52 research outputs found
Christos J. Paraskevopoulos – Panagiotis Getimis – Nicholas Rees (eds.): Adapting to EU Multi-Level Governance: Regional and Environmental Policies in Cohesion and CEE Countries.
No full textChristos J. Paraskevopoulos – Panagiotis Getimis – Nicholas Rees (eds.): Adapting to EU Multi-Level Governance: Regional and Environmental Policies in Cohesion and CEE Countries. 1st ed. Hampshire: Ashgate, 2006, 301 stran, ISBN 0 7546 4533 9 (signatura knihovny ÚMV 52 886)
Challenges and Perspectives on Metropolitan Governance in Athens
No full textThe fragmentation of local government structures (more than 120 municipalities), combined with the traditional ‘sectoral federalism’ within a centralist state, the lack of visible democratic legitimacy and political responsibility for the whole region, could not foster the implementation of coherent policies for the metropolitan area of Athens. For a long period, the rising socioeconomic complexity combined to a growing deficit of social capital and urban identity, as well as to several self-referential organizations and particularistic interests had led to a series of failures and blockades. The governability-problems of Athens have been a legend for many years. Economic recovery and an unprecedented mobilization due to the city’s nomination for the Olympic Games (in 1996), gave new hope to citizens and stakeholders that had continually been frustrated. Large-scaled projects (with pressing needs for private capital and expertise), a growing voluntary sector and self-confident local leaders shaped new, more “open†networks of metropolitan policies. The success of new, result-oriented metropolitan coalitions in and for Athens has in deed been remarkable: The “face and the image of the city†has drastically changed, while the achievement of effectively organizing the games in a small country should not be under-estimated. The “mega-project†of the Games created a strong public awareness, new platforms and new agendas of public deliberation. During the games, the city revealed the “hidden treasure†of Athenian civil society that proved to be much stronger than expected. Soon after, the need to conceptualize a ‘modern’ scheme of metropolitan governance became a part of the political debate. The need for metropolitan reform is widely accepted but public debate on alternative scenarios seems to postpone the starting point. For the moment, the danger of a “back to normal businessâ€-effect is growing. An environment of non-continuity and disruption, distrust and non-transparency seems to rise again. How could the perspective of metropolitan integration through governance be still kept alive in Athens? How are the positive effects of “mega-projects†for metropolitan governance to be evaluated and further advantaged in cases like the one of Athens?
Rescaling of Planning Power: Comparing Functional Planning Reforms in Six European Countries
No full textMeasuring institutional performance in achieving urban sustainability
No full textFrom the 1980s onwards, many Western democracies started to establish systems of performance measurement. As Pollitt and Bouckaert (2000: 86-87) have argued, measuring public performance is by no means new. It is beyond doubt, however, that ‘interest in measuring public sector activities has blossomed over the last quarter century’ (Pollitt and Bouckaert 2000: 87). The authors observe that systems of performance indicators are now used in a wide array of countries and in a variety of policy and service sectors (Pollitt and Bouckaert 2000: 87-89). In this chapter we focus on performance management in local government. There is little doubt that the adoption of performance management in local government is often the result of central government initiatives. In reviewing central-local relations many national governments have implemented performance-based systems of management and control. In some cases (e.g. in some of the Australian states (Aulich 2005) or in the UK (Wilson 2005)) the implementation of such systems was essentially a top-down process. In other cases central government has tried to persuade local governments to adopt such systems, as was the case in The Netherlands (e.g. Helden and Bogt 2001) and in some other Australian states (Aulich 2004). In these more horizontal approaches, the implementation of performance management was often part of a policy of devolution of powers to local government. An example is the Dutch Urban Policy Initiative. In order to tackle effectively the problems of large urban areas, central government committed itself to broadening the powers of city governments. Central and city governments signed agreements, cast in the form of covenants, on how these new powers were to be exercised. The local authorities committed themselves under these covenants to achieving tangible results, and also agreed to cooperate in national urban performance monitoring (Denters 2002)
Governance in Regional and Environmental Policies in Hungary: Challenges of Europeanisation and Adaptation
No full textBetween vision and consensus:Urban leadership and community involvement in the Dutch cases
No full textThis chapter draws on research in the policy areas of social inclusion and economic competitiveness in two Dutch cities: Roermond and Enschede. In both of these cities and policy areas we examine one type of Dutch political leader: municipal aldermen.1 The Dutch system of local government is uniform and all municipalities essentially have the same decisionmaking structure. The legal regime for municipalities does not vary, but there are nevertheless considerable de facto differences in local politics, citizen involvement and local decision-making across the country. Our prime focus in this chapter is the role of municipal aldermen as political leaders, their leadership types, leadership styles, actual behaviour and role in shaping the complementarity between urban leadership and community involvement
Greece: A Case of Fragmented Centralism and ‘Behind the Scenes’ Localism
No full textAbstract
Greece, while described as the ‘cradle of Western democracy’, remains to be one of the most centralist state in Europe. This central governance is mirrored in Greece's percentage of local expenditure in GDP which remains the lowest in Europe and in the restricted functions of local government. Centralism remains to be perceived as necessary in order to sustain national unity and distributive capacities of the state in a country that has had to cope with political instability, regional divergence, and weak economic development. This article discusses Greece's dominant model of ‘pendulum democracy’. Within the context of centralism and the ‘pendulum democracy’, civil society in Greece remains weak and fragmented. Adding to these is the clientelistic political culture of Greece. All of these resulted in the confusion of political responsibility, frustration of accountability, inefficiency, and disintegration of the public space. While reform efforts have been directed to reduce centralism and the Westminster model of pendulum democracy, these however have little effect on the political system of Greece. The persistent fragmentation and the lack of cohesion of sectoral policies continually frustrate reform processes.</jats:p
- …
