CAHIERS
DU CRISES
–
COLLECTION ÉTUDES THÉORIQUES
–
NO
ET0908
22
beginning, neoliberalism was not an attack against the state, but via the state against
democratic forms of government. Traditional and newly emerging business and technocratic
elites have been supported to the detriment of the majority of the population. As a
consequence, social inequality and poverty have risen considerably (Milanovic 2002). New
patterns of social exclusion have thus been created (Duménil/Lévy 2001). Women were
affected in a double way by privatizations and the downsizing of the welfare states as jobs got
lost in the social sector and parts of the social work were re-privatized to the families, where
mostly women took over those responsibilities (Young 1998; 2000a)
2
. Apart from the social
crisis resulting from rising inequality and poverty (Wade 2004), neoliberalism also produced
vast economic and financial crises in the 1990s (Allegret et al. 2003; Becker et al. 2003).
These crisis-tendencies were rooted in structural contradictions (cf. Jessop 2002: 103ff.) and
led to a revision of neoliberal policies.
The invention of governance as an analytical and normative term was linked to these
developments. However, discursive shifts must not be confused with reality. Governing was
never reduced to sovereign government, neither in Feudalism when power was exercised
indirectly, nor in Fordism when corporatism systematically integrated civil society.
Nevertheless, we will first present modalities of governance (table 2) to be employed within
the framework of KATARSIS to present ongoing restructurings in European governance-
structures in a second step. The proposed modalities of governance relate to the two classic
modes on the one hand: the market and the state, which we will further differentiate. The
market works with the principle of exchange. The core principle for the functioning of
a market society is private property, which has to be secured by the state, which normally
works by the principle of command which is therefore the concept employed to represent the
bureaucratic state-apparatus. Hybrid forms of governance are represented by the two forms
of multilateral governance and citizen’s governance.
2
The exclusionary dynamics concerning women were even more complicated. As career chances for upper-class women partly increased
during the last decades, household work in the corresponding families is increasing being done by domestic servants, which was
described as a relationship between the “mistress” and the “maid” by Brigitte Young (2000b).
GOVERNANCE AND DEMOCRACY
–
KATARIS PROJECT
23
TABLE 2
Modalities of Governance
DIMENSIONS
OF ANALYSIS
GOVERNANCE
BY COMMAND
MULTILATERAL
GOVERNANCE
CITIZEN
’
S
GOVERNANCE
MARKET
-
BASED
GOVERNANCE
Definition
of general
interest
Imposed by
the state
Co-produced by
various agents
Co-produced by
various actors
Sum of
particularistic
interests
Definition
of rules and
evaluation
Command,
Control
Consultation,
negotiation
Interpellation
and public
debate
Reputation,
efficiency,
satisfaction
Actors
Dominance
by the state
Plurality of actors Plurality of
actors with
preponderance of
associated actors
Plurality of
actors with
preponderance
of commercial
actors
Instances of
coordination
Top-down
Closed
Top-down
Open
Bottom-up
Open
Bottom-up
Closed
Organisation
and
management
of collective
goods
Direct or
delegated
production
Coproduction,
contractualization
Citizen’s
initiatives,
revelation of
social needs
Demand and
supply
Public
finance and
logics of
attribution
Direct financing
Due to
bureaucratic
rules
Mixed finance
(Public – Private
Partnerships)
Negotiated
Mixed finance
Project-based or
experimentation
Potential to pay
for demand
Incentives
Criterion
of success
Efficient
Allocation
Negotiated
consent
Negotiated
consent
Effective goal
attainment
Sources
of failure
Ineffectiveness,
bureaucratism,
corruption
“Talking shop”,
secrecy, distorted
communication
“Talking shop”,
secrecy,
distorted
communication
Inefficiency,
market
inadequacies
Sources: Jessop 2006; Fraisse 2007