Suchergebnisse

Building on John Ruggie's pioneering study of multilateralism, this paper presents an analogous study of multistakeholder governance, or multistakeholderism. Its central argument is that multistakeholderism is, as yet, a much less well-defined institutional form. Cases exhibit significant variation both in the combinations of actor classes entitled to participate and the nature of authority relations among those actors. The first section discusses multistakeholderism as an institutional form, and proposes a taxonomy of its types. This section also briefly addresses the implications of the analysis for International Relations theory. The paper then conducts a comparative analysis of multistakeholderism, applying the taxonomy to five illustrative cases. It demonstrates the degree of inter-case variation, and the range of issue-areas across which the institutional form is employed and invoked by actors. Three cases are drawn from the increasingly contentious area of Internet governance; the paper thus makes a secondary contribution to this growing literature. The paper's most striking finding in this regard is that Internet governance often fails to live up to its multistakeholder rhetoric. Other cases include governance of securities regulation and the governance of corporate social responsibility. The paper concludes by examining the implications of our argument, and identifying areas for further research.

During the 2000s France witnessed the emergence of activist initiatives whose aim was to include residents in the design, building and management of housing. Yet, today, cohousing appears to have migrated from the activist phrasebook to the political agenda. The aim of this article is to analyze the dynamics and interactions that have fed into this process of institutionalization. It shows that the latter is the result of a coalition between the activist and political arenas, whose interests, at this juncture, overlap. This alliance with the public authorities can be linked to the "outreach" strategy offered by elected Green politicians, who needed to ally themselves with activists in order to pursue their policies and gain legitimacy as new public actors grappling with power. In this arena of "cause entrepreneurs", the practice of public actors resembles that of interest or even activist groups. ; Au cours des années 2000 en France, on a assisté à l'émergence d'initiatives militantes visant à concevoir, produire et gérer le logement avec ses habitants. Aujourd'hui la thématique de « l'habitat participatif » semble avoir quitté le seul registre des mobilisations pour faire son apparition dans l'agenda politique. L'article se propose d'analyser les dynamiques et interactions qui ont alimenté ce processus d'institutionnalisation. Il montre que celui-ci est le produit d'une coalition entre espace militant et espace politique, associés conjoncturellement par des intérêts croisés. L'alliance avec les pouvoirs publics est à lier à la stratégie de « courte échelle » offerte par les élus verts qui ont eu besoin de se trouver des interlocuteurs parmi les militants pour conduire leurs politiques et se légitimer en tant que nouveaux acteurs publics aux prises avec le pouvoir. La pratique des acteurs publics s'apparente ici à celle de groupes d'intérêts voire de militants dans le jeu des « entrepreneurs de cause ».

During the 2000s France witnessed the emergence of activist initiatives whose aim was to include residents in the design, building and management of housing. Yet, today, cohousing appears to have migrated from the activist phrasebook to the political agenda. The aim of this article is to analyze the dynamics and interactions that have fed into this process of institutionalization. It shows that the latter is the result of a coalition between the activist and political arenas, whose interests, at this juncture, overlap. This alliance with the public authorities can be linked to the "outreach" strategy offered by elected Green politicians, who needed to ally themselves with activists in order to pursue their policies and gain legitimacy as new public actors grappling with power. In this arena of "cause entrepreneurs", the practice of public actors resembles that of interest or even activist groups. ; Au cours des années 2000 en France, on a assisté à l'émergence d'initiatives militantes visant à concevoir, produire et gérer le logement avec ses habitants. Aujourd'hui la thématique de « l'habitat participatif » semble avoir quitté le seul registre des mobilisations pour faire son apparition dans l'agenda politique. L'article se propose d'analyser les dynamiques et interactions qui ont alimenté ce processus d'institutionnalisation. Il montre que celui-ci est le produit d'une coalition entre espace militant et espace politique, associés conjoncturellement par des intérêts croisés. L'alliance avec les pouvoirs publics est à lier à la stratégie de « courte échelle » offerte par les élus verts qui ont eu besoin de se trouver des interlocuteurs parmi les militants pour conduire leurs politiques et se légitimer en tant que nouveaux acteurs publics aux prises avec le pouvoir. La pratique des acteurs publics s'apparente ici à celle de groupes d'intérêts voire de militants dans le jeu des « entrepreneurs de cause ».