1,721,442 research outputs found
The Politics of Information: An Organization-Theoretical Perspective
No full textFrom an abstract, systemic perspective a depiction of the european institutions and their bureaucratic organizations as a complex, polycentric system of information processing may well be acceptable as a starting point. The question, however, is what this implies for the micro- and meso-level analyses of the bureaucracies of the eu — of the commission, the council, the european parliament, european agencies, and so forth — as these are after all the real world organizations that process information in support of the formal decisions on policies and their implementation. To give the problem a little twist: which organization-theoretical approach to the eu’s bureaucracies fits the emphasis on information and information processing as, assumedly, crucial resources and mechanisms of trans- and supranational governance?keywordsprospect theorydecision strategybureaucratic organizationoperational politicsbureaucratic politicsthese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves
Heroïneverstrekking en de consequenties voor verwervingscriminaliteit en overlast; een terreinverkenning
No full textHeroïneverstrekking en de consequenties voor verwervingscriminaliteit en overlast; een terreinverkenning
No full textConclusion
No full textDeveloping from the early nineties onwards there is by now a rich literature analysing and demonstrating the opportunities for the supranational bureaucracies of the EU to influence European policy-making substantially and beyond their formal tasks and competences (e.g., Cram 1993, 1994; Donnelly 1993; Heritier 1999; Egeberg 1999; Stevens and Stevens 2001; Pollack 2003; Beach 2005). Whatever the ontological and epistemological differences between these contributions to the ‘Public Administration Turn’ in EU studies (Trondal 2007), they typically suggest that the informal power or ‘agency’ of the supranational bureaucracies is primarily based on informational asymmetries that privilege ‘Brussels’ and on the expertise to exploit these asymmetries. No wonder that Moravcsik, a staunch advocate of inter-governmentalism, has challenged those who invoke the notion of ‘informational asymmetries’ as evidence for the explanatory power of supranationalism to come up with a much more precise explanation of the circumstances under which informational asymmetries arise and impact policy-making in the EU (Moravcsik 2005). One does not have to buy Moravcsik’s claim that only a rationalist ‘micro theoretical’ model of the transformation of information into decisional power can do the job to appreciate the more general (and seemingly simple) question his critique suggests.</p
Conclusion
No full textDeveloping from the early nineties onwards there is by now a rich literature analysing and demonstrating the opportunities for the supranational bureaucracies of the EU to influence European policy-making substantially and beyond their formal tasks and competences (e.g., Cram 1993, 1994; Donnelly 1993; Heritier 1999; Egeberg 1999; Stevens and Stevens 2001; Pollack 2003; Beach 2005). Whatever the ontological and epistemological differences between these contributions to the ‘Public Administration Turn’ in EU studies (Trondal 2007), they typically suggest that the informal power or ‘agency’ of the supranational bureaucracies is primarily based on informational asymmetries that privilege ‘Brussels’ and on the expertise to exploit these asymmetries. No wonder that Moravcsik, a staunch advocate of inter-governmentalism, has challenged those who invoke the notion of ‘informational asymmetries’ as evidence for the explanatory power of supranationalism to come up with a much more precise explanation of the circumstances under which informational asymmetries arise and impact policy-making in the EU (Moravcsik 2005). One does not have to buy Moravcsik’s claim that only a rationalist ‘micro theoretical’ model of the transformation of information into decisional power can do the job to appreciate the more general (and seemingly simple) question his critique suggests.</p
The Politics of Information: A New Research Agenda
No full textThe politics of information: the case of the european union presents the results of a research agenda that focuses on european institutions and their bureaucratic organizations as a complex, polycentric system of information processing geared to producing and implementing collectively binding decisions. The sources of inspiration for this research agenda are diverse, but two rather general observations might be mentioned here. The first observation concerns a transformation of the domestic politics of western societies. During the second half of the 20th century western societies — alternately labelled as ‘post-industrial’, ‘information’, ‘knowledge’, and, more recently as ‘risk’ and ‘network societies’ — have been shifting from a top-down, command-and-control style of government to a politics based more on bargaining/negotiation/deliberation between public and private actors in which concern about the control over information and expertise is gradually replacing the erstwhile concern with the monopoly of the state of the legitimate means of (eventually violent) coercion (cf. Hooghe and marks 2001, 5). As the german sociologist stehr claims, ‘in knowledge societies, the balance in the uses of different forms of power changes; knowledge, rather than the more traditional forms of coercive power, becomes the dominant and preferred means of constraint and control of possible action’ (stehr 1994, 168; cf. Willke 1997).keywordsmember statebureaucratic organizationconditional ruleeffect ruleoperational politicsthese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves
A neomonadology of social (memory) production
No full textThe essay considers the example of the public memorial events commemorating the death of beloved musician Pino Daniele in the city of Naples in January 2015 as an example of 'social production', in this case of collective memory, such as theorized by theorists of social production and social cooperation addressing the relevance of the concept of the common(s) to the relation between economic (utility or exchange) value and other types of value (aesthetic, ethic etc). In as much as the production of value in digital networks involves the technological mediation of databases, interfaces and algorithms, the essay considers the potential of a revised version of German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz's monadology to conceptualize the relationship between the divisibility of data, the individuality of agents, and the common ground of the crowd. In particular, such attempts draws on the one hand on Gilles Deleuze's theorization of the monads in his work on cinema, and on Gabriel Tarde's economic psychology to elaborate a neo-monadological theory of the collective production of social memory as value in networked media
- …
