Hungry for power? Regional elites and the architecture of government

Tatham, Michaël; Bauer, Michael W.

doi:10.1111/gove.12542

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, they have already been found to have an impact in country‐specific studies as well as in larger comparative analyses. Other studies have highlighted the effects of bureaucratic streamlining arguments (Blom‐Hansen et al, 2020; Callanan et al, 2014; Steiner & Kaiser, 2017), of forced versus voluntary processes (Erlingsson et al, 2015; Erlingsson et al, 2020; Ryan et al, 2016), of right‐wing ideology on territorial reform (Steiner, 2003; Toubeau & Wagner, 2015), and of attachment and feelings of belonging (Hooghe & Marks, 2016; Tatham & Bauer, 2021; Zimmerbauer & Paasi, 2013). We nonetheless encourage further and more diverse research into the determinants of support for coerced institutional change.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding bureaucratic support for coerced institutional change

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Institutional reform processes can be contested. The more so by those working in the affected institutions. Bureaucracies, in particular, can be resistant to change.To better understand such processes, we study the regional reform in Norway. This reform is interesting as it mixes "voluntary" and "forced" dynamics. Indeed, Norwegian regions (fylkeskommuner) can remain unchanged, merge voluntarily, or be forced to merge by central government. This provides an opportunity to better understand support for coerced change. Through a survey of regional bureaucrats, we test different explanations of support for forced mergers. We find that two logics are at play. A "logic of discipline" which appeals to right-wing bureaucrats, advocates larger units, and streamlined bureaucracies, even if this is against the wishes of the main actors involved. And an "identity logic" which recognizes that feelings of attachment are powerful shapers of preferences beyond what efficiency and functionality dictate. | INTRODUCTIONInstitutions evolve. Sometimes incrementally, other times more dramatically. Such evolution is key to their survival but also a reflection of the changing nature of their environment. Public

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding bureaucratic support for coerced institutional change

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regional elites were studied in the European context. M. Tatham and M. Bauer (2021) survey the distribution of competences across the regional-national-EU triptych and highlight that preferences of regional elites 'remain somewhat of a black box'.…”

Section: The Theoretical and Methodological Basis Of The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing an “Unfinished Project”: Analyzing the Elites of Perm Krai Through the Lens of Expert Opinion

Kazarinova

2022

Vestn. Ross. univ. družby nar., Ser. Politol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perm Krai and the socio-political processes taking place in it are in many ways typical of Russia, and therefore of interest to a wide audience of researchers and political analysts. Based on the theoretical constructions of international elites studies and the Perm School of Political Science and elitology, we study the political and business elites of the region, their political behavior, aspects of identity, as well as the most politically sensitive topics in the life of the region. Relying primarily on the literature analysis and subsequent own semi-standardized in-depth interviews (N10) with representatives of regional elites - the following results were obtained. The identity of the elites and everymen in Perm region is somewhat vague, associated with the neutral notion of geographical region of the Kama region. Liberalism in the economic sphere and a relatively stable inter-elite consensus in the political sphere, based on technocracy, are characteristic of the region’s policy for some decades. The region is characterized by a low socio-political dynamics compared to the benchmark regions of the Urals and Siberia, due to lack of regionally oriented elites and businesses and the predominance of various kinds of “Varangians” in the political class. The socio-political and cultural landscape of the region (the Perm Cultural Project) becomes a starting place and a source of supplies for the elites, receiving back very little. Thus, the region remains a promising project that cannot be realized in any way.

show abstract

“…Further studies have mapped characteristics of elites worldwide (Gerring et al 2019) or examined the attitudes of elites in a certain country or region toward a particular topic, such as globalization (Rosenau et al 2006;Strijbis et al 2019). A substantial body of literature has investigated elite views of regional governance through the EU (Hooghe 2002;Best et al 2012;Sanders and Toka 2013;Persson et al 2019;Goldberg et al 2020;Cilento and Conti 2021;Tatham and Bauer 2021). However, we mostly lack systematic research on elite opinion toward IOs more generally (for exceptions, see Binder and Heupel 2015;Schmidtke 2019).…”

Section: State Of the Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizens, Elites, and the Legitimacy of Global Governance

Dellmuth

Scholte

Tallberg

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary society has witnessed major growth in global governance, yet the legitimacy of global governance remains deeply in question. This book offers the first full comparative investigation of citizen and elite legitimacy beliefs toward global governance. Empirically, it provides a comprehensive analysis of public and elite opinion toward global governance, building on two uniquely coordinated surveys covering multiple countries and international organizations. Theoretically, it develops an individual-level approach, exploring how a person’s characteristics in respect of socioeconomic status, political values, geographical identification, and domestic institutional trust shape legitimacy beliefs toward global governance. The book’s central findings are threefold. First, there is a notable and general elite–citizen gap in legitimacy beliefs toward global governance. While elites on average hold moderately high levels of legitimacy toward international organizations, the general public is decidedly more skeptical. Second, individual-level differences in interests, values, identities, and trust dispositions provide significant drivers of citizen and elite legitimacy beliefs toward global governance, as well as the gap between the two groups. Most important on the whole are differences in the extent to which citizens and elites trust domestic political institutions, which shape how these groups assess the legitimacy of international organizations. Third, both patterns and sources of citizen and elite legitimacy beliefs vary across organizations and countries. These variations suggest that institutional and societal contexts condition attitudes toward global governance. The book’s findings shed light on future opportunities and constraints in international cooperation, suggesting that current levels of legitimacy point neither to a general crisis of global governance nor to a general readiness for its expansion.

show abstract

Hungry for power? Regional elites and the architecture of government

Cited by 5 publications

References 60 publications

Understanding bureaucratic support for coerced institutional change

Understanding bureaucratic support for coerced institutional change

Managing an “Unfinished Project”: Analyzing the Elites of Perm Krai Through the Lens of Expert Opinion

Citizens, Elites, and the Legitimacy of Global Governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About