TY - JOUR A1 - Ulrich, Peter T1 - Regionale und lokale Governance BT - Konzeptionelle Einordung eines sozialwissenschaftlichen Modebegriffs im Kontext ländlicher Entwicklung JF - KWI-Schriften KW - Governance KW - Regionale Governance KW - Lokale Governance KW - ländliche Entwicklung KW - Entwicklung KW - governance KW - regional governance KW - local governance KW - rural development KW - development Y1 - 2023 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-631166 SN - 978-3-86956-571-2 SN - 1867-951X SN - 1867-9528 IS - 14 SP - 75 EP - 84 PB - Universitätsverlag Potsdam CY - Potsdam ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Ulrich, Peter T1 - Lokale Partizipation von Digitalen Pionieren in ländlicher Governance JF - KWI-Schriften KW - Governance KW - Partizipation KW - Zivilgesellschaft KW - Digitalisierung KW - ländliche Governance KW - governance KW - participation KW - civil society KW - digitalization KW - rural governance Y1 - 2023 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-631178 SN - 978-3-86956-571-2 SN - 1867-951X SN - 1867-9528 IS - 14 SP - 85 EP - 97 PB - Universitätsverlag Potsdam CY - Potsdam ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Ulrich, Peter A1 - Zeißig, Hanna A1 - Witting, Antje T1 - Handlungsempfehlungen für die lokale Governance und Übertragbarkeit auf Brandenburg JF - KWI-Schriften KW - Governance KW - lokale Governance KW - Handlungsempfehlungen KW - Brandenburg KW - Digitalisierung KW - governance KW - local governance KW - policy recommendations KW - Brandenburg KW - digitalization Y1 - 2023 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-631182 SN - 978-3-86956-571-2 SN - 1867-951X SN - 1867-9528 IS - 14 SP - 101 EP - 124 PB - Universitätsverlag Potsdam CY - Potsdam ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Streck, Charlotte T1 - Strengthening the Paris Agreement by holding non-state actors accountable BT - establishing normative links between transnational partnerships and treaty implementation JF - Transnational environmental law N2 - While the intergovernmental climate regime increasingly recognizes the role of non-state actors in achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement (PA), the normative linkages between the intergovernmental climate regime and the non-state dominated 'transnational partnership governance' remain vague and tentative. A formalized engagement of the intergovernmental climate regime with transnational partnerships can increase the effectiveness of partnerships in delivering on climate mitigation and adaptation, thereby complementing rather than replacing government action. The proposed active engagement with partnerships would include (i) collecting and analyzing information to develop and prioritize areas for transnational and partnership engagement; (ii) defining minimum criteria and procedural requirements to be listed on an enhanced Non-state Actor Zone for Climate Action platform; (iii) actively supporting strategic initiatives; (iv) facilitating market or non-market finance as part of Article 6 PA; and (v) evaluating the effectiveness of partnerships in the context of the enhanced transparency framework (Article 13 PA) and the global stocktake (Article 14 PA). The UNFCCC Secretariat could facilitate engagement and problem solving by actively orchestrating transnational partnerships. Constructing effective implementation partnerships, recording their mitigation and adaptation goals, and holding them accountable may help to move climate talks from rhetoric to action. KW - transnational partnerships KW - non-state actors KW - Paris Agreement KW - climate KW - governance KW - transnational governance Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102521000091 SN - 2047-1025 SN - 2047-1033 VL - 10 IS - 3 SP - 493 EP - 515 PB - Cambridge Univ. Press CY - Cambridge ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Heinzel, Mirko Noa A1 - Liese, Andrea T1 - Expert authority and support for COVID-19 measures in Germany and the UK BT - a survey experiment JF - West European politics N2 - During COVID-19, various public institutions tried to shape citizens’ behaviour to slow the spread of the pandemic. How did their authority affect citizens’ support of public measures taken to combat the spread of COVID-19? The article makes two contributions. First, it presents a novel conceptualisation of authority as a source heuristic. Second, it analyses the authority of four types of public institutions (health ministries, universities, public health agencies, the WHO) in two countries (Germany and the UK), drawing on novel data from a survey experiment conducted in May 2020. On average, institutional endorsements seem to have mattered little. However, there is an observable polarisation effect where citizens who ascribe much expertise to public institutions support COVID-19 measures more than the control group. Furthermore, those who ascribe little expertise support them less than the control group. Finally, neither perception of biases nor exposure to institutions in public debates seems consistently to affect their authority. KW - COVID-19 KW - expertise KW - authority KW - survey experiment KW - institutions KW - crises KW - governance Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2021.1873630 SN - 0140-2382 SN - 1743-9655 SP - 1258 EP - 1282 PB - Taylor & Francis CY - Abingdon ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kuhlmann, Sabine A1 - Bouckaert, Geert A1 - Galli, Davide A1 - Reiter, Renate A1 - van Hecke, Steven T1 - Opportunity management of the COVID-19 pandemic BT - testing the crisis from a global perspective JF - International review of administrative sciences N2 - This article provides a conceptual framework for the analysis of COVID-19 crisis governance in the first half of 2020 from a cross-country comparative perspective. It focuses on the issue of opportunity management, that is, how the crisis was used by relevant actors of distinctly different administrative cultures as a window of opportunity. We started from an overall interest in the factors that have influenced the national politics of crisis management to answer the question of whether and how political and administrative actors in various countries have used the crisis as an opportunity to facilitate, accelerate or prevent changes in institutional settings. The objective is to study the institutional settings and governance structures, (alleged) solutions and remedies, and constellations of actors and preferences that have influenced the mode of crisis and opportunity management. Finally, the article summarizes some major comparative findings drawn from the country studies of this Special Issue, focusing on similarities and differences in crisis responses and patterns of opportunity management. KW - administrative culture KW - comparison KW - COVID-19 KW - crisis management KW - governance KW - opportunity management KW - pandemic KW - window of opportunity Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852321992102 SN - 0020-8523 SN - 1461-7226 VL - 87 IS - 3 SP - 497 EP - 517 PB - Sage