Arthur Benz

The Europeanization of regional policies: patterns of multi-level governance

The rise and integration of the regional level in the European Union (EU) multi-level system threatens to overload policy-making owing to a rising number of actors, levels and different institutional settings. Based on comparative empirical research on different types of region (less developed regions vs. city-regions) in both France and Germany, it is argued that adjustments of both intergovernmental and regional structures lead to the development of a multi-level framework in which dangers of overload and malfunctions can be successfully circumvented. Concerning the intergovernmental dimension of regional development policies, it is shown that the dynamic differentiation of decision-making structures as well as a balanced mixture of different modes of governance (co-operative networks, hierarchy and competition) can provide viable escape routes from potential deadlock. However, processes of structuring multi-level governance depend to a considerable degree on the national institutional setting which may...

Governance — Modebegriff oder nützliches sozialwissenschaftliches Konzept?

Governance — ist das wieder ein Anglizismus, mit dem Sozialwissenschaftler ihr Sprachrepertoire unnotig verkomplizieren? Liegt nicht wie bei allen aus dem angelsachsischen Sprachraum stammenden Begriffen auch bei diesem der Verdacht nahe, dass es sich hierbei um einen Modeausdruck handelt, der Altes lediglich in ein neues Gewand kleidet? Gibt es nicht geeignete deutsche Worter, um das zu bezeichnen, was eigentlich gemeint ist? Diese Fragen liegen auf der Hand und sie haben ihre Berechtigung. Neuen Bezeichnungen sollte man mit Skepsis begegnen, vor allem dann, wenn sie plotzlich in aller Munde sind und in vielen Bereichen Verwendung finden, keiner aber so genau definieren kann, was eigentlich damit gemeint ist. Und all dies trifft fur den Governance-Begriff zu.

The politics of adaptation: The Europeanisation of national parliamentary systems

Parliamentary systems can be characterised by particular patterns of interaction between the executive, the majority parties and the opposition parties in parliament. The basic argument outlined in this paper is that in order to understand the impact of European integration on national parliamentary democracies we have to find out how these patterns are adjusted. The article starts by identifying the basic social mechanisms that drive the interaction of the mentioned groups of actors and by describing how they are modified in European multi-level governance. In this context, members of national parliaments are faced with a dilemma: Successful scrutiny can undermine the effectiveness of European governance whereas a permissive parliament causes a legitimacy deficit. Through case studies on the Europeanisation of the parliamentary systems in the UK, in Denmark and in Germany, the authors show how members of parliaments cope with this challenge and which strategies they apply to avoid the dilemma.

Policy Learning in Regional Networks

The article contributes to the current discourse on learning regions. It aims to identify favourable conditions for policy learning in regions. Supported by the most prominent theories on regional development and innovation, the existence of autonomous policy networks in regions is regarded as a fundamental prerequisite for generating innovations. However, previous research does not clarify how networks have to be organized and linked to the institutional framework inside and outside a region, how actors should interact in networks, and whether competitive or cooperative orientations of actors are more conducive to change. Our theoretical reasoning leads us to the conclusion that learning regions are those that manage to meet different, to a certain degree contradictory, demands regarding structures of networks and actors involved. Successful learning, the generation and implementation of new patterns of politics and new policies depends on specific structural characteristics of networks, but also on actors’ cognitive dispositions, orientations, strategies and interactions. Moreover, favourable institutional settings are identified which may induce adequate network structures and support innovative policies. Finally we draw some conclusions for practical regional policy in a ‘learning region’.

Federal dynamics: continuity, change, and the varieties of federalism

Acknowledgements 1. Federal Dynamics: Introduction Part I: Models, Varieties and Dimensions of Federalism 2. Dimensions and Dynamics of Federal Regimes 3. Comparing Federalisms: Variations or Distinct Models? 4. Varieties of Federalism and Propensities for Change Part II: Timing and Sequencing and Historical Evolution 5. Between Path Dependence and Gradual Change: Historical Institutionalism and the Study of Federal Dynamics 6. Resilience and Change in Federal Institutions: The Case of the German Federal Council 7. Decentralization in Time: A Process-Tracing Approach to Federal Dynamics of Change 9. Federalism, Democracy and Democratization 10. The Evolution of Federalism and Executive Power in Canada and Australia Part III: Social Change and Political Structuring 11. Federalism, Nationalist Politics, and Social Policy: How Ideas and Institutions Interact to Produce or Prevent Change 12. Dynamics of Change in Federal Representation 13. Mainstream Parties and Territorial Dynamics in the UK, Spain and India Part IV: Actors, Institutions and Internal Dynamics 14. Constitutional Change in Federations: The Role of Complementary Institutions 15. Constitutional Reform and Federal Dynamics: Causes and Effects 16. Paradoxes of Self-Coordination in Federal Systems 17. Economic Crisis and Federal Dynamics Conclusion: Theorizing Federal Dynamics

