Remodeling the transnational political realm: Partnerships, best-practice schemes, and the digitalization of governance

Alternatives

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 141-164

  Hansen, Hans Krause ^a   Salskov Iversen, Dorte ^a  

^a Department of Innovation and Organizational Economics   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Best practice; e modernization; Governmentality; ICTs; Partnerships; Transnational

Indexed keywords

EID: 23344438894     PISSN: 03043754     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/030437540503000202     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. See, for instance, Ronald J. Deibert, Parchment, Printing, and Hypermedia: Communication in World Order Transformation (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997);
2. Jane E. Fountain, Building the Virtual State: Information Technology and Institutional Change (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2001);
3. G. Nulens and L. Van Audenhove, "An Information Society in Africa? An Analysis of the Information Society of the World Bank, ITU, and ECE," Gazette 61, no. 6 (1999): 451-471;
4. Manuel Castells, The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001);
5. Ronald J. Deibert, International Plug 'n Play? Citizen Activism, the Internet, and Global Public," Policy International Studies Perspectives 1 (2000): 255-272.
6. See, for instance, John Clarke and Janet Newman, The Managerial State (Sage: London, 1997);
7. P. Du Gay, In Praise of Bureaucracy (London: Sage, 2000);
8. P. Du Gay, "Markets and Meanings: Re-imagining Organizational Life," in Majken Schultz, Mary Jo Hatch, and Mogens Holten Larsen, eds., The Expressive Organization: Linking Identity, Reputation, and the Corporate Brand (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
9. See Dorte Salskov-Iversen, Hans Krause Hansen, and Sven Bislev, "Governmentality, Globalization, and Local Practice: Transformations of a Hegemonic Discourse," Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 25 (2000): 183-222.;
10. Sven Bislev, Hans Krause Hansen, and Dorte Salskov-Iversen, "The Global Diffusion of Managerialism: Transnational Discourse Communities at Work," Global Society 16, no. 2 (2002): 199-212;
11. Hans Krause Hansen, Dorte Salskov-Iversen, and Sven Bislev, "Discursive Globalization: Transnational Discourse Communities and New Public Management," in Morten Ougaard and Richard Higgot, eds., Towards a Global Polity (London: Routledge, 2002);
12. Hans Krause Hansen and Dorte Salskov-Iversen, "Managerialized Patterns of Political Authorities: Partners, Peddlers, and Entrepreneurial People," in Critical Quarterly 44, no. 3 (2002): 4-18;
13. Wendy Lamer and William Walters, "Globalization as Governmentality," Alternatives 29, no. 4 (2004): 495-514.
14. R. O. Keohane and J. S. Nye, "Power and Independence in the Information Age," Foreign Affairs 77, no. 5 (1998): 81-95.
15. See, for example, A. Claire Cutler, Virginia Haufler, and Tony Porter, Private Authority and International Affairs (New York: State University of New York Press, 1999), pp. 3-22;
16. Rodney Bruce Hall and Thomas Biersteker, The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002);
17. John Braithwaite and Peter Drahos, Global Business Regulation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 325-354;
18. Bob Jessop, "The State and the Knowledge-driven Economy," in John R. Bryson, Peter W. Daniels, Nick Henry, and Jane Pollard, Knowledge, Space, Economy (London: Routledge, 2000), pp. 63-78.
19. When organizations play the "governance game," they implicitly recognize what has been theorized as the shift from government to governance; i.e., the movement from coordinated, hierarchical structures and processes of societal steering to a more network-based process of exchange, negotiation, and soft regulation (see, e.g., Salskov-Iversen, Hansen, and Bislev, note 3). It should be noted that the government-to-governance assumption can lead to a simplified view on current changes in the exercise of ruling. Rather than implying a shift from old to new patterns of ruling, one might speak of an "overlay of different governance regimes that produce tensions and contradictions" in various realms of policy (Janet Newman, "Participatory Democracy, Governance, and Citizenship: Theorising Political and Cultural Change," paper presented at "Democracy after Governance" seminar, Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen, March 20-21, 2003). In fact, hierarchy and networks, and the different implications such organizational features can have for organization and management at all possible levels of governance, may coexist, interact, or contradict one another, producing new patterns of change.
