Governance As Theory, Practice, And Dilemma
1Governance as Theory,Practice, and DilemmaMark BevirThe word ‘governance’ is ubiquitous. TheWorld Bank and the International MonetaryFund make loans conditional on ‘goodgovernance’. Climate change and avian fluappear as issues of ‘global governance’. TheEuropean Union issues a White Paper on‘Governance’. The US Forest Service callsfor ‘collaborative governance’. What accountsfor the pervasive use of the term ‘governance’and to what does it refer? Current scholarshipoffers a bewildering set of answers. The word‘governance’ appears in diverse academicdisciplines including development studies,economics, geography, international relations,planning, political science, public administration, and sociology. Each discipline sometimes acts as if it owns the word and has noneed to engage with the others. Too littleattention is given to ways of making sense ofthe whole literature on governance.At the most general level, governancerefers to theories and issues of social coordination and the nature of all patterns of rule.More specifically, governance refers to various new theories and practices of governingand the dilemmas to which they give rise.These new theories, practices, and dilemmasplace less emphasis than did their predecessors on hierarchy and the state, and more5419-Bevir-Chap-01.indd 1on markets and networks. The new theories,practices, and dilemmas of governance arecombined in concrete activity. The theoriesinspire people to act in ways that help giverise to new practices and dilemmas. Thepractices create dilemmas and encourageattempts to comprehend them in theoreticalterms. The dilemmas require new theoreticalreflection and practical activity if they are tobe adequately addressed.SCOPE AND ORGANIZATIONThe Handbook of Governance reflects thebreadth of a concept of governance as all oftheory, practice, and dilemma. Governance inall these different guises stands in contrast toelder concepts of the state as monolithic andformal. For a start, theories of governancetypically open up the black box of the state.Policy network theory, rational choice theory,and interpretive theory undermine reifiedconcepts of the state as a monolithic entity,interest, or actor. These theories draw attention to the processes and interactions throughwhich all kinds of social interests and actorscombine to produce the policies, practices,5/18/2010 2:21:00 PM
2THEORIES OF GOVERNANCEand effects that define current patterns ofgoverning. In addition, the relationship ofstate and society changed significantly inthe late twentieth century. New practices ofgovernance find political actors increasinglyconstrained by mobilized and organizedelements in society. States and internationalorganizations increasingly share the activityof governing with societal actors, includingprivate firms, non-governmental organizations, and non-profit service providers. Thenew relationship between state and societyadmits of considerable variation, but it is aninternational phenomenon. New practices ofgovernance extend across the developed anddeveloping world, and they are prominentamong strategies to regulate transnationalflows and govern the global commons.Finally, current public problems rarely fallneatly in the jurisdictions of specific agencies or even states. Governance thus posesdilemmas that require new governing strategies to span jurisdictions, link people acrosslevels of government, and mobilize a varietyof stakeholders.Governance draws attention to the complex processes and interactions that constitute patterns of rule. It replaces a focus on theformal institutions of states and governmentswith recognition of the diverse activities thatoften blur the boundary of state and society.Governance as theory, practice, and dilemmahighlights phenomena that are hybrid andmultijurisdictional with plural stakeholderswho come together in networks.Many of the ideas, activities, and designsof governance appear unconventional. A distinctive feature of the new governance is that itcombines established administrative arrangements with features of the market. Governancearrangements are often hybrid practices, combining administrative systems with marketmechanisms and non-profit organizations.Novel forms of mixed public–private orentirely private forms of regulation are developing. For example, school reform often nowcombines elder administrative arrangements(school districts, ministries of education)with quasi-market strategies that are meant to5419-Bevir-Chap-01.indd 2give parents greater choice (charter schools,voucher systems).Another distinctive feature of governanceis that it is multijurisdictional and often transnational. Current patterns of governancecombine people and institutions across different policy sectors and different levelsof government (local, regional, national, andinternational). Examples include variedefforts to regulate food standards and safety.International food safety standards are set inRome by Codex Alimentarius – a joint bodyof the World Health Organization and theUnited Nation’s Food and AgricultureOrganization; however, if the USA importsfish from China, the presumption is thatChinese officials at the national and locallevel enforce these standards. The practice ofregulating food safety operates simultaneously at international, national, and locallevels.A third distinctive feature of governanceis the increasing range and plurality ofstakeholders. Interest groups of various sortshave long been present in the policymakingprocess. Nonetheless, a wider variety of nongovernmental organizations are becomingactive participants in governing. One reasonfor the pluralization of stakeholders is anexplosion of advocacy groups during the lastthird of the twentieth century. Another reasonis the increasing use of third-party organizations to deliver state services. Arguably, yetanother reason is the expansion of philanthropists and philanthropic organizations,both of which are becoming as prominentas they were in the nineteenth century. Forexample, the Gates Foundation has bothmounted a multicity effort to reform urbanschool districts and embarked on a massivepublic health campaign in developing countries. The increasing range and variety ofstakeholders has led to the emergence andactive promotion of new practices and institutional designs, including public–privatepartnerships and collaborative governance.Yet another distinguishing feature ofgovernance reflects and responds to the factthat governing is an increasingly hybrid,5/18/2010 2:21:01 PM
