APPLICATION FORM FOR PROSPECTIVE WORKSHOP DIRECTORS

Transcription

1 APPLICATION FORM FOR PROSPECTIVE WORKSHOP DIRECTORS To apply for running a workshop at the Joint Sessions in Turin, Italy, March 2001, send the form below as the cover sheet and a separate workshop proposal to the ECPR Central Services. You can do this by either ing both documents as an attached file (in word format.doc or rich text format.rtf) to the ECPR Central Services at ecpr@essex.ac.uk. Alternatively, you can print up the information and send it as a fax to the Central Services, fax: The deadline for applications is 15 October Title of proposed workshop: Institutional innovation in local democracy Name of workshop director(s): Prof. Dr. Bas Denters and Researcher/Cand.polit. Signy Irene Vabo Name and address of institution(s): Prof. Dr. Bas Denters University of Twente Faculty of Public Administration and Public Policy Institute for Decentralized Governance (INDEGO) P.O. BOX VK Hengelo The Netherlands Researcher/Cand.polit. Signy Irene Vabo Norwegian institute for urban and regional research P.O.BOX 44 Blindern N-0313 Oslo Norway Telephone number/s: Bas Denters: / , Signy Irene Vabo: / Fax number/s: Bas Denters: , Signy Irene Vabo: address/s: Bas Denters: s.a.h.denters@bsk.utwente.nl, Signy Irene Vabo: signy.vabo@nibr.no Please note that the information above is VERY important as it will be used in all future correspondence and printed in the academic programme. The proposal should be typed with 1.5 line spacing on three/four A4 pages using this sheet as the first page, and should cover the points outlined in the guidelines ( For further information, please contact either: ECPR Central Services University of Essex Wivenhoe Park COLCHESTER CO4 3SQ Essex, UK Tel: /2497 Fax: ecpr@essex.ac.uk Web: Dr Vincent Hoffmann-Martinot (Workshop Committee Chair) Institut d Études Politiques de Bordeaux Domaine Universitaire, BP 101 F TALENCE CEDEX France Tel: Fax: v.hoffmann-martinot@wanadoo.fr 1

2 Workshop title Institutional innovation in local democracy Outline of the topic During the 1990 s, the improvement of governmental effectiveness and managerial efficiency have become major concerns for local governments throughout Europe. Osborne and Gaebler s plea for Reinventing government (1992) did not only sweep over the USA (Thompson and Riccucci 1998), it also affected many European local governments (see various contributions in Stoker 1999 en 2000 for example). In order to improve effectiveness and governability, local governments have increasingly involved non-governmental actors in local decision-making processes (so-called governance structures). Other local initiatives have focussed primarily on the improvement of managerial efficiency. Such reform strategies, following the trend of New Public Management, include functional specialisation (e.g. introducing institutional divisions between the demand and supply sides of service production); enhanced co-ordination (matrix-organisation, cross-divisional networks); decentralisation ( Management by Objectives, block grants, sub-governmental bodies for service production management) and so forth. After an initial euphoria there is a growing concern about the effects of these functional reforms on the democratic quality of local government. Local governments became aware of possible negative side effects of such reforms, and have experimented with measures to improve the openness and the responsiveness of local government. From the political scientist s perspective these functionally inspired reforms in urban governance raise a wide range of issues. In normative political theory one major argument in the case for local democracy is gauged in terms of assumptions about local government s superior accessibility and responsiveness and greater opportunities for political participation (e.g. Sharpe 1970 or Smith 1985: 18-45). In the positive political study of local government there is a long tradition in which the validity of such assumptions has been subject of empirical studies. In the 1950 s this has resulted in the famous community power controversy (Hunter 1953; Dahl 1961). In subsequent years many other aspects of the actual functioning of local democracy were subjected to theoretical reflection and subsequent empirical investigation. Sometimes such studies aimed at a more or less all encompassing assessment of local democracy. Excellent examples of such studies are Eulau and Prewitt s Labyrinths of Democracy (1973) and Newton s, Second City Politics (1976). Other studies have focussed on specific aspects of local democracy. For example on local political participation (e.g. Mabileau et al. 1989; Parry, Moyser and Day 1992; Pettersen and Rose 1996) or on local political representation (e.g. Denters and De Jong 1992; for an overview of UK studies see Judge 1999: ). The recent institutional reforms in local government justify that many of the old questions should be revisited:

