Lokalna vladavina i institucije u razvijenim zemljama i zemljama u razvoju: prema komparativnoj povijesnoj perspektivi

Institutions and their historical dynamics are indispensable to understanding how the contemporary urban politics of developing world democracies differs from the present day urban politics of the developed world. The paper sketches the outline of a comparative historical account of how the local government institutions that have become familiar among the cities of developed democracies have emerged. Then, it shows how examination of institutional arrangements in the cities of contemporary developing democracies from the same broadly comparative perspective illuminates important differences between urban politics there from contemporary processes in the cities of developed countries. These reflections point to the need to bring a deeper historical understanding to comparisons of urban governance and politics across the divide between developed country democracies and the new democracies of the developing world. Across the developed and developing worlds, the variations in institutions and state-society relations are as important as any global commonalities. In developing and transitional democracies, efforts at local state building confront conflicts that their counterparts in earlier democratizing countries did not. These conflicts stem partly from trajectories of institutional development that have left local government capacities weak, but also from the demands of urban movements that have helped bring about democratization, and arisen in its wake. The accumulating agendas of the policy state at the local level have imposed greater expectations for local governance that have in turn helped spark civic and political action, including protest. The resulting tensions have helped make local governance infrastructures as central to the politics of contemporary developing countries as they have long been to their counterparts in the developed world.Institucije i njihova povijesna dinamika neophodne su za razumijevanje načina na koji se gradske javne politike zemalja u razvoju razlikuju od današnjih takvih politika razvijenog svijeta. U radu se ukratko prikazuje komparativni povijesni razvoj načina na koji su se pojavile institucije lokalne vlasti koje su sada tipične za gradove razvijenih demokracija. Zatim se navodi kako, koristeći istu komparativnu perspektivu, pregled institucionalne organizacije u gradovima suvremenih zemalja u razvoju upućuje na važne razlike između tamošnjih gradskih javnih politika i suvremenih procesa u gradovima razvijenih zemalja. Ova razmatranja upućuju na potrebu dubljeg povijesnog razumijevanja usporedbi urbane vladavine i javnih politika tako da se premosti jaz između razvijenih zemalja i novih demokracija u zemljama u razvoju. U obje skupine zemalja razlike u institucijama i odnosima između društva i države jednako su važne kao i bilo koja druga globalna zajednička značajka. U zemljama u razvoju te u zemljama u tranziciji pokušaji izgradnje lokalne samouprave suočeni su s konfliktima s kojima se njihove prethodnice koje su se ranije demokratizirale nisu susretale. Spomenuti konflikti djelomično potječu od putova institucionalnog razvoja koji su zadržali slabe lokalne kapacitete ali i od zahtjeva urbanih pokreta koji su pomogli demokratizaciji, a koji su nastali tijekom toga razvoja. Rastući broj pitanja na dnevnom redu lokalnih vlasti nametnuo je veća očekivanja od lokalne vladavine što je pak potaklo građanski i politički aktivizam, uključujući i proteste. Rastuće napetosti dovele su do toga da su infrastrukture lokalne vladavine u zemljama u razvoju postale jednako važne kao što su već dugo u razvijenim zemljama

Partners No More: Relational Transformation and the Turn to Litigation in Two Conservationist Organizations

The rise in litigation against administrative bodies by environmental and other political interest groups worldwide has been explained predominantly through the liberalization of standing doctrines. Under this explanation, termed here the floodgate model, restrictive standing rules have dammed the flow of suits that groups were otherwise ready and eager to pursue. I examine this hypothesis by analyzing processes of institutional transformation in two conservationist organizations: the Sierra Club in the United States and the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel (SPNI). Rather than an eagerness to embrace newly available litigation opportunities, as the floodgate model would predict, the groups\u27 history reveals a gradual process of transformation marked by internal, largely intergenerational divisions between those who abhorred conflict with state institutions and those who saw such conflict as not only appropriate but necessary to the mission of the group. Furthermore, in contrast to the pluralist interactions that the floodgate model imagines, both groups\u27 relations with pertinent agencies in earlier eras better accorded with the partnership-based corporatist paradigm. Sociolegal research has long indicated the importance of relational distance to the transformation of interpersonal disputes. I argue that, at the group level as well, the presence or absence of a (national) partnership-centered relationship determines propensities to bring political issues to court. As such, well beyond change in groups\u27 legal capacity and resources, current increases in levels of political litigation suggest more fundamental transformations in the structure and meaning of relations between citizen groups and the state

Federalism and metropolitan governance in cross-national perspective: the case of urban sprawl

In this paper, I employ a 'bottom-up' approach to analyze efforts to curb exurban sprawl in cross-national perspective. Based on local housing and environmental data in a total of eleven French, German, and US urban regions, the analysis demonstrates that policies and institutions addressed to urban governance made more of a difference for outcomes than did federalism and other aspects of vertical integration at the heights of national states. This result highlights the importance both of local policy determinations and of the supralocal institutional infrastructures in which they nest.

Trois modèles de gouvernance multiniveau au-delà du clivage État-société

Par l’étude des interactions entre les institutions étatiques multiniveaux et l’organisation de la société civile, nous posons les jalons d’une plus grande compréhension de la gouvernance multiniveau. Les autorités locales et celles des échelons supérieurs créent des modèles de participation locale dans la vie politique et civique. Ces institutions évoluent à leur tour en fonction des modèles de pouvoir et d’influence au niveau local. À l’intérieur d’une démocratie bien établie, ces configurations institutionnelles et ces associations s’inscrivent dans une infrastructure interreliée qui dicte les conditions en matière de résolution collective de problèmes, de relations de pouvoir et de participation. Les complémentarités institutionnelles entre les formes d’autorités locales et les types d’organisations civiques viennent renforcer ces systèmes. Ces différences expliquent une grande partie des contrastes transnationaux dans l’élaboration des politiques et les démocraties locales.This paper, by exploring the interplay between multilevel stateinstitutions and the organization of civil society, seeks to lay thegroundwork for a deeper understanding of multilevel governance.Institutions within the local state and at higher levels systematicallyshape patterns of local participation in politics and civic life. Inturn, these institutions evolve in ways that patterns of power andinfluence at the local level help to shape. In settled democracies,these configurations of institutions and associations comprise aninterrelated infrastructure that sets terms for collectiveproblem-solving, power relations and participation. Institutionalcomplementarities between forms of local states and patterns of civicorganization have reinforced these systems. These differences accountfor major cross-national contrasts in policy-making and local democracy

Decentralization, local government, and the welfare state/ Sellers

hal. 611-632, : ill.; 21 cm

Decentralization, local government, and the welfare state/ Sellers

hal. 611-632, : ill.; 21 cm