Date post: | 18-Dec-2014 |
Category: |
Presentations & Public Speaking |
Upload: | christian-katzenbach |
View: | 148 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Between Coordination and Regulation
Conceptualizing Governance in Internet Governance
GigaNet Symposium 2014, Istanbul
Prof. Dr. Jeanette Hofmann, Social Science Center Berlin Christian Katzenbach, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet & Society Kirsten Gollatz, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet & Society
Structure
Internet governance
reflexive coordination in: Internet governance
reflexive
coordination
“Internet Governance”
governance as
“Internet Governance”
“ A common definition
Internet governance is the
development and application by Governments, the private sector and civil society,
in their respective roles,
of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes
that shape the evolution and use of the Internet. (WGIG 2005)
Contradictions and shortcomings of Internet governance research
“shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes”
versus governance as side-effects
versus distributed agency
? “steering and shaping”
Scope – What is not Internet governance?
Modes – Governance and regulation: Are they the same?
Reflection of governance and regulation literature?
Internet governance
The Concept of Governance
Different terminological traditions
European Approach Anglo-American Approach
Governance = Government 3-step paradigm shift: (Mayntz 2003)
Public planning
Public steering
Governance
- hierarchical, command & control
- distributed, cooperative, network
Governance versus Regulation
Modes of Coordination Constellation of Actors Structure Formation
non-hierarchal regulation
distinction between steering subject and steering object
intentional
simple governance
integration of steering subject and steering object
intentional
complex governance
integration of steering subject and steering object
non-intentional
(Translation of Grande 2012: 583)
Governance versus Regulation: Analytical Shortcomings
Regulation – misses empirical phenomena that cannot be explained as outcomes of rational problem solving
Governance – vague term without clear boundaries: what is outside of governance?
Task – Specifying a middle ground between concepts too narrow and too broad
reflexive
coordination governance as
When simple coordination fails it becomes reflexive
Coordination – building blocks of social order, varying by reach, stability and number of people involved
Governance = coordinating coordination
Critical moments – actors articulate formerly implicit understandings and norms to evaluate the situation and consider new rules
Periods of simple and reflexive coordination may alternate over time
– institutions designed to enable coordination cause new coordination issues
Coordination, Regulation, Governance
Definition Evaluation Criteria
Coordination reciprocal social processes
mutual adjustments
Regulation intentional interventions
outcome, achievement of pre-defined goals
Governance legitimacy, acceptance, smooth process
reflexive coordination
reflexive coordination in: Internet governance
Internet Governance as Reflexive Coordination: The IGF
(Epstein 2011: 6)
Conditions of coordination – (re-)shaping its own context
Coordinating coordination – “recursive loops” (p.3) Critical moments – compromising different worldviews
and conflicting opinions Bottom-up perspective – debating the formal and
informal practices Reflexivity – boundaries are enacted and constantly
negotiated by the actors involved Outcome – a fluid concept
Summary
Shortcomings – lack of a systematic reflection of governance in Internet governance
Task – specifying a conceptual and pragmatic ground
Approach – governance as reflexive coordination
Further research – empirical applicability in Internet governance arrangements, contextualization, theoretical extensions