3 1. As a first example, regime theory (Stone 1993) raises important issues regarding the implications of new governance systems for the structure of community power. On the basis of regime theory Stoker e.g. has emphasized that effective urban regimes may not necessarily be governed by the open-ended competitive bargaining characteristic of some pluralist visions of politics (1995: 59-60). Therefore, new governance structures could be essential for the formation of a potentially effective coalition for urban change even though it remains to be seen whether they will also secure adequate participatory opportunities for neighbourhood organisations and target populations (Denters, Van Heffen and De Jong 1999). 2. At the micro-level additional questions about the democratic merits of recent reforms may arise: Who are the citizens that employ any new participatory channels? What do the participants say? And how representative are they for the broader constituency? (cf. Verba c.s. 1993). Moreover we could also raise questions about the effects of new modes of citizen involvement on citizen orientations towards local democracy and its legitimacy. In this respect Berry, Portney and Thompson s evaluation of the effects community based systems in urban government in the USA may serve as a source of inspiration. 3. Finally, many political scientists ask questions about the consequences of these reforms for the role of local councillors and other elected officials. What is their role in the new governance structures? Are we witnessing the rise of post-parliamentary governance (Judge 1999: ) and what is the democratic status of such a system? How do we secure the public accountability of the newly emerging systems of service provision (after outsourcing and other related NPM instruments)? As Thompson and Riccucci have observed: Reinvention proponents do tend to be Hamiltonian in their emphasis on energizing the executive, following a long tradition of reformers who have sought to buffer administrative processes against intrusions by the legislative branch (1998: 246). It is still an open question as to whether new methods of public accountability (e.g. through citizen charters and performance assessments) will provide satisfactory alternatives to traditional modes of legislative supervision. In this workshop we will revisit such classic issues of community power and local representative democracy. Such a reassessment of classic issues in local democracy is not only academically rewarding. It is also rewarding and timely because of its practical relevance: the ideas of the [reinvention] movement have appealed to countless public officials [across the world; BD/SV] who in varying degrees have attempted to implement them (Thompson and Riccucci 1998: 254). The empirical evidence on the effects of these reforms, however, is at best scattered. In the case of the United Kingdom the recent ESRC Local Governance Programme has resulted in some intriguing empirical studies (Stoker 1999 and 2000). In a series of other countries similar studies have been conducted. The accessibility of such studies is however limited to national audiences for linguistic reasons (reports not in English). This is for instance the case in the Nordic countries. Relevant studies 3

