|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
O |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
O |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G |
|
T |
|
|
|
|
|
A |
|
|
M |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N |
|
|
S |
|
|
|
|
E |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
P |
|||
|
|
I |
|
|
|
|
O |
||
|
|
|
|
|
? L |
|
|||
|
|
T T V |
|
|
|||||
|
|
C E |
E |
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
A E |
|
D |
|
|
|
|||
H |
J |
|
L |
|
PROFESSOR CAROL SCOTT |
||||
W |
|
O N |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R I |
A |
|
|
LEONARD PRANEPA, CO- |
|||||
|
O |
|
|
|
|
||||
PE |
|
|
|
|
DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR |
||||
|
|
G |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
R |
|
|
|
|
|
|
RUSSIAN STUDIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FELLOW ST ANTONY’S COLLEGE, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OXFORD UNIVERSITY |
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
ЛЕТНИЙ КАМПУС АКАДЕМИИ ПРИ 1
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 |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
2 |
- 2 0 1 2 |
|
|
|
|
L |
E T |
O |
|
|
|
E |
N |
||
|
V C A |
|
||||
|
E |
|
I |
|||
|
|
N |
|
|||
L |
|
|
N E |
|
||
I |
|
|
|
|
T |
|
|
|
|
A M |
|
||
- |
N R |
|
|
|||
T |
|
|
|
|||
L |
R P |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
I |
|
|
U E X |
|
|
||||
M V F |
|
E |
|
|
||
E |
|
|
||||
O O |
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
||
G E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
G |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
3 |
- 2 0 1 2 |
MULTI-LEVEL GOVERNANCE
Evolving Patterns
Regions, previously ignored, now central to theorizing
Historical industries and new sectors Traditions of governance evolving, Taylorism declining
Globalization of Trade and Information
Current Era: one of Experimentation
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
4 |
- 2 0 1 2 |
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 |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
5 |
- 2 0 1 2 |
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 |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
6 |
- 2 0 1 2 |
EQUALIZATION OR GROWTH: THE TRADE-OFF IN REGIONAL
POLICY
Federal and Regional programs Some fiscal transfers for welfare Some sectoral policies
Some competitive pressures Multi-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 |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
7 |
- 2 0 1 2 |
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 |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
8 |
- 2 0 1 2 |
REGIONAL/FEDERAL
PROGRAMS MUST BE
COORDINATED
Canada, Austria and Switzerland, among federations, have the greatest difficulty coordinating regional and national planning
US and Germany are more successful, there is more devolution at planning stage and more federal support for local plans
New: Multi-level regulation, combining positive hierarchical coordination with innovative and competitive regional policies
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
9 |
- 2 0 1 2 |
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 |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
10 |
- 2 0 1 2 |
CENTRALIZATION TENDENCIES
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
11 |
- 2 0 1 2 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
|
, |
|
|
4 |
|
|
2 |
|
y |
|
|
l |
|
|
Ju |
|
|
Л Е Т Н И Й К А М П У С А К А Д Е М И И П Р И П Р Е З И Д Е Н Т Е Р Ф |
12 |
- 2 0 1 2 |