Browse by title

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 162 items :

  • Public Administration and Management x
  • All accessible content x
Clear All
This content is available to you

Edited by Sandra Seubert, Marcel Hoogenboom, Trudie Knijn, Sybe de Vries and Frans van Waarden

This content is available to you

Edited by Sandra Seubert, Marcel Hoogenboom, Trudie Knijn, Sybe de Vries and Frans van Waarden

This content is available to you

Frans van Waarden and Sandra Seubert

People living in Europe belong to different concentric or overlapping territorially defined communities: neighbourhoods, cities, nation-states and the European Union, and not to forget the world population. They can also belong to various other groups or categories: (extended) families, friends, colleagues, genders, age groups, ethnic groups, the employed or the unemployed, students or pensioners, the healthy, the sick or the disabled, as well as language or religious communities. These communities and categories define multiple identities, which engender rights, duties and responsibilities. Over time some of these have come to be defined in law. Membership of territorially defined communities is referred to as citizenship. This term – as well as related ones in other European languages (citoyennete, burgerschap, Burgerschaft, ciudadania, cittadinanza, cidadania, cetatenie, medborgarskap) – stems from the term ‘city’, ‘burg’, ‘fortress’, that is, a walled and protected territory. Inhabitants of this walled territory had freedom (‘Stadtluft macht frei’), which furthered independence and individualism. However, not everybody within the city walls was a ‘citizen’. Alongside the territorial definition, citizenship has always had a social construction of membership, which included and excluded some groups. For example, the beggar within the city walls was not part of the citizens. For those who were included, the right to freedom and independence was always combined with duties and responsibilities. Walls provided protection, but had to be built, maintained and defended. Duties such as serving in civic militias, guarding walls and dykes, providing labour and paying taxes were required in order to guarantee the continued protection of these rights. Such rights and duties stabilised mutual expectations between people and developed into customs. Eventually they became enacted into law, in order to increase transparency and predictability and ensure equality.

This content is available to you

Francis Cheneval and Mónica Ferrín

This chapter compares the institutional setting and integration processes in Switzerland and the European Union (EU). It shows that EU integration is trying to achieve more political integration and the accommodation of a much higher degree of diversity in much less time than has ever been the case in Switzerland. Direct democracy has acted as a federator in the Swiss context. There has been a slow and iterative process of adaptation of structurally similar institutions of direct democracy at all levels (communal, cantonal, federal) roughly between 1830 and 1891. The EU is only incipiently in a process of introducing direct democracy. Mobility of residence, the one element on which the EU has based the construction of EU citizenship and identity, has not been actively facilitated and is implicitly discouraged in Switzerland, formal freedom of movement notwithstanding.

This content is available to you

Series preface

Lessons for the EU

Edited by Francis Cheneval and Mónica Ferrin

This content is available to you

Introduction

Lessons for the EU

Francis Cheneval and Mónica Ferrín

This content is available to you

Agnes Batory, Andrew Cartwright and Diane Stone

In this introductory chapter to the volume, the authors examine on the one hand the concepts of policy transfer and policy diffusion and, on the other, the concept of policy failure and success within the general context of Europeanization in Central and Eastern Europe. They invite contributors to address two main sets of questions: To what degree was the policy/institution/idea under consideration transferred intact or modified? And did the resulting policy or institution come to be viewed as a success or failure, or somewhere in between? The chapters that follow highlight that policy ‘transfer’ processes are often non-linear and fuzzy and sometimes counter-intuitive, and point to the central importance of the views, interests and constellations of the domestic actors that filter and interpret international influences. In this sense, the CEE experience in the years since accession is as much about active and sometimes strategic policy imports and policy distortion and perhaps less about simple receipt and incorporation of external models.

This content is available to you

Introduction

Assessing Behavioural Public Policy

Peter John

Behavioural public policies or nudges have become ever more popular in recent years, with governments and other public agencies increasingly keen to use light-touch interventions to improve public policies. Nudge units and their equivalents have been established across the world, and bureaucrats often use experiments to test out behavioural interventions. By asking how far to nudge, the book is a review of how behavioural economists, think tank advocates and policy-makers have used nudges, providing many examples of good practice. Some common criticisms of nudge are also reviewed, as is the ethical debate about the loss of individual autonomy. The core claim of the book is that policy-makers could go further than they do currently by adopting a more radical version of the research and policy agenda. By incorporating more conscious thought into behavioural public policies, what is called ‘nudge plus’, while at the same time encouraging a bottom-up and decentralised approach to formulating and authorising nudges, policy-makers can design policies that give more agency to citizens.

This content is available to you

Foreword

Beyond Accession in Central and Eastern Europe

Heather Grabbe

This content is available to you

Marietta E.A. Haffner

In many Western European countries including the Netherlands and France, the market share of private renting decreased massively after World War II. Often strict rent control is deemed to also be responsible for this development. Yet more recent development indicates a further decline of the sector in the Netherlands, whereas its market share stabilized in France. This chapter explains the development of the private rental sector resulting from private individual or person landlords leaving the sector in the Netherlands, but staying in operation as landlords in France. While in France the institutional landlords/investors retreated, in the Netherlands they kept up their rental stock until the subsidization of new investment became less attractive and in the end was abolished. How ‘rent tenure’-neutral subsidization seems to have played a role, is the central focus of this chapter.