Governance and Democracy katarsis survey Paper



Yüklə 0,72 Mb.

səhifə29/35
tarix20.09.2017
ölçüsü0,72 Mb.
1   ...   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   ...   35

CAHIERS DU CRISES 

 COLLECTION ÉTUDES THÉORIQUES 



 NO 


ET0908 

 

 



 

 

 



68

– and therefore urban elites – was avoided. This is a parallel to the case of the Tower Colliery, 

where the satisfaction of material interests – in the form of employment under decent 

conditions – also played a prominent part. Due to direct engagement of formerly excluded 

actors, a “space that is conducive towards citizenship” (García 2006: 752) has been created in 

these cases. This leads to the possibility of collective learning by the participating citizens, as 

participation is a political learning process, and to the notion of a “public state”, which is ruled 

more directly by its citizens than the bureaucratically administered Fordist welfare state (Novy 

2003b). The proposed notion of citizenship comprises both a social and a political dimension 

(García 2006: 748) and is therefore able to grasp the dialectical relationship between the 

content and the process dimensions of social exclusion. Furthermore it is useful in dealing 

with the complex relationship between agency and structure and in conceptualising the 

question of the relevant geographical sphere or political level. We would therefore suggest the 

claim for equal citizenship as a concrete utopia that should inform socially creative strategies 

in the field of governance and democracy. 



GOVERNANCE AND DEMOCRACY 

 KATARIS PROJECT



 

69

 



 

 

 



 

5

5

.

.

 

 

D

D

I

I

M

M

E

E

N

N

S

S

I

I

O

O

N

N

S

S

 

 

O

O

F

F

 

 

M

M

U

U

L

L

T

T

I

I

-

-

L

L

E

E

V

V

E

E

L

L

 

 

G

G

O

O

V

V

E

E

R

R

N

N

A

A

N

N

C

C

E

E

 

 

A

A

N

N

D

D

 

 

S

S

O

O

C

C

I

I

A

A

L

L

L

L

Y

Y

 

 

C

C

R

R

E

E

A

A

T

T

I

I

V

V

E

E

 

 

S

S

T

T

R

R

A

A

T

T

E

E

G

G

I

I

E

E

S

S

 

 

(

(

S

S

C

C

S

S

)

)

 

 

Multi-level governance (Bache/Flinders 2004; Eising 2004) is an important dimension in the 

KATARSIS-case studies. In a few cases, like Porto Alegre, upscaling is a crucial part of the 

politics of scale or of attempts to broaden alliances. Local empowerment has led to regional 

developmental efforts. In other cases, like Tower Colliery the emphasis is on proper spaces of 

innovation and power that permit alternatives to liberal governance. Multi-level governance is 

a concept which has been developed for the understanding of current transformations within 

the European Union. It tries to grasp the double movement which shifts power away from the 

national state towards trans-national and multi-national levels as well as the local and urban 

levels. 


The term “level” hints at a hierarchy of the different political levels involved. Marks and 

Hooghe (2004) distinguish two different types of multi-level governance, which are shown in 

table 3. Whereas type I multi-level governance refers to the more classic forms of federalism, 

type II multi-level governance refers to more flexible arrangements with intersecting 

memberships and could thus be called “network governance”. This second type of governance 

is less transparent, as there is a certain lack of rules and regulations, which leads to problems 

concerning democratic legitimacy. The first type is more in tune with traditional forms of 

liberal and republican democracy based on sovereignty. 






Dostları ilə paylaş:
1   ...   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   ...   35


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©genderi.org 2019
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə