Democratic metropolitan governance: experiences in five German metropolitan regions
Democratic metropolitan governance: experiences in five German metropolitan regions
复制标题
民主大都市治理：德国五个大都市地区的经验
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
K. Zimmermann
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
K. Zimmermann
本文旨在描述是否反思的合法性大都市治理安排发现考虑在德国五个大都市区的大都市改革。大都市地区是一个越来越重要的政治决策规模，但合法性和问责机制没有跟上。鉴于在大多数大都市机构中，只有间接的合法性机制（如由市议会或公私理事会代表组成的地区议会）在起作用，人们可能会认为，产出合法性或业绩合法性是大都市治理合法性的主要来源。事实上，公民非常关心废物管理或公共交通等服务的质量和价值，而不太关心这些服务背后的决策程序的透明度----至少在区域范围内是这样。结果表明，情况好坏参半。五分之二的地区建立了直接选举产生的地区议会，这些议会现在构成了真正的都市政治层级，投入和产出的合法性结合在一起。在其他区域，转向灵活的治理形式为社会行为者开辟了决策舞台，但这种政策进程的开放似乎是非常有选择性的，并以牺牲公民参与为代价。
The paper seeks to describe whether reflections about the legitimacy metropolitan governance arrangements found consideration in metropolitan reforms in five German metropolitan regions. Metropolitan regions are an increasingly relevant scale for political decision-making but mechanism for legitimacy and accountability did not keep pace. Given the fact that in most metropolitan institutions only indirect mechanisms of legitimacy such as regional assemblies with representatives from municipal councils or public–private governing boards are at work, one may expect that output legitimacy or legitimacy by performance is the dominant source for legitimacy in metropolitan governance. In fact, citizens care much about the quality and the prize of services such as waste management or public transport but less about the transparency of decision-making procedures behind these services – at least on the scale of the region. The results show a mixed picture. In two out of five regions, directly elected regional assembly have been established and now constitute genuine tiers of metropolitan politics where input and output legitimacy are combined. In other regions, the turn to flexible forms of governance opened up decision-making arenas for societal actors, but it seems that this opening of the policy process is very selective and comes at the expense of citizen participation.