate for these areas. To this end the article first of all casts light on Eurocentric premises of the concept of governance. It deals with the central dichotomy between state and private actors. The omnipresence of this differentiation is then explained with the help of Foucault‘s, Luhmann‘s and Derrida‘s (de-)constructivist theories. Assuming that Eurocentrism is inevitable, but that it has a varying degree of influence on the observer, the author then outlines an equivalence functionalist approach to governance research, which poses questions about the nature of a task performed, about the “way” in which it is performed and by “whom”. In this way, European dichotomies with regard to actors and modes of action in governance can be avoided.

Governance in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit: Das Forschungsprogramm des SFB 700

Thomas Risse/Ursula Lehmkuhl - 2006

Download

Abstract

Governance ist zu einem zentralen Thema sozialwissenschaftlicher Forschung geworden. Dabei besteht Übereinstimmung, dass politische Gemeinwesen bestimmte Leistungen in den Bereichen Herrschaft, Sicherheit und Wohlfahrt erbringen sollen. In den Debatten wird aber oft „effektive Gebietsherrschaft“ als Kernelement moderner Staatlichkeit stillschweigend vorausgesetzt, und die Forschung konzentriert sich auf die OECD-Welt. In globaler sowie historischer Perspektive sind autoritative Entscheidungskompetenz und Gewaltmonopol des Staates jedoch die Ausnahme, nicht die Regel. Ein Blick auf die Länder des Südens, „zerfallen(d)e Staaten“ in den Krisenregionen der Welt oder ehemalige Kolonien bestätigt dies. Hier wird politisch gesteuert, ohne dass die vielfältigen Verfahren demokratischer und rechtsstaatlich organisierter Wohlfahrtsstaaten verfügbar wären. Der SFB 700 fragt daher nach den Bedingungen von Governance in diesen Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit: Wie und unter welchen Bedingungen werden Governance-Leistungen in den Bereichen Herrschaft, Sicherheit und Wohlfahrt in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit erbracht, und welche Probleme entstehen dabei? Die SFB-Teilprojekte untersuchen, wie dort regiert wird und welche Probleme dabei entstehen. Dabei gehen wir davon aus, dass sich in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit „neue“ Formen des Regierens herausbilden, die vorwiegend „weiche“ Steuerungsformen nutzen, auf vielfältigen Kooperationsformen zwischen staatlichen und nicht-staatlichen Akteuren basieren und durch eine Verschränkung von globalen, nationalen und lokalen Ebenen charakterisiert sind.

The governance problematique constitutes a central research focus in contemporary social sciences. Yet, the debate remains centered on an „ideal type“ of the modern nation-state – with full sovereignty and a legitimate monopoly over the use of force. From a global as well as a historical perspective, however, the Western modern nation-state is an exception rather than the rule. Outside the developed world, we find areas of “limited statehood”, from developing and transition countries to „failing“ and „failed states“ in today’s conflict zones and – historically – in colonial societies. Our Research Center focuses on these areas of limited statehood which lack the capacity to implement and enforce central decisions or even lack the monopoly over the means of violence. We ask: How can effective and legitimate governance be sustained in areas of limited statehood? Which problems emerge under these conditions? We assume that “multi-level governance” is the rule in areas of limited statehood, linking the local with the national, regional, and global levels. We also assume that governance in areas of limited statehood involves a variety of public and private actors, such as states, international organizations, firms, and civil society. Governance entails negotiations, bargaining, and arguing among these actors rather than hierarchical „command and control“.

The governance problematique constitutes a central research focus in contemporary social sciences. Yet, the debate remains centered on an „ideal type“ of the modern nation-state – with full sovereignty and a legitimate monopoly over the use of force. From a global as well as a historical perspective, however, the Western modern nation-state is an exception rather than the rule. Outside the developed world, we find areas of “limited statehood”, from developing and transition countries to „failing“ and „failed states“ in today’s conflict zones and – historically – in colonial societies. Our Research Center focuses on these areas of limited statehood which lack the capacity to implement and enforce central decisions or even lack the monopoly over the means of violence. We ask: How can effective and legitimate governance be sustained in areas of limited statehood? Which problems emerge under these conditions? We assume that “multi-level governance” is the rule in areas of limited statehood, linking the local with the national, regional, and global levels. We also assume that governance in areas of limited statehood involves a variety of public and private actors, such as states, international organizations, firms, and civil society. Governance entails negotiations, bargaining, and arguing among these actors rather than hierarchical „command and control“.

Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood - New Modes of Governance? Research Program of the Research Center (SFB) 700