GOVERNANCE AS THEORY, PRACTICE, AND DILEMMAmultijurisdictional, and plural phenomenon.Scholars have called attention to the way thatgoverning arrangements, different levels ofgovernance, and multiple stakeholders arelinked together in networks. Environmentalscientists have shown how natural areas likewatersheds or estuaries are often governedby networks of stakeholders and governmentagencies. Scholars of urban politics havecalled attention to the way urban, suburban,and exurban areas get organized in broaderregional networks. International relationsscholars have noted the increasing prominence of inter-ministerial networks as waysof governing the global commons. Morerecently, policymakers, often influenced bytheories from the social sciences, have begunactively to foster networks in the belief thatthey provide a uniquely appropriate institutional design with which to grapple withthe new governance. Joined-up governanceand whole-of-government approaches arewidespread in states such as Australia andBritain, in policy sectors such as HomelandSecurity, and in transnational and international efforts to address problems such asfailed states.So, the Handbook of Governance concentrates on the theories, practices, and dilemmas associated with recognition of the extentto which governing processes are hybrid andmultijurisdictional, linking plural stakeholders in complex networks. A concern with thenew theories, practices, and dilemmas ofgovernance informs the main themes thatrecur throughout the individual chapters. Thecontributors generally focus on: The new theories of coordination that have drawnattention to the presence or possibility of marketsand networks as means of coordination. The new practices of rule that have risen sincethe 1970s, especially the apparent growth ofmarkets and networks. The dilemmas of managing and reforming hybridpatterns of rule that combine aspects of market,network, and hierarchy.Even when a chapter title refers to a broadertopic, the essay itself focuses on the relation5419-Bevir-Chap-01.indd 33of that topic to the theories, practices, anddilemmas of governance. For example, thechapters in the first section on theories ofgovernance concentrate on how these theories illuminate new practices of governanceand/or how they have been modified inresponse to the dilemmas posed by the newgovernance.The very organization of the Handbook ofGovernance reflects an emphasis on the connections between governance as theory, practice, and dilemma. Few scholars sufficientlyrecognize the extent to which the new governance is a product of new formal and folktheories that led people to see and act differently. The first section of the Handbookfocuses on those theories in the social sciences that arose and prospered in the twentieth century, transforming our understandingof society and politics. Many of these theories challenged the older idea of the state as anatural and unified expression of a nationbased on common ethnic, cultural, and linguistic ties and possessing a common good.Many of them made people more aware ofthe role of pressure groups, self-interest, andsocial networks in the policy process. Later,toward the end of the twentieth century, someof these theories then inspired attempts toreform the public sector and develop newpolicy instruments. Certainly, the new publicmanagement owed a debt to rational choiceand especially principal–agent theory, whilejoined-up governance drew on developmentsin organizational and institutional theory.The second section of the Handbook examines the changing practices of governance.Public sector reforms have transformed practices of governance across diverse levels andin diverse territories. The reforms have givenrise to complex new practices that rarely correspond to the intentions of the reformers.What does the state now look like? What roledo non-governmental organizations play inthe formation and implementation of policiesand the delivery of services? The final section of the Handbook explores some of thedilemmas that this new governance poses forpractitioners.5/18/2010 2:21:01 PM
