From meditation to action – a research agenda for studying informal global rule-making: remarks on ‘Cosmopolitanism, publicity, and the emergence of a “global administrative law”’

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Oliver Westerwinter
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
Comparative Research ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
Institutional Architecture ◽  
Global Law ◽  
Rule Making ◽  
Law Making

Abstract Friedrich Kratochwil engages critically with the emergence of a global administrative law and its consequences for the democratic legitimacy of global governance. While he makes important contributions to our understanding of global governance, he does not sufficiently discuss the differences in the institutional design of new forms of global law-making and their consequences for the effectiveness and legitimacy of global governance. I elaborate on these limitations and outline a comparative research agenda on the emergence, design, and effectiveness of the diverse arrangements that constitute the complex institutional architecture of contemporary global governance.

Public Authorities and Intermunicipal Cooperation in a European Context

2016 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 403-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anders Lidström
Keyword(s):  
Local Government ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Comparative Research ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Metropolitan Areas ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
European Context ◽  
The Us ◽  
Intermunicipal Cooperation

Although not entirely clear with regard to definitions and delimitations, the article by Savitch and Adhikari opens up for a comparative research agenda of considerable importance for better understanding the preconditions for how the metropolis can be governed. Their suggestion that public authorities are important for solving collective problems in the metropolitan areas is also relevant in a European context. There is already a tradition in Europe to establish cooperative arrangements between metropolitan local governments for tasks that requires a larger territorial scale, but Savitch and Adhikari direct our attention to private law arrangements, i.e. inter-municipal corporations. Also in Europe, these have become increasingly common, which may be understood in the light of the increasing marketization of local government. Although lacking in democratic legitimacy, they provide more flexibility and may also include private businesses in their governing body. However, knowledge about their occurrence and functions is limited, which calls for further, systematic and comparative research. In particular, it should be investigated whether they, as in the US, are more common in the metropolitan areas with the strongest resources.

Democratic legitimacy and global governance: a research agenda

2015 ◽  
pp. 251-276
Author(s):  
Matthias Lievens ◽  
Emilie Bécault ◽  
Antoon Braeckman ◽  
Jan Wouters
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy

scholarly journals The Quest for Legitimacy in American Administrative Law

2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marshall J. Breger
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
The United States ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
Democratic Deficit ◽  
Democratic Accountability ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Rule Making ◽  
Do So

In the United States, administrative law suffers from a perceived lack of legitimacy largely due to a lack of democratic accountability or what some have called a democratic deficit. These misgivings stem, in part, from a deep-seated American distrust of bureaucracy. This Article examines how the quest for legitimacy has led practitioners (and theorists) of administrative law to undertake four interrelated projects: the Accountability Project, the Rationality Project, the Transparency Project, and the Participatory Project all designed to create a substitute or shadow form of democratic legitimacy.Through an examination of these projects, I clarify how they try to address the democratic deficit, and whether they effectively do so. Specifically, this article investigates the impact of judicial review, informal rule-making, increased access to information, and public participation as efforts to meet the legitimacy challenge. Moreover, it disputes the contention that the pursuit of democratic legitimacy is less consequential for administrative law than the need for bureaucratic rationality, by illustrating that bureaucratic rationality is but one component of a larger scheme intended to serve as a functional substitute for legitimacy. At bottom, because Americans do not share the fondness for the technocratic model displayed by many other legal systems, legitimacy projects have an enduring place in American administrative law.

Challenges in the Empirical Study of Global Governance Legitimacy

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Bernstein
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Study ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Cultural Factors ◽  
Theory Building ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Political Communities

This commentary discusses three challenges for the promising and ambitious research agenda outlined in the volume. First, it interrogates the volume’s attempts to differentiate political communities of legitimation, which may vary widely in composition, power, and relevance across institutions and geographies, with important implications not only for who matters, but also for what gets legitimated, and with what consequences. Second, it examines avenues to overcome possible trade-offs from gains in empirical tractability achieved through the volume’s focus on actor beliefs and strategies. One such trade-off is less attention to evolving norms and cultural factors that may underpin actors’ expectations about what legitimacy requires. Third, it addresses the challenge of theory building that can link legitimacy sources, (de)legitimation practices, audiences, and consequences of legitimacy across different types of institutions.

