Relationship between government and governance in europe

Urban Governance in Europe : the Government of What ?

relationship between government and governance in europe

The notion of going from government to governance, known as the . and the relationship between government and governance are seldom elaborated. .. European Journal of Political Research, 43(2), – Governance with/out government has emerged as an alternative or into the governance literature by students of International Relations and European Politics. Introduction. The shift from 'government' to 'governance' is one of the more noteworthy .. great importance in the relations of Swedish government units with EU.

More or less, it depends. In France or Britain, the making of large outer city social housing schemes in the s was not matched by services to the population. In French poor suburbs where some estates concentrated the poorest populations and recent immigrants, local authorities did not have resources, while social services, police, schools and public transports were insufficient. Those places were not governed, or weakly governed.

In the US, M.

Navigation

In his seminal contribution, G. Martinotti identified different city users beyond the classic groups of those who work and live in the same place, a minority in most cities.

Who governs transnational networks of retired Moroccan, Pakistanis, Senegalese or Turkish pensioners who spend half the year in their home country where they build a house and half the year in a host country where the children have organised their life? Who governs mobile population? This raises numbers of questions about the provision of services, about tax avoidance, about school population or the provision of housing.

One could argue that increased mobility of different sorts make urban society less legible and therefore far more difficult to govern.

relationship between government and governance in europe

However, the economic sociology of regulation is helpful to understand regulations. In analytical terms, cities are more or less organised around markets or governments, in more or less conflictual or combined ways.

Three ideal types are usually defined: This type of regulation implies domination and control as well as the capacity to sanction. This description can also fit certain large, hierarchized organizations where authority is the principal moving force, even if only informally.

Patronage is defined as: As far as urban politics is concerned, the latter is more relevant. In other words, parts of the city can be regulated according to non classic governmental principles but with the participation of governmental actors.

Corrupt elite networks sometimes.

What is GOVERNANCE? What does GOVERNANCE mean? GOVERNANCE meaning, definition & explanation

Associations, voluntary sector organisations, from neighbourhood group to giant utility firms have a say and some power in urban policies. Emerging problems raise questions which cross horizontally over bureaucracies and sectors, and vertically over different levels of government. Cities were considered vulnerable to these risks due to: But until recently, these problems were not framed as risks.

Although this can be seen as part of a wider extension of the notion of risk to policy issues, risk holds some special features in urban settings, and these relate to the questions addressed in the previous section. Nor can it be said that cities today are more vulnerable than they were before. True, they are more densely populated and more dependent upon a whole set of complex and interdependent networks. But the middle age city could easily be characterized in similar terms, when set against their wider political and economic environment.

From government to governance and onward to adaptive governance | Ideas for Sustainability

There are no such studies in Europe, due for the most part to the way cities were built and developed over the centuries. Vulnerabilities and hazards are well known, but they have for the most part always been there. The development of urbanization may have increased the risk of flooding in cities like Paris, London and Prague, for example, but one can hardly state that these cities are more at risk than they were a hundred years ago.

While some groups of the population will be considered as being at risk, others may be defined as risk factors by their behaviour, for instance minorities accused of drug trafficking or carrying diseases. Maps help decide which neighbourhoods are exposed to dangers, be they flooding or criminal activities, and this will have an indirect impact on property values.

Technical devices, such as cameras and once again maps, are used as instruments destined to change the behaviour of individuals; but more often then not they will force them to move to other parts of the city either to avoid a danger or to avoid being watched. City officials have lists of vulnerable populations they must provide assistance to in case of a pandemic, heatwave or other major catastrophe. But these lists rarely match from one city to another and once again reveal distinctive preferences.

Preparations for a potential H5N1 pandemic and management of the recent H1N1 pandemic both offer interesting illustrations.

While in some countries, the state relies on local government to take part in the management of the pandemic, in others it organizes the response with its own resources. For example, on issues related to water or waste, metropolitan governments possess not only the resources but also the policy style needed to address these often complex technical and social problems. Faced with emerging risks, local authorities are initially at pains to manage the scientific debates on whether or not these technologies present a risk for health or the environment.

In many instances, these contribute actively to a reduction in the general level of controversy and political risk. In turn, this competition may fuel the general controversy and help maintain some risk issues high on the public agenda — whatever the actual risks for the population may be. Such a transfer calls for renewed institutional capacities, either at the level of an urban region or within the state. Yet, many risk issues reveal that such capacities are still lacking.

More and more, these conflicts are framed as risk issues. Territories of urban governance: The city is proving more elusive, populations more diverse, governments are being rescaled and new modes of governance are being structured. Another highly cited paper on governance Rhodes, developed a definition that was strongly influenced by the political context in the UK at that time.

It relates governance to self-organizing networks characterized by interdependence between organizations, continuing interactions between network members and a significant degree of autonomy from the state.

Today Governance is distinct from Government. Governance is a way to manage power and policy, while government is an instrument to do so. Governance is seen as an alternative to conventional top-down government control, yet issues of legitimacy and accountability abound in the literature on governance.

In the same vein, environmental governance is best understood as the establishment, affirmation, or change of institutions to resolve environmental conflicts Paavola, As a process, governance may operate at any scale: It is increasingly recognized that environmental governance is often neither small-scale nor large-scale, but cross-scale Berkes, quoted by Adger et al. It is still unclear how local-level, bottom-up, participatory approaches can be congruent with international and national top-down regulatory strategies in a consistent way Adger et al.

Some part of the response lies in the transdisciplinary framing of scale and governance so that a broad variety of stakeholders can join the decision making process Kok and Veldkamp, Ostrom quoted by Adger et al. A better matching of the scale of governance to the scale of ecological and social processes leads to increased capacity to adapt to change Walker et al.

relationship between government and governance in europe

The most pressing contemporary environmental challenges involve systems that are intrinsically global. Global governance has enticed and startled humankind from its dawn and kept crossing the centuries. The idea was strongly resisted when questioning national boundaries, yet more easily embraced when facing global menaces.

Consequently, nearly international environmental agreements are now into force Biermann, The UN has made some attempts in this direction, e. It is based upon multilateralism, interstate negotiations and quantitative targets but bears the failure of effectiveness, legitimacy and above all scale matching.

However, in light of its universality and scope, Weiss credited the UN with a special role, albeit not a monopoly, on future leadership for global governance.

relationship between government and governance in europe

Aside from the UN, Europe represents a mandatory case study when it comes to supranational governance and it may be not so far-fetched to see the EU as trend setter in environmental governance. The EU was among the first actors going from government to governance. Even if is limited and hampered by divergent cultures and political preferences, there is still a strong number of EU supporters pledging in favor of a common baseline of administrative tools and practices.

With its overarching tool box of policy instruments and cross-cutting strategies, the EU is one of the best examples for regarding governance as a complementary way to pursue environmental objectives and to operationalise sustainable development by dealing with strategic aspects. In the nexus between conservation and development, Governance provides an opportunity for rethinking multi and cross-scale relations in meaningful ways for the livelihoods of individuals and communities Hyden, In the complex policy issue of sustainable development, governance points to the need for changing institutional relations and rules.

Change is creatively but rigorously addressed by the resilience perspective.