中央地方关系中的令人困惑的代理:新工党下的监管治理和变化解释

IF 2.1 2区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Steven Griggs, Helen Sullivan
{"title":"中央地方关系中的令人困惑的代理:新工党下的监管治理和变化解释","authors":"Steven Griggs,&nbsp;Helen Sullivan","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-856X.2012.00544.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Research Highlights and Abstract</h3>\n \n <div>The article seeks to make a contribution in the following areas:\n <ul>\n \n <li>It seeks to establish a new research agenda in centre-local relations, which builds on explanations of local practice and the political and affective dimensions of the work of officers and politicians. In so doing, it suggests that we should further dissolve the often over-determined boundaries between the centre and the local.</li>\n \n <li>In recasting centre-local relations, it draws particular attention to the capacity of local agency and the role of regulatory intermediaries; it explores such agency through an original case study of the take-up and use of the Power of Well Being.</li>\n \n <li>It offers a critical assessment of existing accounts of regulatory governance under New Labour.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <p>The UK Coalition's espoused commitment to Localism has re-ignited debates about the state and nature of centre-local relations in England. This article explores this contested space through the practice of regulatory governance under the New Labour government. It identifies two dominant interpretations of centre-local relations under New Labour, which it characterises as state-centric dirigisme and disciplined pluralism. This analysis draws attention to the capacity of local agency to shape the potential and limitations of regulatory governance. This capacity is explored empirically through an examination of the take-up and use of the Local Government Well Being Power introduced in 2000. The article suggests that centre-local relations should be recast to examine critically local practices and the political and affective dimensions of what local officers and politicians actually ‘do’ and it sets out an agenda for future research.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51479,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Politics & International Relations","volume":"16 3","pages":"495-514"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1467-856X.2012.00544.x","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Puzzling Agency in Centre-local Relations: Regulatory Governance and Accounts of Change under New Labour\",\"authors\":\"Steven Griggs,&nbsp;Helen Sullivan\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/j.1467-856X.2012.00544.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Research Highlights and Abstract</h3>\\n \\n <div>The article seeks to make a contribution in the following areas:\\n <ul>\\n \\n <li>It seeks to establish a new research agenda in centre-local relations, which builds on explanations of local practice and the political and affective dimensions of the work of officers and politicians. In so doing, it suggests that we should further dissolve the often over-determined boundaries between the centre and the local.</li>\\n \\n <li>In recasting centre-local relations, it draws particular attention to the capacity of local agency and the role of regulatory intermediaries; it explores such agency through an original case study of the take-up and use of the Power of Well Being.</li>\\n \\n <li>It offers a critical assessment of existing accounts of regulatory governance under New Labour.</li>\\n </ul>\\n </div>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <p>The UK Coalition's espoused commitment to Localism has re-ignited debates about the state and nature of centre-local relations in England. This article explores this contested space through the practice of regulatory governance under the New Labour government. It identifies two dominant interpretations of centre-local relations under New Labour, which it characterises as state-centric dirigisme and disciplined pluralism. This analysis draws attention to the capacity of local agency to shape the potential and limitations of regulatory governance. This capacity is explored empirically through an examination of the take-up and use of the Local Government Well Being Power introduced in 2000. The article suggests that centre-local relations should be recast to examine critically local practices and the political and affective dimensions of what local officers and politicians actually ‘do’ and it sets out an agenda for future research.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51479,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Politics & International Relations\",\"volume\":\"16 3\",\"pages\":\"495-514\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-11-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1467-856X.2012.00544.x\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Politics & International Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-856X.2012.00544.x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Politics & International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-856X.2012.00544.x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

本文试图在以下领域做出贡献:它试图建立一个新的研究议程,在地方实践的解释和官员和政治家的工作的政治和情感维度。在这样做的过程中,它建议我们应该进一步消除经常过度确定的中央和地方之间的界限。在重塑中心-地方关系时,它特别注意地方机构的能力和管制中介机构的作用;它通过一个关于接受和使用幸福力量的原始案例研究来探索这种机构。它对新工党(New Labour)领导下的监管治理的现有描述进行了批判性评估。英国联合政府对地方主义的承诺再次引发了关于英格兰中央与地方关系的状态和性质的辩论。本文通过新工党政府的监管治理实践来探索这一有争议的空间。它确定了新工党时期对中央-地方关系的两种主要解释,它将其描述为以国家为中心的统制主义和纪律多元主义。这一分析提请注意地方机构塑造监管治理潜力和局限性的能力。通过对2000年引入的地方政府福利权力的接受和使用的检查,实证地探讨了这种能力。这篇文章建议,应该重塑中心-地方关系,以批判性地审视地方实践,以及地方官员和政治家实际“做”的政治和情感维度,并为未来的研究制定了议程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Puzzling Agency in Centre-local Relations: Regulatory Governance and Accounts of Change under New Labour

Research Highlights and Abstract

The article seeks to make a contribution in the following areas:
  • It seeks to establish a new research agenda in centre-local relations, which builds on explanations of local practice and the political and affective dimensions of the work of officers and politicians. In so doing, it suggests that we should further dissolve the often over-determined boundaries between the centre and the local.
  • In recasting centre-local relations, it draws particular attention to the capacity of local agency and the role of regulatory intermediaries; it explores such agency through an original case study of the take-up and use of the Power of Well Being.
  • It offers a critical assessment of existing accounts of regulatory governance under New Labour.

The UK Coalition's espoused commitment to Localism has re-ignited debates about the state and nature of centre-local relations in England. This article explores this contested space through the practice of regulatory governance under the New Labour government. It identifies two dominant interpretations of centre-local relations under New Labour, which it characterises as state-centric dirigisme and disciplined pluralism. This analysis draws attention to the capacity of local agency to shape the potential and limitations of regulatory governance. This capacity is explored empirically through an examination of the take-up and use of the Local Government Well Being Power introduced in 2000. The article suggests that centre-local relations should be recast to examine critically local practices and the political and affective dimensions of what local officers and politicians actually ‘do’ and it sets out an agenda for future research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: BJPIR provides an outlet for the best of British political science and of political science on Britain Founded in 1999, BJPIR is now based in the School of Politics at the University of Nottingham. It is a major refereed journal published by Blackwell Publishing under the auspices of the Political Studies Association of the United Kingdom. BJPIR is committed to acting as a broadly-based outlet for the best of British political science and of political science on Britain. A fully refereed journal, it publishes topical, scholarly work on significant debates in British scholarship and on all major political issues affecting Britain"s relationship to Europe and the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信