Multi-level Governance and Democracy: A Faustian Bargain?

Pierre, Jon; Peters, Bernhard

doi:10.1093/0199259259.003.0005

Cited by 245 publications

(141 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

133

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Even if these cases do not allow simple generalisation to other instances of participatory governance, they suggest that multi-level governance may indeed be a Faustian bargain between alleged efficiency and democracy, but in different ways that Peters and Pierre (2004) could predict. Not even formal procedures and legal frameworks geared to privileging the weaker parties, such as the tripartition in LEADER, may suffice, if people do not adopt political identities and roles when acting in governance networks, and especially if the general public is uninterested.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The absence of hierarchies and legal frameworks as well as the informality of procedures are seen mostly to enhance efficiency in governance, as an improved problem-solving capacity, for example. (Peters and Pierre, 2004.) Yet, as Peters and Pierre formulate it, MLG can be seen as "a Faustian bargain" in which democratic accountability attached to the states' legal frameworks and hierarchies is traded for the alleged efficiency of governing.…”

Section: The Prospects Of Democracy In Multi-level Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, as Peters and Pierre formulate it, MLG can be seen as "a Faustian bargain" in which democratic accountability attached to the states' legal frameworks and hierarchies is traded for the alleged efficiency of governing. Peters and Pierre (2004) assume that formal rules and legal frameworks often serve equality and protect the powers of the weaker parties. The informal patterns of political coordination typical to multi-level arrangements may in fact be a strategy for strong political interests to escape or by-pass the requirements of accountability and thus they might undermine democracy.…”

Section: The Prospects Of Democracy In Multi-level Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the tripartite practice of the LAG boards could be seen as a legal framework that privileges weaker actors, local NGOs and "ordinary rural residents", vis-á-vis local governments, since it gives them two thirds of votes in decision-making. Therefore, the tripartition could be seen the kind of formal framework Peters and Pierre (2004) This analysis is based on a PhD study on LEADER action in grass-roots level in Eastern Finland (see Nousiainen, 2011). As a part of its field work, some participant observation was conducted mostly between October 2007 and June 2008 in a LAG.…”

Section: Leadermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Multilevel Governance and Participation: Interpreting Democracy in EU-programmes

Nousiainen

Mäkinen

2014

European Politics and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article offers an ethnographically oriented, interpretive approach for the research into the democratic qualities of multi-level governance (MLG). The complex and networked MLG arrangements, such as the EU's participatory policy practices, are changing the traditional roles of public administration and politics in ways we cannot yet fully foresee. Especially, the impact on democracy is subject to debate. With two case studies, this article seeks to shift the focus of the discussion on the democratic possibilities of MLG from theoretical analysis to empirical research into local and mundane experiences concerning EU policy implementation. The cases studied are the rural development programme LEADER and the youth policy programme Youth in Action. The studies suggest that the participation of NGOs or individual citizens cannot automatically be seen as a counterbalance to administration since the participants seem capable of adopting technocratic or administrative identities and roles. In addition, participatory practices may be geared to impacting on the participants instead of functioning as their democratic opportunity to impact on governance. Therefore, the paper suggests that the assessments of democracy should not only concentrate on the formal status of the participants: a credible democratic legitimation requires both the possibility and the will to act politically.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: The Prospects Of Democracy In Multi-level Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Prospects Of Democracy In Multi-level Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Leadermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Multilevel Governance and Participation: Interpreting Democracy in EU-programmes

Nousiainen

Mäkinen

2014

European Politics and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We have examined elsewhere (Peters and Pierre, 2001) the "Faustian bargain" that is implied in multi-level governance, and many of the same normative and empirical questions appear to exist within models of governance more generally, and within the garbage can conception that we are exploring in this paper. The loose structuring and seemingly p articipatory nature of the arrangements within the garbage can hide rather effectively the exercise of power, and the ability of a limited number of actors to shape outcomes.…”

Section: Paradoxes In the Garbage Canmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governance: A Garbage Can Perspective

Peters

2005

Governing Complex Societies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

teaching and research staff, visiting professors, graduate students, visiting fellows, and invited participants in seminars, workshops, and conferences. As usual, authors bear full responsibility for the content of their contributions. AbstractAs I worked through the revisions of this paper I realized that I was to a great extent returning to the dominant themes from one of the first books I ever published. This was Can Government Go Bankrupt?, written with Richard Rose and published in 1978. That book and this paper both deal with the authority of governments and their capacity to govern. Dror (2001) provides a very detailed analysis of governance capacity, but much of that analysis will actually come down to the presence of legitimacy for the governing system, and the capacity to use steering instruments effectively to reach desired collective goals. The issues to be raised in this paper are concentrated primarily on governance questions at the level of central governments and multi-level interactions, rather than of the international system, but much of the same logic of sovereignty/authority is in operation. Abstrakt

show abstract

Federalism and Multilevel Governance

Wusten¹

2015

The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Political Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multi-level Governance and Democracy: A Faustian Bargain?

Cited by 245 publications

References 0 publications

Multilevel Governance and Participation: Interpreting Democracy in EU-programmes

Multilevel Governance and Participation: Interpreting Democracy in EU-programmes

Governance: A Garbage Can Perspective

Federalism and Multilevel Governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About