20. The empirical data discussed in this article are based in part on fieldwork involving interviews with members of the organizations studied and in part on documentary research, drawing on documents produced by these organizations. Our research is part of, and partly funded by, the Media and Democracy in Network Society research program (see www.modinet.dk), funded by the Danish Ministry of Science, Technology, and Development. The program, which runs from 2002 to 2005, involves more than forty researchers from the humanities and social sciences.
21. David Harvey, Justice, Nature, and the Geography of Difference (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998), p. 76. The discursive moment can capture the correlation between knowledge, power, and discourse, and thus it enables us to examine one of the major characteristics of discourses; namely, their ability to generate effects of truth. Moreover, as Michel Foucault and now many others have shown, by normalizing or naturalizing specific ways of thinking and doing things, often with a claim to scientific or other expertise, discourses produce effects of power.
22. Richard Higgot and Morten Ougaard, "Beyond System and Society - Towards a Global Polity?" introduction to Ougaard and Higgot, note 3, pp. 2-5.
23. Graham Burchell, Collin Gordon, and Peter Miller, eds., The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality (London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991);
24. P. Miller and N. Rose, "Governing Economic Life," Economy and Society 19 (1990): 1-31;
25. Mitchell Dean, Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society (London: Sage, 1999).
26. David Held and Anthony McGrew, eds., Governing Globalization: Power, Authority, and Global Governance (Maiden: Polity, 2002); Deibert 1997, note 1; Keohane and Nye, note 4.
27. Clive Barnett, Culture and Democracy: Media, Space, and Representation (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2003), pp. 33-53;
28. J. P. Singh, "Information Technologies and the Changing Scope of Global Power and Governance," introduction to James N. Rosenau and J. P. Singh, Information Technologies and Global Politics: The Changing Scope of Power and Global Governance (New York: State University of New York Press, 2002), pp. 1-38.
29. E-modernization has - like questions of human rights, pollution, and terrorism - become a cross-cutting issue that, to an increasing extent, occupies the minds of policymakers at all levels. One obvious example is the World Summit of the Information Society (WSIS). Organized under the aegis of the United Nations, WSIS aims at developing "a common vision and understanding of the Information Society, to better understand its scope and dimensions and to draw up a strategic plan for successfully adapting to the new society." See www.itu.int/wsis.
30. Nikolas Rose and Peter Miller, "Political Power Beyond the State: Problematics of Government," British Journal of Sociology 43, no. 2 (1992): 172-205; Dean, note 10.
31. Dean, note 10, pp. 177-180. Dean uses the term technologies of agency/performance, while we use technique to avoid confusion with conceptions like new information and communication "technologies."
32. Dean, note 10, p. 168.
33. J. Nelson, "Building Partnerships: Cooperation Between the United Nations System and the Private Sector" (New York: UN Department of Public Information, 2002);
34. J. M. Brinkerhoff, "Partnership for International Development: Rhetoric or Results?" (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2002), p. 6;
35. Hans Krause Hansen, "Shaping Global Governance: Knowledge Management, Modernization by Technology, and Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships," paper presented at the International Studies Association 44th annual convention, Montreal, March 17-20, 2004.
36. Dean, note 10, p. 169.
37. Dorte Salskov-Iversen, "Institutionalizing Change: Competitive Knowledge Construction in the Field of E-Governance," paper presented at the International Studies Association 44th annual convention, February 25-March 1, 2003, Portland, Ore.;
38. Du Gay, In Praise of Bureaucracy, note 2, and Du Gay, "Markets and Meanings," note 2.
39. See Wendy Lamer and William Walters, Global Governmentality: Governing International Spaces (London: Routledge, 2004);
40. Larner and Walters, note 3; Andrew Barry, Political Machines: Governing a Technological Society (London: Athlone Press, 2001).
41. The study of the GKP was initiated in 2002. It is based on archival and documentary research as well as qualitative interviews with partners, secretariat, and leadership at the GKP annual meeting in 2003.
42. Members currently include the World Bank, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the International Development Research Centre (Canada), Bellanet (Canada), the ProPoor Infotech Centre (India), the Omar Dengo Foundation (Costa Rica), the Panos Institute, the Information Technology and Telecom International (Nepal), the National Information Technology Council (Malaysia), the Swedish International Development Cooperation (SIDA), and the Swiss Agency of Development and Cooperation (SDC).
43. See Diane Stone, "The 'Knowledge Bank' and the Global Knowledge Network," Global Governance 9, no. 1 (2003): 43-61.
44. GKP, GKP Annual Report 2001, p. 5: www.globalknowledge.org. accessed August 31, 2004.
45. GKP, note 24.
46. In establishing a conceptual backcloth for its global missions and visions, the GKP frequently invokes the information age: "The GKP is committed to sharing knowledge, information experience, and resources, and collaborating in joint activities, that aim to enhance human and economic security, social equity, and sustainable development in the Information Age"; and the GKP seeks to "build understanding of how knowledge and information, especially the use of information and communications technologies (ICTs), can and should fundamentally change the nature of international development efforts in the information age, and in that context build on lessons from joint evaluation and learning exercises": Partners, October 1999, accessible on www.globalknowledge org
47. GKP, note 24, pp. 7-8.
48. The GKP and the Swiss Agency of Development Cooperation were coresponsible for the ICT4D Platform at the World Summit of the Information Society (WSIS), Geneva, December 2003. The platform aimed to highlight the potential of ICTs in contributing to development goals and gathered thousands of politicians, NGO representatives, businesspeople, and researchers from all over the world. It was designed as a global village with a marketplace in the center and combined the exhibition of ICTs with conferences and workshops.
49. Castells, note 1, p. 68;
50. K. L. Kraemer and J. Dedrick, "Strategic Use of the Internet and E-commerce: Cisco Systems, "Journal of Strategic Information Systems 11 (2002): 5-29.
51. GKP, note 24.
52. For a discussion of Cisco's innovative and successful strategies of corporate philanthropy, see Michael E. Porter and M. R. Kramer, "The Competitive Advantage of Corporate Philanthropy," Harvard Business Review, December 2002, p. 65. According to Porter and Kramer, the Network Academy Program has benefited many employers around the world, providing them with access to highly skilled academy graduates and even direct competitors. Cisco, however, stands to benefit the most. The networking academies not only contribute to improving the company's competitive context but "Cisco has attracted international recognition for this program, generating justified pride and enthusiasm among company employees, goodwill among its partners, and a reputation for leadership in philanthropy." In 2003, Cisco said of the GKP: "As a cooperation of partnerships that actively works in developing countries, the Global Knowledge Partnership (GKP) parallels Cisco's vision of minimizing the digital divide among and within countries through the Cisco Networking Academy Program. The goal of this partnership is to spur economic development and increase individual opportunity through the power of information and knowledge. At the Second Global Knowledge Conference in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Cisco vice president for Strategic Technology Policy, Christine Hemrick, discussed the Cisco Networking Academy Program and empowering individuals through the knowledge-based economy": www.cisco.neta-cad.net/ public/digital_divide/partners/WorldBankGkp. html+global+knowledge++partnership&ie=UTF8&site=CDC&output= xml_no_dtd&client=CDC&proxystylesheet=CDC&oe=UTF-8, accessed June 27, 2003.
53. GKP, note 24.
54. A. Wittel, "Toward a Network Sociality," Theory, Culture, and Society 18, no. 6 (2001): 51-76.
55. GKP, note 24, p. 5.
56. See Mikkel Flyverbom and Hans Krause Hansen, "Technology Galore: Global Networks in the Service of Development," in Jens Hoff, ed., Digital Dreams and Digital Fears: The Reconfiguration of Authority, Community, and Identity in the Network Society (Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur, forthcoming).
57. Susana Borràs and Kerstin Jacobsson, "The Open Method of Coordination and New Governance Patterns in the EU," Journal of European Public Policy 11, no. 2 (2004): 185-208.
58. The Bertelsmann Foundation has gained a reputation as one of the most energetic and influential advocates of modernizing government in Germany (and beyond): Christopher Pollitt and Geert Bouckaert, Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 236. The foundation is the largest private company-sponsored foundation in Germany and one of the largest in Europe. For an account of its activities and role in the sphere of government reform and its use of transnational networks, see Hansen and Salskov-Iversen, note 3.
