Governmentality, Globalization, and Local Practice: Transformations of a Hegemonic Discourse

Abstract

Since the 1980s, local governments in many parts of the world have undergone major institutional reforms. Shaped by a wide range of economic, political, and social trends, these changes have been driven by a particular blend of global and local dynamics. On the one hand, they have been contingent upon a globally dominant discourse that has tirelessly pointed out the devastating consequences of public-sector growth. On the other hand, the particular tracks that this discourse has followed, as well as the modes of local appropriation of its core messages, have variedand we believe will continue to vary-from case to case.This article sets out to explore the correlation between governmentality, globalization, and local practice from the vantage point of the institution of local government as it is being reshaped by the global discourse known as New Public Management (NPM).Evolved from modest beginnings among international administrative experts working for the United Nations, taken up by the Carter administration, and then processed and refined by the OECD, NPhl has arguably acquired the status of a hegemonic discourse: since the 1980s, most contemporary discourses in the field of public administration and management have positioned themselves in relation to elements of NPM. Though not a coherent set of values and notions and therefore not readily definable, NPM can nevertheless be distinguished despite its multiple guises and applications by (1) its clear emphasis on business-management practices, and (2) its reliance on individual rationalities and market ?

Beyond the deliberative subject? Problems of theory, method and critique in the turn to emotion and affect

“…Translation forms a valuable counter to notions of the flow of ideas across boundaries; attention shifts to the local and particular settings in which ideas are received, translated, mediated and adapted into new practices (e.g. Czarniawska andJeorges, 1996, Czarniawska andSevόn, 2005;Freeman, 2007;Lendvai, 2005;Salskov-Iversen et al, 2000). The image of 'source' and 'recipient' is rejected in favour of chains of association in which difference produces the possibility of the transformation of both: 'translation involves creating convergences or homologues by relating things that were previously different' (Callon, 1980: 211).…”

Islandness and struggles over development: A Tasmanian case study

“…Their members have been suspicious about sustainable development as one manifestation of ecological modernization e the idea that it is possible to maintain rates of economic growth and protect the environment via technological advances (Buttel, 2003;Higgott, 2000;Rutherford, 1999;Salskov-Iversen, Hansen, & Bislev, 2000;Yeates, 2002;York & Rosa, 2003). Ecological modernization has been criticized for its capacity to perpetuate the ''domination and destruction of the environment and the promotion of less democratic forms of government, foregrounding modernity's industrial and technocratic discourses over its more recent, resistant and critical ecological components'' (Christoff, 1996: 497).…”

Three theses on ‘governance’ and the political

“…This dissolution of the state/ society distinction is well illustrated by the popularity of the very term 'governance' as a privileged alternative to 'government', traditionally conceived in statist terms. 'Governance' usually refers to a plurality of governing agencies beyond the state, frequently conceived of in terms of 'networks' or 'partnerships' modelled on the private sector, and connoting a more inclusive, participatory and voluntary orientation in contrast to the 'topdown' and 'coercive' image of state government (Pierre 2000;Salskov-Iversen et al 2000;Du Gay 2002).…”