Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Answers.com

Multi-level governance

 
Political Dictionary: multi-level governance

An influential theoretical perspective developed since the early 1990s in the context of studies of the European Union and especially its cohesion policies with major contributions by Liesbet Hooghe and Gary Marks. Multi-level governance is contrasted to more traditional forms of state-centric governance and provides a framework for understanding the developing role of subnational governments in the emerging European polity. It is differentiated from theories of federalism in terms of the dispersion of authority over a complex, flexible, and fluid patchwork of overlapping jurisdictions. This is sometimes summarized in terms of the acronym FOCJ (functional, overlapping, and competing jurisdictions). In contrast with more traditional forms of decentralization, the number of jurisdictions is not limited, the jurisdictions operate at diverse territorial scales rather than a few levels (even across national borders) and they are task-specific rather than multi-task. The networks of governance arrangements that emerge have been compared to a ‘new medievalism’ and have some similarities with polycentric forms of government developed at city level in the United States. Normative arguments in favour of such arrangements include the claim that they can better reflect the heterogeneous preferences of citizens and deal with the varying scale of externalities arising from public good provision. Critics have been concerned about transaction cost issues, what authority structures can resolve conflicts, issues of accountability, and whether there is an inbuilt bias towards effective problem-solving rather than issues of power. It has been questioned whether it is a coherent theory that can generate hypotheses or simply a useful account of how boundaries in government are becoming less clear. Provided that too much is not expected of the theory, it offers a useful lens on changing political opportunity structures in the European Union.

— Wyn Grant

Search unanswered questions...
Enter a question here...
Search: All sources Community Q&A Reference topics
Wikipedia: Multi-level governance
Top

Multi-level governance is a public administration theory that originated from studies on European integration. The authors Liesbet Hooghe and Gary Marks were the first to develop the concept of multi-level governance in the early 1990s. Their theory resulted from the study of the new structures that were put in place by the TEU (Maastricht Treaty) in 1992. Multi-level governance gives expression to the idea that there are many interacting authority structures at work in the emergent global political economy. It illuminates the intimate entanglement between the domestic and international levels of authority.[1]

Contents

Multi-level governance and the European Union

The study of the European Union has been characterized by two different theoretical phases. The first phase was dominated by studies from the field of international relations; in the second phase these studies were revised and insights from among others, public policy were added. The most straightforward way of understanding this theoretical shift is to see it as a move away from treating the EU as an international organisation similar to others (e.g. NATO) to seeing it as something unique among international organisations. The uniqueness of the EU relates both to the nature and to the extent of its development. This means that in some areas of activity the EU displays more properties related to national political systems than to those of international organisations.

The theory of Multi-level governance belongs to the second phase. Multi-level governance characterizes the changing relationships between actors situated at different territorial levels, both from the public and the private sectors. The multi-level governance theory crosses the traditionally separate domains of domestic and international politics and highlights the increasingly fading distinction between these domains in the context of European integration. Multi-level governance was first developed from a study of EU policy and then applied to EU decision-making more generally. An early explanation referred to multi-level governance as a system of continuous negotiation among nested governments at several territorial tiers[2] and described how supranational, national, regional, and local governments are enmeshed in territorially overarching policy networks[3]. The theory emphasized both the increasingly frequent and complex interactions between governmental actors and the increasingly important dimension of non-state actors that are mobilized in cohesion policy-making and in the EU policy more generally. As such, multi-level governance raised new and important questions about the role, power and authority of states.

No other international form of cooperation is characterized by such far-reaching integration as the European Union. This becomes evident by the number and scope of policy areas covered by the European Union and the way policy is developed. The European Union can be characterised by a mix of classic intergovernmental cooperation between sovereign states and far-reaching supranational integration.

The combination of communal decision-making with the wide area of policy areas results in a deep entanglement of the member states’ national policy levels with the European policy level. This entanglement is one of the basic principles of the Multi-level governance theory. The multi-level governance theory describes the European Union as a political system with interconnected institutions that exist at multiple levels and that have unique policy features. The European Union is a political system with a European layer (European Commission, European Council and European Parliament), a National layer and a Regional layer. These layers interact with each other in two ways: first, across different levels of government (vertical dimension) and second, with other relevant actors within the same level (horizontal dimension).

Criticism on multi-level governance theory

Many of the problems associated with multi-level governance revolve around the notion of levels. The very idea of levels and levels of analysis is imbued with hierarchical implications. However, different levels or social spaces often interact or cut across with one another in complex ways that are not strictly heirarchical. To what extent can 'levels' be identified at all? The notion that international bodies constitute a discrete level of authority and governance is contestable. International regulatory networks may not be separate sources of authority but instead represent the reconstitution of state authority and the pursuit of state-level governance by other means. While territorial levels make sense when we are referring to public forms of authority, they seem less compatible with private and market forms of authority.[1]

Another criticism on the theory of multi-level governance is that it's not really a proper theory, rather that it is an approach. The main difference between multi-level governance and other theories of integration is that it gets rid of the continuum or grey area between intergovernmentalism and supranationalism and leaves in its place a descriptive structure. This theory does not address the sovereignty of states directly, but instead simply says that a multi-level structure is being created by subnational and supranational actors. One of the main questions of integration theory, namely, the transfer of loyalty and sovereignty between national and supranational entities and the future of this relationship in the EU is not specifically addressed in this theory.

The identification of partial political measures and general macroeconomics is divided on diverse decisional levels. National governments maintain an important decisional role but the control unlocalizes at supranational level. Individual national sovereignty is dilated in this decisional process and the supranational institutions have an autonomic role.

References

  1. ^ a b Insert footnote text here
  2. ^ G. Marks, 'Structural policy and Multi-level governance in the EC' in: A. Cafruny and G. Rosenthal (ed.) The State of the European Community: The Maastricht Debate and Beyond (Boulder 1993) pp.391-411
  3. ^ I.Bache, Europeanization and Britain: Towards Multi-level governance? Paper prepared for the EUSA 9th Biennal Conference in Austin, Texas, March 31 - 2 April 2005

1. * Baker, Andrew, David Hudson, and Richard Woodward (2005). Governing Financial Globalization: International political economy and multi-level governance. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge/Ripe. 

2. * G. Marks, 'Structural policy and Multi-level governance in the EC' in: A. Cafruny and G. Rosenthal (ed.) The State of the European Community: The Maastricht Debate and Beyond (Boulder 1993) pp. 391-411

3. * I.Bache, Europeanization and Britain: Towards Multi-level governance? Paper prepared for the EUSA 9th Biennal Conference in Austin, Texas, March 31 - 2 April 2005

4. * Baker, Andrew, David Hudson, and Richard Woodward (2005). Governing Financial Globalization: International political economy and multi-level governance. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge/Ripe. 

External links


 
 

 

Copyrights:

Political Dictionary. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics. Copyright © 1996, 2003 by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.  Read more
Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Multi-level governance" Read more