4THEORIES OF GOVERNANCEGOVERNANCE AS THEORYThe twentieth century witnessed the rise ofall kinds of new, and often formal, approachesto social science. These theories led people tosee the world differently and then to remakethe world. No doubt few people bother tothink about social life in terms of the formalmodels of rational choice. But a folk recognition of the largely self-interested nature ofaction, even the action of public officials,spread far more widely. Moreover, as itspread, so political actors increasingly triedto introduce reforms to deal with self-interest– to mitigate its adverse consequences, toregulate it and keep it within limits, or to harness it to improve efficiency. In this way, newtheories inspired both the recognition and theactive formation of apparently new featuresof governance. Equally, of course, social science theories have often struggled to catchup with some of the apparently improvisedchanges in governance. The reader mighteven want mentally to rearrange the Handbookto trace a progression not from theoreticalinnovations to the practices these theoriesinspired, but from the rise of the new governance to attempts to comprehend it in theoretical terms; that is from Sections III and IIto I, rather than from I to II and III.So, the chapters in Section I on Theories ofGovernance play a dual role: on the onehand, they introduce the reader to some ofthe general ways of thinking that have helpedto inspire the recognition and formation ofthe new governance; on the other, they showhow theories that may have been designedfor other uses have since been modified toaccommodate the new governance.Pluralists have long challenged reifiedconcepts of the state. Empirically they pointto the complex interactions, processes, andnetworks that contribute to governing. Inaddition, more radical and normative pluralists challenge mainstream concepts of sovereignty and argue for a greater dispersal ofauthority to diverse social organizations.In Chapter 2, Henrik Enroth discusses thepluralism of policy network theory as it5419-Bevir-Chap-01.indd 4impacts governance. Policy network theoryrose out of an earlier pluralism, with itsattempts to disaggregate the state and focuson groups. Some policy network theoristshave recently adopted anti-foundational,nominalist perspectives that have led themto pay more attention to meanings and todecenter even the concept of a group.Networks appear as undifferentiated parts ofa social life characterized by contests ofbelief as they inform diverse actions. Enrothpresses forward with this nominalist perspective, asking how it modifies our grasp ofinterdependence, coordination, and pluralism.The dramatic rise of rational choice theoryprovided another powerful challenge to elder,reified concepts of the state. In Chapter 3,Keith Dowding discusses the ways rationalchoice influenced both the understandingand practice of governance. Rational choicetheory is an organizing perspective or methodology that builds models of how peoplewould act if they did so in accord with preferences having a certain formal structure. Thisperspective gave rise to theories about thenon-predictability of politics, the problemsof commitment, the hazards of principal–agent relations, and conflicts in democracies.Dowding shows how these rational choicetheories inspired worries about the welfarestate. Public choice in particular then inspiredsome of the managerial reforms associatedwith the new governance. Interestingly,Dowding also suggests that rational choiceprovides a critical perspective on just thosereforms. Contemporary practices of governance rely too greatly on the superficialsupport public choice theory gave to choiceand markets. Policy actors should pay moreattention to rational choice analyses of thechaos and instability associated with weakinstitutions.Chapter 4 looks at interpretive theories ofgovernance. Interpretive theories reject thelingering positivism of most other approachesto governance. Social life is inherently meaningful. People are intentional agents capableof acting for reasons. Indeed, social scientistscannot properly grasp or explain actions5/18/2010 2:21:01 PM
GOVERNANCE AS THEORY, PRACTICE, AND DILEMMAapart from in relation to the beliefs of theactors. Many interpretive theorists concludethat social explanations necessarily involverecovering beliefs and locating them in thecontext of the wider webs of meaning ofwhich they are a part. Governmentality, postMarxism, and social humanism all share aconcern with meanings and their contexts.Typically, these interpretive theories lead toa more decentered view of governance.Governance consists of contingent practicesthat emerge from the competing actions andbeliefs of different people responding tovarious dilemmas against the background ofconflicting traditions. Similarly, interpretivetheory often challenges the idea of a set oftools for managing governance. Interpretivetheorists are more likely to appeal to storytelling. Practitioners orientate themselves tothe world by discussing illustrative cases andpast experiences. They use stories to explorevarious possible actions and how they mightlead the future to unfold.Robert Christensen and Mary Tschirhartlook, in Chapter 5, at organization theory.They distinguish four broad categories oforganizational theories, depending on whetherthey concern the micro or macro level andwhether they are deterministic or voluntaristic. Micro-level theories concentrate onindividual organizations. Voluntaristic microlevel theories focus on strategic choices. Theytreat action as constructed, autonomous, andenacted. They generally explain the behaviorof an organization in terms that echo themicro-level views of rational choice andinterpretive theory as examined in the previous two chapters. In contrast, other formsof organizational theory either avoid clearmicro-level assumptions or take a muchmore deterministic view of behavior. Theseforms of organizational theory overlap withthe institutional and systems theories considered in the next two chapters. Deterministicmicro-level theories inspire system-structuralviews. Macro-level approaches concentrateon populations or communities of organizations. The more deterministic macro-leveltheories take a natural selection view.5419-Bevir-Chap-01.indd 55Voluntaristic macro-level theories focus oncollective action.In Chapter 6, Guy Peters discusses threeinstitutionalist theories of governance.Normative institutionalism focuses on therole of values, symbols, and myths in defining appropriate actions for individuals