4 include the extensive project on the effects of the structural reforms at the local level in Denmark, carried out by the University of Odense (Ejersbo 1997), a book edited by Klausen and Ståhlberg (1998) on New Public Management in the Nordic countries and the Norwegian research councils program on the Evaluation of the New Local Government Act of Our aim in organising this workshop is to provide an international platform where an effort will be made to stimulate the debate between scholars engaged in the serious and systematic study of the nature and consequences of local institutional reform. In organising the workshop we will try to do justice to the rich variation in initiatives, both within countries and cross-nationally. Therefore we would be very much interested in research reports of a comparative nature (either cross-national or based on comparisons of different municipal initiatives within one country). References Berry, J.M., Portney, K.E. en Thomson, K. (1993). The rebirth of urban democracy, The Brookings Institution, Washington D.C.. Dahl, R.A. (1961). Who governs? Democracy and power in an American city, Yale University Press, New Haven etc.. Denters, S.A.H. en Jong, H.M. de (1992). Tussen burger en bestuur: een empirisch onderzoek naar de positie van het raadslid in de Overijsselse gemeenten, CBOO Universiteit Twente, Enschede. Denters, S.A.H., Heffen, O. van en Jong, H.M. de (1999). An American Perestroika in Dutch Cities? Urban Policy in the Netherlands at the end of a millennium. Public Administration vol. 77, pp Ejersbo, Niels red. (1997): Politikere, ledere & professionelle i kommunerne. Effekter av strukturændringer. Odense Universitetsforlag, Odense. Eulau, H. en Prewitt, K. (1973). Labyrinths of democracy: adaptations, linkages, representation, and policies in urban politics, Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis etc.. Hunter, F. (1953). Community power structure, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. Judge, D. (1999). Representation: theory and practice in Britain, Routledge, London. Klausen, Kurt Klaudi and Krister Ståhlberg (1998): New Public Management i Norden. Nye organisations- og ledelsesformer i den decentrale velfærdsstat. Odense Universitetsforlag, Odense. Mabileau, A., e.a. (1989). Local politics and participation in Britain and France, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge etc.. Newton, K. (1976). Second city politics: democratic processes and decision-making in Birmingham, Clarendon Press, Oxford. Osborne, D. en Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: how the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector, Plume, New York. Parry, G., Moyser, G.en Day, N. (1992). Political participation and democracy in Britain, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge etc.. Pettersen, P.A. en Rose, L.E. (1996). Participation in local politics in Norway: Some do, some don't; some will, some won't. Political Behavior vol. 18, no. 1, pp Sharpe, L.J. (1970). Theories and values of local government. Political Studies vol. 18, pp Smith, B.C. (1985). Decentralization: the territorial dimension of the state, George Allen & Unwin, London. Stoker, G. (1995). Regime theory and urban politics. In Judge, D., Stoker, G. en Wolman, H. (ed.), Theories of urban politics, Sage, London etc., pp Stoker, G. (ed.) (1999). The new management of British local governance, Macmillan Press, Houndmills etc.. Stoker, G. (ed.) (2000). The new politics of British local governance, Macmillan Press, Houndmills etc. Stone, C.N. (1993). Urban regimes and the capacity to govern: a political economy approach. Journal of Urban Affairs vol. 15, pp Thompson, F.J. en Riccucci, N.M. (1998). Reinventing government. In Polsby, N.W. (ed.), Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 1, 1998, Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, pp Verba, S., e.a. (1993). Citizen activity: Who participates? What do they say?. American Political Science Review vol. 87, pp Participants Participants will be recruited from various networks. First, this workshop will be of interest to people involved in LOGOPOL, the ECPR s standing group on Local Government & Politics (convenor 4

5 Vincent Hoffmann-Martinot) and to the people involved in the IPSA Research Committee 5 on Comparative studies on local government and politics (convenor Harald Baldersheim). Moreover the workgroup will be relevant for the members of the European Urban Research Association (chair: Robin Hambleton) which is a network of urban scholars interested a.o. in issues of urban governance. Whenever appropriate we will also recruit among the membership of other networks; e.g. the participants in the annual Nordic Conference on Research on Local Government and the Nordic network for scholars working in the field of intra-municipal decentralisation. The workshop directors will publish their call for papers for this workshop in the media (newsletters, mailing lists and websites) of all these networks in order to attract a high number of proposals for quality papers form a wide range of countries. Type of paper The main objective of our workshop is to bring together students of the democratic effects of local institutional reform. Papers should focus on the democratic effects of (a) particular type(s) of reform(s). Each paper should carefully describe the nature of the initiated reform and its intended consequences. Moreover we expect that paper givers will discuss (the) actual democratic effects of the reform; here we are particularly interested in the three clusters of questions outlined in the above. Because of the wide variety of local initiatives we will especially welcome comparative studies (crossnational or based on the comparison of different municipalities in one country). This does not imply however, that interesting case studies will not be considered. Funding On the basis of a positive decision about this workshop proposal both workshop directors will try to secure financial support to cover (part of) their travel and accommodation expenses with national funding agencies. In the Netherlands Denters will make applications to NWO (The Dutch National Science Foundation) and to the Netherlands Institute of Government (NIG; the national postgraduate school for public administration and political science). In Norway Vabo will make applications to the Norwegian Research Council (Nfr) and to the Nordic Academy for Advanced Study (NorFa). Biographical note Bas Denters, professor of Urban Policy and Urban Politics at Faculty of Public Administration and Public Policy at the University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. Bas Denters in 1988 received the Dutch Political Science s Annual Prize for the best publication in Dutch political science for his PhD thesis. He is currently member of the executive of the European Urban Research Association and member of the board of editors of Acta Politica, International Political Science Journal. Research interests: Size and local democracy; Issues of local political participation and civic participation and local political representation; Issues of urban governance. He is 5

