The metagovernance of English devolution

Bailey, Douglas A.; Wood, Matthew

doi:10.1080/03003930.2017.1359165

Cited by 45 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bell and Hindmoor (2009, p. 47) explain that Australia's Job Network provided a means for the government to centrally steer and horizontally manage the programs of non-state actors. This type of hands-off and hands-on action enables devolved central steering through delegating resources and authority to local public authorities to legitimately coordinate and manage policy implementation across state and local stakeholders (Bailey & Wood, 2017;Considine, 2003). LECs in Demark have demonstrated the effect of this bounded autonomy on other governance arrangements.…”

Section: Metagovernance and State Capacity To Metagovernmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing Metagovernance in the Context of Developing Democracies: An Institutionalist Viewpoint

Rasheed

2020

JPAG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metagovernance has traditionally been evolving as an effective mode of governance in developed democracies for states or governments to legitimately steer and coordinate stakeholder governance across jurisdictions. This article extend this work to understand the application of metagovernance in the context of developing democracies. Using an institutionalist viewpoint, the article explores the conceptual and empirical bases of metagovernance, drawing from the political science and political economy literature on developing economies to explain how political institutions can shape the state capacity to metagovern socio-economic activities in developing democracies. This article finds that the state capacity to metagovern can be challenged by weak democratic political practices.

show abstract

Section: Metagovernance and State Capacity To Metagovernmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing Metagovernance in the Context of Developing Democracies: An Institutionalist Viewpoint

Rasheed

2020

JPAG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The development of the competitiveness of metropolitan economic networks depends not only on preventing this kind of passive blocking of infrastructure. It also depends on persuading non-urban administrations to actively participate in the formulation and implementation of more intricate policies to become more complementary to urban areas [44][45][46].…”

Section: The Competitiveness Of the Metropolitan Region And Polarisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Neomedieval Urban Future: Neoliberal or Sustainable?

Terlouw¹

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of cities in the transformation of society is discussed. The growing importance of cities and their global networks undermine the nation state. This is a reversal of the development of the modern state which, over several centuries, increased its control over its territory and cities. Such changes have generated renewed interest in the Middle Ages. The relations between Medieval cities and territorial states were part of complex and shifting political arrangements, involving urban networks and overlapping claims to authority over territories. The general characteristics of prospective neomedieval political systems are discussed in more detail and applied to the regulatory challenges faced by neoliberalism and the transformation to a circular economy. The shift in the focus of neoliberal policy from the competitiveness of cities to that of metropolitan regions, with diverging urban and provincial interests hampers neomedievalist coordination. The cooperation between urban and provincial interests can however be realised in the transformation from a linear to a more circular economy, where metropolitan regions are well suited to accommodate the diverging aspects and forms of territorial regulation in a neomedievalist manner.

show abstract

“…This does not necessarily result in more powers for the local and regional level. Although in Western states the central government is less in control, or less attempting to control its regions directly, it is still the dominant, if not sovereign power (Jessop 2016;Bailey and Wood 2017;Brenner 2004). Although the hierarchical control from the central government has weakened and central administrations now cooperate more with local and regional administration on specific projects, it is not a cooperation between equals.…”

Section: State Rescaling: Urban Economic Opportunities and Threats Tomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The legitimising identity discourses of metropolitan regions focus on the flexible and voluntary character of their cooperation as the most effective way to organise the coordination at the appropriate scale to cope with the challenges of the rapidly changing globalising economy (Terlouw and van Gorp 2014;Bailey and Wood 2017;Wachsmuth 2016;Brenner 2004;Jessop et al 2008). Coordination in these networks is not based on hierarchy, but on a shared devotion to the same goals and their commitment to specific projects.…”

Section: The Legitimacy Of Project Based Network Cooperationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legitimising identity discourses and metropolitan networks: urban competitiveness versus territorial protection

Terlouw

2019

GeoJournal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growing economic importance of urban networks transforms the political relations in metropolitan regions. New forms of regional cooperation emerge, but many municipalities outside the cities which have become a vital part of metropolitan networks resist this urban led development. This paper analyses why while the importance of areas outside the cities for metropolitan regions has increased, many oppose this and regard this as an unwanted urban incursion threatening the interests and identities of their communities in well-established territories. This paper analyses the backgrounds of these political conflicts by looking at the different perspectives on identity and legitimacy. It develops a typology of the different legitimising identity discourses used by urban and non-urban administrations to promote or resist cooperation in metropolitan regions. There is a clear and coherent contrast between backward and inward looking 'thicker', and forward and outward looking 'thinner' legitimising identity discourses. These are based on opposing views on nine related aspects which help to better understand the deep roots of the opposition between urban competitiveness and territorial protection. The typology of different legitimising identity discourses is a useful tool to analyse the growing resistance in more peripheral regions to the further strengthen the global competitiveness of metropolitan regions. The examples in this paper of how legitimising identity discourses are used in the Netherlands-where economic policies like in many other countries focus on the strengthen of metropolitan regions-showed not only how these divisions fuel conflicts, but also how these are sometimes bridged through cooperation legitimised by a partially shared identity discourse.

show abstract

The metagovernance of English devolution

Cited by 45 publications

References 36 publications

Framing Metagovernance in the Context of Developing Democracies: An Institutionalist Viewpoint

Framing Metagovernance in the Context of Developing Democracies: An Institutionalist Viewpoint

Towards a Neomedieval Urban Future: Neoliberal or Sustainable?

Legitimising identity discourses and metropolitan networks: urban competitiveness versus territorial protection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About