andthereby shaping institutions. Rational choiceinstitutionalism uses the assumptions ofrational choice theory to understand institutions and to design better ones. Historicalinstitutionalism stresses the persistence ofpath-dependent rules and modes of behavior.Institutionalists have pondered the dilemmasof entrenching the new governance thatincreasingly relies on networks to link publicsector and other actors. They have drawnattention to the importance of institutionalizing a new network by developing its cultureand inner functioning. And they have highlighted the need for a new network to developeffective relationships with its political environment. Institutionalists have also triedto explain the rise of the new governance.Institutions can be treated here as dependentor independent variables. Typically, as dependent variables, institutions appear as, for example, responses to dilemmas and challengesin a changing environment. As independentvariables, different institutions might helpexplain, for example, varied patterns of governance, decision-making, and even gooddecisions. Yet Peters argues that a fulleraccount of how institutions explain aspectsof governance must evoke a micro theorysuch as that associated with either rationalchoice or interpretive theory.Anders Esmark uses Chapter 7 to discusssystems theory. Systems theorists conceiveof coordination as a property of systems.General systems theory explores the abstractprinciples of organized complexity, askinghow systems produce or exhibit order andcoordination at the level of the whole. Socialsystems theory uses the language and ideasof general systems theory to study interactions, organizations, and societies. Typically,systems theorists locate the rise of the newgovernance within a more general narrative5/18/2010 2:21:01 PM
6THEORIES OF GOVERNANCEabout modernity. Modernity consists ofincreased functional differentiation: overtime, society increasingly develops discreteorganizations to fulfill ever more specializedfunctions. The new governance of marketsand networks consists of ever increasinglyspecialized and differentiated organizationsperforming discrete tasks. These specializedorganizations are often autopoietic or selfgoverning. Systems theory characteristicallyexplores issues of metagovernance, such as ifit is possible to govern these self-governingorganizations, how states try to do so, andhow we might do so.In Chapter 8, Bob Jessop argues that thetheory and practice of metagovernanceemerged as a response to governance failure.The failings of hierarchy led to public sectorreforms intended to advance marketization.The failings of these reforms then led to anexpansion of networks. But networks toofail, especially if communication amongthe relevant actors is
The Handbook of Governance reflects the breadth of a concept of governance as all of theory, practice, and dilemma. Governance in all these different guises stands in contrast to elder concepts of the state as monolithic and formal. For a start, theories of governance typically open up the black box of the state.
PART III Globalism, liberalism, and governance 191 9 Governance in a globalizing world 193 ROBERT O. KEOHANE AND JOSEPH S. NYE JR., 2000 Defining globalism 193 Globalization and levels of governance 202 Globalization and domestic governance 204 The governance of globalism: regimes, networks, norms 208 Conclusions: globalism and governance 214
Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice Chris Ansell Alison Gash University of California, Berkeley ABSTRACT Over the past few decades, a new form of governance has emerged to replace adversarial and managerial modes of policy making and implementation. Collaborative governance, as
Objective: To acquire knowledge of ethics, emerging trends in good governance practices and sustainability. Contents: Part A: Ethics and Governance (70 Marks) 1. Introduction Ethics, Business Ethics, Corporate Governance, Governance through Inner Consciousness and Sustainability Failure of Governance and its Consequences 2.
Analysts and Data Stewards in an organization use Data Governance Tools to simultaneously enforce corporate governance policies and to promote correct usage of data. Typically, metadata is extracted from Databases, ETL processes, and some BI Tools and is consolidated within a Data Governance Tool where it is enriched with additional governance .
Module 5: Effective NGO Governance page 145 MODULE 5 EFFECTIVE NGO GOVERNANCE Good governance is key to the growth and sustainability of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Module 5, “Effective NGO Governance,” presents methods and techniques for planning and implementing actions to improve an organization’s governance.
Governance SOA Governance is the set of policies, rules, and enforcement mechanisms for developing, using, and evolving service-oriented systems, and for analysis of the business value of those systems Design-time governance Runtime governance Change-time governance SOA Governance was crea
IoT, discuss how IoT operations can be governed and what is needed, including the roles and responsibilities involved in IoT governance, and describe a proposed governance framework implementation as well as the future challenges facing IoT governance. This paper is intended to showcase how IoT governance can be implemented.
Korean as a second language (L2). This study quantifies such correspondence at the syllable level by calculating the degree of correspondence in Korean-Chinese syllables. The degree of correspondence between Korean and Chinese syllables was examined. Results show that among the 406 Chinese character families in Sino-Korean words, 22.7% have an average correspondent consistency lower than 0.5 .
