Over the past two decades the traditions of governing in European nation-states have been under great pressure as conventional state-centric practices have been challenged or replaced by new ideas of governance. These new ideas and norms and models generally originate from what could be seen as an international (in many respects Â?EuropeanÂ?) discursive structure composed of a number of different institutions and actors, such as the European Union or OECD. The result has been a conspicuous convergence of the ways of seeing the aims and strategies of governing and governance across European polities. This has not been a one-way process, though: we have been witnessing an exchange of ideas or norms, with states also as exporters of ideas and institutional practices to the international level. For example in the case of Finland, while new ideas have entered the Finnish scene, the Â?Finnish modelÂ? has also drawn a lot of international attention due to its widely-praised democratic qualities and economic effectiveness. Given these developments, the aim of this proposed project is to examine the new ideational, converging modes of governance in Europe, their international origins, national adaptations and, in particular, underlying rationales. Counter to mainstream theorising of new governance (Hooghe and Marks 2001;Pierre 2000;Pierre and Peters 2000), we argue that these new modes are essentially based on a complex process of hierarchisation of the different ideas and norms (e.g. best practices ideals or international indicators), and that these hierarchies can in the end produce fixed and non-flexible governance standards or even Â?iron cagesÂ? (cf. Weber 1922). We therefore ultimately ask to what extent European states follow instrumental Â?no-other-optionsÂ? governance strategies, dismissive of both politics and ethics or, alternatively, to what extent they can justly claim democratic ownership of their own developments? In political theory terms, if politics is defined, in essence, by the possibility of disagreement (cf. Rosanvallon 2006), then in what ways do the aforementioned developments in new governance modes close, constrain or open this possibility and thereby the realm of politics? This study is part of the project Ideas on the Move: New Normative Hierarchies of Governance in European Polities financed by the Academy of Finland. In a nutshell, this project is to examine the new ideational, converging modes of governance in Europe, their international origins, national adaptations and, in particular, underlying rationales. Each sub-project is to elaborate how the nation-state institutions receive ideas, adjust to them, and implement them. Kull will focus on the interaction between the national managing authorities and the European Commission and ask in how far the Commission has leverage on different member states both in terms of implementing a broader application of the partnership-principle as a new mode of governance and in fostering a further decentralisation of national approaches, such as happened in Finland. Furthermore, Kull will ask why and which member states successfully resisted the installation of a new governance model that gives space for broader local partnerships, and instead maintained a regime of Â?government-dependent policyÂ? (Bruckmeier 2000). The sub-project will also contribute to the debate on issues becoming very pressing in rural Europe after the expected reforms of 2013, such as cohesion and rural poverty. In theoretical terms, the study on the phenomenon of ideational change propelling CAP reforms will contribute to the further conceptualisation of constructivist approaches, above all structural constructivism (e.g. Kauppi 2005).
Vastaava tutkija
Kull Michael Hankkeen kesto 2010 - 2012
Hankkeen vaihe: päättynyt
HUOM! Tämä tutkimushankekuvaus on tuotettu Hankehaaviin Maa- ja elintarviketalouden tutkimuskeskuksen tutkimustietojärjestelmästä, jota ei enää ylläpidetä. Tarkista ajantaiset tutkimushanketiedot Luonnonvarakeskus Luken järjestelmästä.
|