scholarly journals A New and Reinvigorated Research Agenda for U.S. Local Governments

2021 ◽  
pp. 0160323X2199163
Author(s):  
Ann O’M. Bowman ◽  
Domonic A. Bearfield ◽  
Stefanie Chambers ◽  
Beverly A. Cigler ◽  
Arnold Fleischmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Local Government ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Intergovernmental Relations ◽  
Social Equity ◽  
Local Government Finance ◽  
Local Government Management ◽  
Vantage Points

This essay offers a perspective on a new and reinvigorated research agenda for the study of U.S. local governments. It reports on the ideas and reflections of a set of local government scholars with different vantage points and varied substantive interests. Seven paramount themes or directions for a research agenda were identified, all of which contain numerous threads and thrusts: local government finance and economic development, local government management, intergovernmental relations, collaboration, public engagement, social equity, and institutional design. The essay offers some reasons for optimism about the future of U.S. local governments while also identifying cause for concern.

scholarly journals Slavery and Its Transformations: Prolegomena for a Global and Comparative Research Agenda

2021 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 566-598
Author(s):  
Matthias van Rossum
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Research ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
The Body ◽  
Indonesian Archipelago ◽  
Research Perspectives ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Indian Ocean ◽  
Contemporary Development

AbstractThis article argues that we need to move beyond the “Atlantic” and “formal” bias in our understanding of the history of slavery. It explores ways forward toward developing a better understanding of the long-term global transformations of slavery. Firstly, it claims we should revisit the historical and contemporary development of slavery by adopting a wider scope that accounts for the adaptable and persistent character of different forms of slavery. Secondly, it stresses the importance of substantially expanding the body of empirical observations on trajectories of slavery regimes, especially outside the Atlantic, and most notable in the Indian Ocean and Indonesian Archipelago worlds, where different slavery regimes existed and developed in interaction. Thirdly, it proposes an integrated analytical framework that will overcome the current fragmentation of research perspectives and allow for a more comparative analysis of the trajectories of slavery regimes in their highly diverse formal and especially informal manifestations. Fourth, the article shows how an integrated framework will enable a collaborative research agenda that focuses not only on comparisons, but also on connections and interactions. It calls for a closer integration of the histories of informal slavery regimes into the wider body of existing scholarship on slavery and its transformations in the Atlantic and other more intensely studied formal slavery regimes. In this way, we can renew and extend our understandings of slavery's long-term, global transformations.

scholarly journals Hybrid institutional complexes in global governance

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth W. Abbott ◽  
Benjamin Faude
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Structural Difference ◽  
Functional Differentiation ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Intergovernmental Organizations ◽  
The Core ◽  
Institutional Strategies

AbstractMost issue areas in world politics today are governed neither by individual institutions nor by regime complexes composed of formal interstate institutions. Rather, they are governed by “hybrid institutional complexes” (HICs) comprising heterogeneous interstate, infra-state, public–private and private transnational institutions, formal and informal. We develop the concept of the HIC as a novel descriptive and analytical lens for the study of contemporary global governance. The core structural difference between HICs and regime complexes is the greater diversity of institutional forms within HICs. Because of that diversity, HICs operate differently than regime complexes in two significant ways: (1) HICs exhibit relatively greater functional differentiation among their component institutions, and hence suffer from relatively fewer overlapping claims to authority; and (2) HICs exhibit greater informal hierarchy among their component institutions, and hence benefit from greater ordering. Both are systemic features. HICs have characteristic governance benefits: they offer good “substantive fit” for multi-faceted governance problems and good “political fit” for the preferences of diverse constituents; constrain conflictive cross-institutional strategies; and are conducive to mechanisms of coordination, which enhance substantive coherence. Yet HICs also pose characteristic governance risks: individual institutions may take on aspects of problems for which they are ill-suited; multiple institutions may create confusion; HICs can amplify conflict and contestation rather than constraining them; and the “soft” institutions within HICs can reduce the focality of incumbent treaties and intergovernmental organizations and forestall the establishment of new ones. We outline a continuing research agenda for exploring the structures, operations and governance implications of HICs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document