doi: 10.12924/librello.PaG
The forthcoming issues of Politics and Governance will be issued by the open access publisher Cogitatio (www.cogitatiopress.com). Authors interested in publishing in Politics and Governance are kindly asked to visit the journal's new website and make their submission at: http://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance
sub-national governments

Latest publications

Editorial  
pp. 1-2
doi: 10.12924/pag2014.02010001 | Volume 2 (2014) | Issue 1
Andrej J. Zwitter 1 ,* and Amelia Hadfield 2
1 Faculty of Law, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
2 Department of Psychology, Politics and Sociology, Canterbury Christ Church University, UK
* Corresponding author
Views 590
PDF 834
Publication Date: 20 January 2014
Abstract: 2.5 quintillion bytes of data are created every day through pictures, messages, gps-data, etc. "Big Data" is seen simultaneously as the new Philosophers Stone and Pandora's box: a source of great knowledge and power, but equally, the root of serious problems.

doi: 10.12924/pag2013.01020183 | Volume 1 (2013) | Issue 2
Andrew J. Taylor
Department of Politics, University of Sheffield, UK
Views 513
PDF 843
Publication Date: 7 November 2013
Abstract: This paper examines the feasibility of network governance in the context of the EU's expansion in the Western Balkans. The EU is formally committed to promoting network gov­ernance but the realities of enlargement require the creation of effective states, in other words of the primacy of hierarchy over network. Networks are created in enlargement and reflect the complexities of public policy but these networks do not represent, as yet, a significant shift of power away from the state. Despite a normative preference for network governance, the polit­ical reality of enlargement is that the EU seeks the creation of effective hierarchy.

doi: 10.12924/pag2013.01020170 | Volume 1 (2013) | Issue 2
Michael Howlett 1 , 2 ,* and Jeremy Rayner 3
1 Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, Canada
2 Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, Singapore
3 Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, University of Saskatchewan, Canada
* Corresponding author
Views 1062
PDF 765
Publication Date: 14 October 2013
Abstract: Thinking about policy mixes is at the forefront of current research work in the policy sciences and raises many significant questions with respect to policy tools and instruments, processes of policy formulation, and the evolution of tool choices over time. Not least among these is how to assess the potential for multiple policy tools to achieve policy goals in an efficient and effective way. Previous conceptual work on policy mixes has highlighted evaluative criteria such as "consistency" (the ability of multiple policy tools to reinforce rather than undermine each other in the pursuit of individual policy goals), "coherence" (or the ability of multiple policy goals to co-exist with each other in a logical fashion), and "congruence" (or the ability of multiple goals and instruments to work together in a uni-directional or mutually supportive fashion) as important design principles and measures of optimality in policy mixes. And previous empirical work on the evolution of existing policy mixes has highlighted how these three criteria are often lacking in mixes which have evolved over time as well as those which have otherwise been consciously designed. This article revisits this early design work in order to more clearly assess the reasons why many existing policy mixes are sub-optimal and the consequences this has for thinking about policy formulation processes and the practices of policy design.

doi: 10.12924/pag2013.01020151 | Volume 1 (2013) | Issue 2
Léa Roger 1 ,* and Gary S. Schaal 1
1 Department of Political Sciences, Helmut Schmidt University/University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg, Germany
* Corresponding author
Views 514
PDF 617
Publication Date: 9 October 2013
Abstract: In our paper we try to answer two empirical research questions. First, we assess the deliberative quality of discussions in two committees of the EU Parliament. In order to do so, we use a slightly revised version of the DQI. Second, we identify and empirically measure those variables that systematically influence the quality of deliberation in interviews with debate actors. We argue that the quality of deliberation in EU committees is influenced by two normative values: deliberation (common good orientation) and responsiveness (particular interest orientation), with the guiding value determined by the particular situation. Using a multidimensional concept of deliberation, we empirically test the impact of situational variables on specific aspects of deliberative quality. In addition, we take into account the temporal dimension of deliberation.

pp. 138-150
doi: 10.12924/pag2013.01020138 | Volume 1 (2013) | Issue 2
Jon Hovi 1 , 2 ,* , Tora Skodvin 1 and Stine Aakre 2
1 Department of Political Science, University of Oslo, Norway
2 Center for International Climate and Environmental Research—Oslo (CICERO), Norway
* Corresponding author
Views 1637
PDF 1653
Publication Date: 20 September 2013
Abstract: More than two decades of climate change negotiations have produced a series of global climate agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol and the Copenhagen Accords, but have nevertheless made very limited progress in curbing global emissions of greenhouse gases. This paper considers whether negotiations can succeed in reaching an agreement that effectively addresses the climate change problem. To be effective, a climate agreement must cause sub­stantial emissions reductions either directly (in the agreement's own lifetime) or indirectly (by paving the way for a future agreement that causes substantial emissions reductions directly). To reduce global emissions substantially, an agreement must satisfy three conditions. Firstly, participation must be both comprehensive and stable. Secondly, participating countries must accept deep commitments. Finally, the agreement must obtain high compliance rates. We argue that three types of enforcement will be crucial to fulfilling these three conditions: (1) incentives for countries to ratify with deep commitments, (2) incentives for countries that have ratified with deep commitments to abstain from withdrawal, and (3) incentives for countries having ratified with deep commitments to comply with them. Based on assessing the constraints that characterize the climate change negotiations, we contend that adopting such three-fold potent enforcement will likely be politically infeasible, not only within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, but also in the framework of a more gradual approach. Therefore, one should not expect climate change negotiations to succeed in producing an effective future agreement—either directly or indirectly.

2012 - 2014 Librello, Switzerland.