Inter-Regional Competition in Co-operative Federalism: New Modes of Multi-level Governance in Germany

Abstract In its territorial dimension, the reconfiguration of the state is mainly revealed in the development of multi-level governance. Generally speaking, we observe a shift from hierarchical and co-operative modes towards competitive modes. As a consequence, regions are increasingly challenged by competition. Beyond the driving forces of the market, which are often overestimated, central governments use policy competition to influence and control regional policy making. Based on an analytical distinction between these types of competition, the article explains how this new mode of multi-level governance works. Empirical evidence is provided for Germany where inter-regional policy competition organized by the federal government is implemented in a co-operative federalism. This case allows us to explain practical problems and constraints of competitive governance.

Mehrebenenverflechtung in der Europäischen Union

Die Fortschritte der europaischen Integration haben ein politisches System erzeugt, das starker fusioniert ist als ein Staatenbund. Aber mit der EU ist bislang kein neuer supranationaler Staat entstanden, der autonom tatig werden kann. Die Union erfullt zwar Funktionen eines Staates, aber sie besitzt nicht die Kompetenzen einer souveranen Staatsgewalt. Vielmehr sind politische Entscheidungen und ihre Durchsetzung in weiten Bereichen nur im Zusammenwirken zwischen europaischen und nationalen Institutionen moglich. Deswegen ist die EU auch kein Bundesstaat. Wenn sie als politisches System „sui generis“ bezeichnet wird, so wird damit einerseits auf ihren hybriden Charakter verwiesen, der sich aus der Verbindung bundesstaatsahnlicher Strukturen im Bereich der vergemeinschafteten Politik und einer staatenbundischen (intergouvernementalen) Kooperation in der „zweiten und dritten Saule“ ergibt. Andererseits sind mit diesem Begriff die ausgepragten Verflechtungen zwischen den Ebenen angesprochen, die der EU eigen sind.

From Joint Decision Traps to Over-regulated Federalism: Adverse Effects of a Successful Constitutional Reform

The article sheds light on an unintended effect of recent constitutional reform in Germany: the extension of detailed regulations in the constitution. This outcome is explained by the structure of the reform process which caused party political and intergovernmental bargaining as usual. Moreover, the interplay between constitutional policy-making and decisions of the Constitutional Court contribute to the described trend of over-regulation of the constitution. The second reform, currently under way, is likely to continue this trend. As a consequence, the federal system is in danger of losing necessary flexibility, while governance will become neither more effective nor more democratic.

Themen, Probleme und Perspektiven der vergleichenden Föderalismusforschung

Der Foderalismus scheint als Strukturprinzip eines politischen Systems1 eine auserst erfolgreiche Geschichte zu haben. Es dauerte allerdings lange, bis sich der moderne Bundesstaat durchsetzte. Nachdem dieser Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts fast zeitgleich mit der reprasentativen Demokratie in die Verfassungstheorie und -praxis des modernen Staates eingefuhrt wurde, waren noch zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts nur wenige Staaten foderativ organisiert. Neben dem ersten Bundesstaat der Neuzeit, den USA (1789), sowie der Schweiz (1848), Kanada (1867), Deutschland (1871) und Australien (1901) finden sich bis dahin nur noch in Mittel- und Sudamerika erfolgreiche (Brasilien und Mexiko) wie gescheiterte Grundungen von Bundesstaaten, deren Verfassungen dem nordamerikanischen Vorbild folgten.

Constitutional Change in Federations—A Framework for Analysis

This article outlines a conceptual framework for analysing constitutional change in federal systems. It begins by explaining the dilemmas, tensions and dynamics inherent in federations that cause the need for adaptation and formal reform of constitutions. After reviewing some approaches and concepts from the literature, the article introduces a conceptual framework for understanding constitutional federal change. It tackles its complexity by determining its modes, mechanisms and outcomes. First, it proposes an analytical distinction among four types of constitutional federal change—reform, innovation, evolution and adjustment—and presents a distinction among four mechanisms of change, distinguishing change produced through constitutional policy making, ‘implicit’ change of intergovernmental rules and patterns of governance practices, intergovernmental competition and/or ‘paradigmatic’ shifts in constitutional ideas and values, or change in court decisions and legal interpretation and discourses. It also deals with several typical outcomes of federal change. Finally, some implications for further research are examined.