6 currently involved in two major ESF-funded international research projects, Size and local democracy in Europe (coordination: Bas Denters and prof. dr. L Rose) and Citizenship, Involvement and Democracy (coordination prof. dr. J.W. van Deth). Most recent publications (in English/French): Boer, H.F. de, Denters, B. en Goedegebuure, L. (1998). Dutch disease or Dutch model? An evaluation of the pre-1998 system of democratic university government in The Netherlands. Policy Studies Review, vol.15, no. 4, pp Denters, S.A.H., Heffen, O. van en Jong, H.M. de (1999). An American Perestroika in Dutch Cities? Urban Policy in the Netherlands at the end of a millennium. Public Administration vol. 77, pp Denters, S.A.H. (1999). Les démocraties urbaines aux Pays Bas: changement socio-politique, continuité institutionelle?. In Hoffmann-Martinot, V. (ed.), Démocraties urbaines: L'état de la démocratie dans les grandes villes de 12 pays industrialisés, Presses Universitaires de France, pp Denters, S.A.H. (2000a). Urban democracies in the Netherlands: social and political change, institutional continuities?. In Gabriel, O., Hoffmann-Martinot, V. en Savitch, H. (ed.), Urban democracies, Leske + Budrich, Opladen, pp Denters, S.A.H. (2000b). Citizens, councilors and urban institutional reform: the case of the Netherlands. In Hoggart, K. en Glark, T.N. (ed.), Citizen responsive government, JAI Press/Elsevier, Amsterdam etc., pp Signy Irene Vabo, Researcher at the Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research and Ph.D. student at the University in Oslo. Research interest: Local and central government relations, local politics and organisation, local democracy political roles and participation. Her PhD project is about effects of the of new organisational solutions in Norwegian municipalities, on local democracy. Most recent publications (in English/Norwegian): Kleven, T., T.S. Floris, M. Granberg, S. Montin, O. Rieper and S.I. Vabo (2000): Renewal of local governance in Scandinavia: Effects for local politicians. Local Government Studies, 26 (2). Vabo, S.I. (forth.): New organisational solutions in Norwegian local councils: Leaving a puzzling role for local politicians? Scandinavian Political Studies, 23 (4). Vabo, S.I. (2000): "Kommunale demokratitiltak alternativ til den representative kanalen?" In Johnsen, Å., L.A. Loe og S.I. Vabo (ed.): Styring og medvirkning i lokalforvaltningen. Cappelen Akademiske Forlag, Oslo. (About Norwegian municipalities attempt to improve participation and local democracy). 6

7 Vabo, S.I. (2000): "Kritiske faktorer for evalueringer av kommunale reformer med fokus på effekter for lokalpolitikken". In Foss O. og J. Mønnesland (ed.): Evaluering av offentlig virksomhet. Metoder og erfaringer. Norsk institutt for by- og regionforskning, Oslo, NIBRs Pluss-serie (About how to evaluate effects of organisational changes on the role of local politicians). 7