59. Bertelsmann Stiftung in cooperation with Booz/Allen/Hamilton, Balanced E-Governance: E-Government - Connecting Efficient Administration and Responsive Democracy (Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Foundation, 2002).
60. Ibid., p. 7.
61. This is not to suggest that the reform experiences of the Anglo-Saxon world are alike. While they share some ideological baggage, including a lot of public-sector bashing (in Britain, primarily during the days of the Thatcher and Major governments), the experience of the United States and Canada, both federal states, lacks the comprehensiveness of the reform programs of the United Kingdom and New Zealand, both unitary governments: S. Borins, "New Public Management, North American Style," in K. McLaughlin, S. P. Osborne, and E. Ferlie, eds., New Public Management: Current Trends and Future Prospects (London: Routledge, 2002), pp. 182-194. Similarly with regard to the policies in place in the e-governance area: The UK central government is in front in comprehensive e-governance initiatives across policy areas and levels of government. The UK experience (with the Canadian and the European) is characterized by facing a complex welfare-state agenda. In the United Kingdom (as in other more welfare-state-oriented administrations), e-governance is also brought to bear on so-called "wicked" issues (e.g., children, employment, senior citizens). While such issues may be just as reform prone, or even more so, they arguably lend themselves less easily to straightforward technological intervention via ICT than do repair of potholes, real-estate assessment, renewal of vehicle registrations, report of vehicle sales, paying of taxes, and so on.
62. Bertelsmann Stiftung, note 38, p. 18.
63. Ibid., p. 6.
64. Interview with the Bertelsmann Foundation, September 2002.
65. Bertelsmann Stiftung, note 38, p. 18.
66. Audit Commission, Lewisham London Borough Council: Corporate Assessment (London: Audit Commission, December 2002).
67. Dorte Salskov-Iversen, "A Discursive Perspective on British Local Government's Response to Change: A Tale of Two Cities," Discourse and Society 8, no. 3 (1997): 391-415.
68. www.lewisham.gov.uk/Beacon/beacon2001_2002.asp, February 12, 2003.
69. All authorities receive an overall assessment score of excellent, good, fair, poor, or weak, based on how their core services perform. Lewisham was rated "good": Audit Commission, Comprehensive Performance Assessment: Scores and Analysis for Single and County Councils in England (London: Audit Commission, 2002).
70. www.cityofseatlle.net, July 29, 2003, and www.cityofseattle.net/htlm/ honors, July 29, 2003. To name some, Seattle excels in the MuniNet Guide, the Annual E-Government Survey, and the Center for Digital Government's survey.
71. For a thorough discussion of the Stockholm Challenge, see Hans Krause Hansen and Dorte Salskov-Iversen, "Globalizing Webs: Translation of e-Modernization," in Barbara Czarniawska and Guje Seven, Global Ideas (Brussels: Liber, forthcoming in 2005).
72. www.challenge.Stockholm.se/faq_right.asp, accessed January 17, 2003.
73. After the Mexican federal government's Citizen Portal was named as 2004 winner of the e-government category, it was reported on the por tal that the government had received an important international recognition - "considered the Nobel of the Internet." See www.gob.mx.
74. For an elaborate discussion of the Global Cities Dialogue, see Hans Krause Hansen and Dorte Salskov-Iversen, "Weak Ties, Strong Allies: Work in Progress to Be Presented at 'Reinventing the Public? Changing Relationships between Public and Private Services,' International Conference at The Open University, April 15-16, 2005." See also www.globalci-tiesdialogue.org/ organization
75. For an account of Phoenix and Bremen, see Bislev, Hansen, and Salskov-Iversen, "The Global Diffusion," note 3.
76. Deibert, note 1.
77. I b i d.
78. Larner and Walters, note 3, pp. 1-15.
79. Keohane and Nye, note 4, pp. 82-84. It could be argued that the term soft regulation offers a better conceptual framework for the entire continuum of performance technologies (i.e., across the mandatory-voluntary boundary). Even if, for example, the British Best Value is a regime backed by law, it relies for its realization on other dynamics (reputational factors, enthusiasm, and innovation), rather than straightforward prescription.
80. For a brief and instructive overview, see Stone, note 23.
81. Stone, note 23, p. 50.
82. See Cutler, Haufler, and Porter, note 5, and Hall and Biersteker, note 5.