Thomas Risse/Ursula Lehmkuhl - 2006

Download

Abstract

Governance ist zu einem zentralen Thema sozialwissenschaftlicher Forschung geworden. Dabei besteht Übereinstimmung, dass politische Gemeinwesen bestimmte Leistungen in den Bereichen Herrschaft, Sicherheit und Wohlfahrt erbringen sollen. In den Debatten wird aber oft „eff ektive Gebietsherrschaft“ als Kernelement moderner Staatlichkeit stillschweigend vorausgesetzt, und die Forschung konzentriert sich auf die OECD-Welt. In globaler sowie historischer Perspektive sind autoritative Entscheidungskompetenz und Gewaltmonopol des Staates jedoch die Ausnahme, nicht die Regel. Ein Blick auf die Länder des Südens, „zerfallen(d)e Staaten“ in den Krisenregionen der Welt oder ehemalige Kolonien bestätigt dies. Hier wird politisch gesteuert, ohne dass die vielfältigen Verfahren demokratischer und rechtsstaatlich organisierter Wohlfahrtsstaaten verfügbar wären. Der SFB 700 fragt daher nach den Bedingungen von Governance in diesen Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit: Wie und unter welchen Bedingungen werden Governance-Leistungen in den Bereichen Herrschaft, Sicherheit und Wohlfahrt in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit erbracht, und welche Probleme entstehen dabei? Die SFB-Teilprojekte untersuchen, wie dort regiert wird und welche Probleme dabei entstehen. Dabei gehen wir davon aus, dass sich in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit „neue“ Formen des Regierens herausbilden, die vorwiegend „weiche“ Steuerungsformen nutzen, auf vielfältigen Kooperationsformen zwischen staatlichen und nicht-staatlichen Akteuren basieren und durch eine Verschränkung von globalen, nationalen und lokalen Ebenen charakterisiert sind.

The governance problematique constitutes a central research focus in contemporary social sciences. Yet, the debate remains centered on an „ideal type“ of the modern nation-state – with full sovereignty and a legitimate monopoly over the use of force. From a global as well as a historical perspective, however, the Western modern nation-state is an exception rather than the rule. Outside the developed world, we fi nd areas of “limited statehood”, from developing and transition countries to „failing“ and „failed states“ in today’s confl ict zones and – historically – in colonial societies. Our Research Center focuses on these areas of limited statehood which lack the capacity to implement and enforce central decisions or even lack the monopoly over the means of violence. We ask: How can eff ective and legitimate governance be sustained in areas of limited statehood? Which problems emerge under these conditions? We assume that “multi-level governance” is the rule in areas of limited statehood, linking the local with the national, regional, and global levels. We also assume that governance in areas of limited statehood involves a variety of public and private actors, such as states, international organizations, fi rms, and civil society. Governance entails negotiations, bargaining, and arguing among these actors rather than hierarchical „command and control“.

The governance problematique constitutes a central research focus in contemporary social sciences. Yet, the debate remains centered on an „ideal type“ of the modern nation-state – with full sovereignty and a legitimate monopoly over the use of force. From a global as well as a historical perspective, however, the Western modern nation-state is an exception rather than the rule. Outside the developed world, we fi nd areas of “limited statehood”, from developing and transition countries to „failing“ and „failed states“ in today’s confl ict zones and – historically – in colonial societies. Our Research Center focuses on these areas of limited statehood which lack the capacity to implement and enforce central decisions or even lack the monopoly over the means of violence. We ask: How can eff ective and legitimate governance be sustained in areas of limited statehood? Which problems emerge under these conditions? We assume that “multi-level governance” is the rule in areas of limited statehood, linking the local with the national, regional, and global levels. We also assume that governance in areas of limited statehood involves a variety of public and private actors, such as states, international organizations, fi rms, and civil society. Governance entails negotiations, bargaining, and arguing among these actors rather than hierarchical „command and control“.

weitere »

Service-Navigation

Hauptnavigation/Hauptmenü oben: Links auf direkt erreichbare, übergeordnete Webseiten

Service-Funktionen

Suche auf der Website http://www.sfb-governance.de

Navigation/Menü: Links auf weitere Seiten dieser Website sowie Banner

SFB-Governance Working Paper Series

Governance und Gewalt. Eine Untersuchung zur Krise des Regierens in Pakistan am Fall Belutschistan

Spoilers or Governance Actors? Engaging Armed Non-State Groups in Areas of Limited Statehood

Governing HIV/AIDS in South Africa. The Role of Firms

Staatlichkeit und Governance im Zeitalter der europäischen Expansion.

The European Union and the Promotion of Good Governance in its Near Abroad. One Size Fits All?

Auf der Suche nach Sicherheit. Die internationale Intervention in Nordost-Afghanistan.

Governance durch Interaktion nicht-staatlicher und staatlicher Akteure. Entstehungsbedingungen, Effektivität und Legitimität sowie Nachhaltigkeit

Transitional Justice als Weg zu Frieden und Sicherheit. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen

Procedural Legitimacy and Private Transnational Governance. Are the Good Ones Doing Better?

Governance und Raum. Theoretisch-konzeptionelle Überlegungen zur Verräumlichung von Governance

Von Ko-Produktion von Staatlichkeit zur Co-Performance of Governance

Economic Governance

From Public-Private Partnership to Market

Fostering Environmental Regulation? Corporate Social Responsibility in Countries with Weak Regulatory Capacities. The Case of South Africa.

Grundbegriffe der Governanceforschung. Ein Beitrag aus dem Teilprojekt A1

Assessing the Contribution of International Actors in Afghanistan

Transnational Public-Private Partnerships in International Relations

Regieren in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit: Zur Reisefähigkeit des Governance-Konzeptes

Governance, Normativität und begrenzte Staatlichkeit

Der Governance-Raum als Analysefaktor - Am Beispiel von "Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit"

Wer regiert wie? Für eine äquivalenzfunktionalistische Beobachtung von Governance in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit

How to Capture Non-Western Forms of Governance: In Favour of an Equivalence Functionalist Observation of Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood

Governance in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit: Das Forschungsprogramm des SFB 700

Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood - New Modes of Governance? Research Program of the Research Center (SFB) 700

News

www.theorieblog.de: Ein neues Blog zur Politischen Theorie und Philosophie

Christian Ickler ist neuer wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter am SFB 700

Deniz Kocak ist neuer wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter am SFB 700