Academic journal article Geopolitics, History and International Relations

Global Policy Mechanisms, Intergovernmental Power Politics, and Democratic Decision-Making Modes of Transnational Public Administration

Academic journal article Geopolitics, History and International Relations

Global Policy Mechanisms, Intergovernmental Power Politics, and Democratic Decision-Making Modes of Transnational Public Administration

Article excerpt

1.Introduction

Organizations are progressively required to effectively play a part in influencing the rules of society. Normative legitimacy demands the arguments why social rules, entities, or structures (Ionescu, 2016a) may be grasped as justifiable. Empirical legitimacy examines the adoption of a governing instrument by participants. Normative legitimacy focuses on the legitimacy determinants (Fisher, 2015) in advancing and perhaps putting into effect such instruments. Adoption in empirical legitimacy may be associated with normative determinants that are proposed in philosophical or political con- victions may impact empirical legitimacy ones. The concept of normative legitimacy within transnational governance is instrumental in global management. Entities within the field of transnational governance may have no legally binding (Popescu Ljungholm, 2015a) or carrying out power resembling those of governmental rule, influencing the manners of doing business either via deliberate self-binding procedures or by creating external demands on participants within their realm of influence. (Hahn and Weidtmann, 2016)

2.The Rise of Transnational Policy-making Mechanisms and Administrative Routines

Transnational administrative networks (Nica et al., 2016) in the European Union (EU) and beyond focus on transboundary policy issues and further the operation of the internal market of the EU. Functional interpretations which highlight the urgency for transnational harmonization fail to identify the function of bureaucratic politics in influencing cross-level interplays. Transnational agencies arise in a congested setting comprising diverse entities all addressing their own particular concerns, which may impact the politics of institutional design. The emergent internationalization of markets and the connection between policy matters necessitate shared policies and institutional agreements to circumvent adverse externalities and regulatory ambiguities. Domestic regulatory authorities face various political choices, institutional legacies, administrative practices, market structures (Popescu, 2016), and business cultures. To undertake such difficult tasks, several kinds of sectorspecific supervisory regimes (Popescu Ljungholm, 2015b) have been set up for integrating guidelines and procedures, and for establishing multilevel regulatory partnership. National agencies' institutional concerns may be jeopardized by harmonization in the EU multilevel setting (Kunnanatt, 2016), as supranational agencies and networks may assume responsibility for undertakings at the national level. (Bach et al., 2016)

There has been an explosion of administrative routines and mechanisms of policy-making (Bratu, 2016) and policy delivery (Nica, 2015) beyond but frequently covering established nation state policy processes. Novel formal and informal entities and participants are behind such policy processes, many a time in partnership with national public administrations. Transnational Administration (TA) designates the systematization, management and carrying out of public nature global policies by both private and public participants functioning beyond the frontiers and jurisdictions of the state (Brown, 2016), but generally in regions beneath the worldwide level. A progressively relevant locus of policy power (Buchely, 2016), decision-making mechanisms and carrying out authority functions on top of the state, being accomplished by large-scale policy participants. (Stone and Ladi, 2015)

In the novel kinds of governance/modes of regulation established by diverse networks of state and non-state participants, prerogative to govern does not belong completely to states but is held by an array of participants at distinct levels. Networking is an effective force via which participants may influence their subsequent future (Williams et al., 2016) and governance results. Power develops from, and requires, connections. A participant's relational position influences her power and assists in strategically configuring her actions. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.