- •OUTLINE
- •MULTI-LEVEL GOVERNANCE
- •DECENTRALIZATION
- •ISSUES FOR REGIONS: THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE US
- •Federal and Regional programs
- •BOTH GOALS IMPORTANT
- •REGIONAL/FEDERAL PROGRAMS MUST BE COORDINATED
- •ARE RELATIVELY
- •CENTRALIZATION
- •DIFFERENT COUNTRIES
- •RUSSIAN FEDERALISM: EXPERIMENTATION
- •RUSSIA’S FAST ADVANCING
- •WHY MANY COUNTRIES STILL FOLLOW CENTRALIZED MODEL
- •DISTRIBUTED GOVERNANCE
- •EXPERIMENTAL
- •REGIONAL GENERAL ISSUES
- •SPECIAL ISSUES
- •EACH SPHERE HAS BUNDLE
- •HUMAN RESOURCES
- •DROUGHT MANAGEMENT WILL
- •DROUGHT MANAGEMENT
- •REGIONAL PROJECTS FOR
- •FLOOD MANAGEMENT: REGIONAL AND LOCAL
- •WHAT SEEMS TO WORK
- •ANSWERS EMERGING
- •ANSWERS FROM RUSSIA:
- •FEDERAL AND
- •STARTING POINT: 1998
- •THEN DECLINE, THEN
- •WHAT HAPPENED?
- •KALUGA PROJECTS (2005-8) WITH FEDERAL SUPPORT
- •PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP
- •INDUSTRIAL ZONES
- •STARTED WITH 4 MAJOR
- •SPILLOVERS
- •RESULTS
- •PARTNERSHIPS
- •EXPLOITING PROXIMITY TO
- •PROBLEMS
- •SUCCESSFUL REGIONAL PROJECT
- •TECHNOLOGICAL AND INVESTMENT ORIENTATION
- •DIFFUSION OF GOVERNANCE
- •ADAPTABLE TASK-ORIENTED
- •LOOSE AND CONTROLLED
- •INDICATORS FOR CONTROLLED
- •INDICATORS FOR LOOSE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
O |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
O |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
G |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S |
|
|
|
|
T |
|
|
|
|
|
I |
|
? E |
|
|
|||||
|
T |
|
T M |
N |
|
|
|||||
|
C L |
P |
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
E V |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
H J E |
O |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
W |
|
|
A |
|
E |
|
PROFESSOR CAROL SCOTT |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
O L |
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
D |
|
|
|
|||||
|
R N |
|
|
|
LEONARD PRANEPA, CO-DIRECTOR, |
|
|||||
|
IO |
|
|
|
|
CENTER FOR |
|
||||
P G |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RUSSIAN STUDIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FELLOW ST ANTONY’S COLLEGE, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OXFORD UNIVERSITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ |
1 |
ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
|
OUTLINE
Multi-level Governance: Age of Experimentation
Challenges for regions Experimentation as a Way of Governing
The example of Kaluga What is a Successful Project?
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
L |
||
|
|
|
|
|
E E |
|||
|
|
|
|
V |
C |
|||
|
|
|
E |
N N |
||||
|
|
L |
|
|||||
|
I |
|
|
|
A T |
|||
|
- |
|
|
|
IO |
|||
|
T |
|
|
N T |
||||
|
L |
|
R E |
|||||
U E R |
A |
|||||||
N |
||||||||
|
V P |
IM |
||||||
M |
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
O F |
|
E |
|
||||
G E |
E |
|
|
|
||||
|
G |
O |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
3 |
MULTI-LEVEL GOVERNANCE
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
4 |
DECENTRALIZATION
US and Germany:
Regions acquiring greater authority over programs
Coordination between Federal and Regional levels for cross-border issues
Sustainability policies: they work better at the regional level
At all levels: Integrative policy approaches
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
5 |
ISSUES FOR REGIONS: THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE US
• |
Environmental issues previously |
|
resolved at the Federal level now |
|
allocated to regions |
• |
State spending grew far faster |
|
than Federal Spending |
• |
From 40% in 1980s to 60% of |
|
programs now at state level; states |
|
spend twice the amount |
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
6 |
Federal and Regional programs
EQUALIZATIONSome fiscal transfersORfor welfareGROWTH: Some sectoral policies
THE TRADE-OFF IN REGIONAL
Some competitive pressures
POLICYMulti-level planning is critical
Make up for regional differences in capacity for solving problems, capacity for learning new routines, economic advantages
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
7 |
BOTH GOALS IMPORTANT
Choices require flexibility
The answer tomorrow may be different from the answer today
Is the answer going to help govern better? I.E.:
Does the answer promote learning, is it incentive compatible with growth, is it incentive compatible with multi-level cooperation
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
8 |
REGIONAL/FEDERAL PROGRAMS MUST BE COORDINATED
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
9 |
ARE RELATIVELY
CENTRALIZED
Tax collection almost entirely centralized for efficiency (mobility of the tax base and tax composition within the country)
In Russia—lack of trust in fairness and organizational capacity of the regions; an effort to increase tax discipline
Legal and administrative affairs are centralized Spending (via transfers) is largely targeted funds
Who decides what to target?
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
10 |
CENTRALIZATION
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
11 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ ПРЕЗИДЕНТЕ РФ -2012 |
12 |