CY - Los Angeles, California ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Eichhorn, Sebastian A1 - Rusche, Karsten A1 - Weith, Thomas T1 - Integrative governance processes towards sustainable spatial development BT - solving conflicts between urban infill development and climate change adaptation JF - Journal of environmental planning and management N2 - Due to the high concentration of people and infrastructures in European cities, the possible impacts of climate change are particularly high (cities' social, economic and technical vulnerabilities). Adaptation measures to reduce the sensitivity of a city to climate risks are therefore of particular importance. Nevertheless, it is also common to develop compact and dense urban areas to reduce urban sprawl. Urban infill development and sustainable spatial climate policies are thus in apparent conflict with each other. This article examines how German cities deal with the tensions between these two policy fields. Using six case studies, a new heuristic analysis method is applied. This study identifies three key governance aspects that are essential for promoting the joint implementation: instruments, organisation and interaction. Based on our case studies, we conclude that successful implementation can only be achieved through integrative governance including all three domains. KW - urban infill development KW - climate change adaptation KW - governance KW - social KW - innovation KW - heuristic analysis Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2020.1866509 SN - 0964-0568 SN - 1360-0559 VL - 64 IS - 12 SP - 2233 EP - 2256 PB - Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group CY - Abingdon ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kuhlmann, Sabine A1 - Hellström, Mikael A1 - Ramberg, Ulf A1 - Reiter, Renate T1 - Tracing divergence in crisis governance BT - responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden compared JF - International review of administrative sciences N2 - This cross-country comparison of administrative responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden is aimed at exploring how institutional contexts and administrative cultures have shaped strategies of problem-solving and governance modes during the pandemic, and to what extent the crisis has been used for opportunity management. The article shows that in France, the central government reacted determinedly and hierarchically, with tough containment measures. By contrast, the response in Germany was characterized by an initial bottom-up approach that gave way to remarkable federal unity in the further course of the crisis, followed again by a return to regional variance and local discretion. In Sweden, there was a continuation of ‘normal governance’ and a strategy of relying on voluntary compliance largely based on recommendations and less – as in Germany and France – on a strategy of imposing legally binding regulations. The comparative analysis also reveals that relevant stakeholders in all three countries have used the crisis as an opportunity for changes in the institutional settings and administrative procedures. KW - administrative culture KW - containment KW - crisis KW - governance KW - multi-level system KW - policy advice KW - public health KW - window of opportunity Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852320979359 SN - 0020-8523 SN - 1461-7226 VL - 87 IS - 3 SP - 556 EP - 575 PB - Sage CY - Los Angeles, California ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kuhlmann, Sabine A1 - Hellstrom, Mikael A1 - Ramberg, Ulf A1 - Reiter, Renate T1 - Tracing divergence in crisis governance BT - responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden compared JF - International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration N2 - This cross-country comparison of administrative responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden is aimed at exploring how institutional contexts and administrative cultures have shaped strategies of problem-solving and governance modes during the pandemic, and to what extent the crisis has been used for opportunity management. The article shows that in France, the central government reacted determinedly and hierarchically, with tough containment measures. By contrast, the response in Germany was characterized by an initial bottom-up approach that gave way to remarkable federal unity in the further course of the crisis, followed again by a return to regional variance and local discretion. In Sweden, there was a continuation of 'normal governance' and a strategy of relying on voluntary compliance largely based on recommendations and less - as in Germany and France - on a strategy of imposing legally binding regulations. The comparative analysis also reveals that relevant stakeholders in all three countries have used the crisis as an opportunity for changes in the institutional settings and administrative procedures. Points for practitioners COVID-19 has shown that national political and administrative standard operating procedures in preparation for crises are, at best, partially helpful. Notwithstanding the fact that dealing with the unpredictable is a necessary part of crisis management, a need to further improve the institutional preparedness for pandemic crises in all three countries examined here has also become clear. This should be done particularly by way of shifting resources to the health and care sectors, strengthening the decentralized management of health emergencies, stocking and/or self-producing protection material, assessing the effects of crisis measures, and opening the scientific discourse to broader arenas of experts. KW - administrative culture KW - containment KW - crisis KW - governance KW - multi-level system KW - policy advice KW - public health KW - window of opportunity Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852320979359 SN - 0020-8523 SN - 1461-7226 VL - 87 IS - 3 SP - 556 EP - 575 PB - Sage Publ. CY - London ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Schmeiss, Jessica A1 - Hölzle, Katharina A1 - Tech, Robin P. G. T1 - Designing Governance Mechanisms in Platform Ecosystems: Addressing the Paradox of Openness through Blockchain Technology JF - California Management Review N2 - The paradox of openness is inherent to all platform ecosystems-the tension in enabling maximum openness to create joint innovation while guaranteeing value capturing for all actors. Governance mechanisms to solve this paradox are embedded into the technical architecture of the platform, addressing the dimensions of access, control, and incentives. Blockchain technology offers unique ways to design novel governance mechanisms through the standardization of interactions. However, the design of such an architecture requires careful consideration of the cost associated with it. KW - ecosystems KW - governance KW - value creation KW - platforms KW - technology management Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125619883618 SN - 0008-1256 SN - 2162-8564 VL - 62 IS - 1 SP - 121 EP - 143 PB - Sage Publ. CY - Thousand Oaks ER -