Journals / Çağdaş Yerel Yönetimler / 2020 / Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 3

Regionalism and Multi-level Governance in Sweden

İsveç’te Bölgeselleşme ve Çok Katmanlı Yönetişim

Pages
1–23
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Regional administrations, which are still in the testing process in the areas already mentioned, consciously limit Sweden’s integration into the EU.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The subject of this study is the regionalization experience and multi-level governance activities of Sweden after her EU membership (1995).
📊
Key Findings & Data:EU policies on regional autonomy and regional development, which came to the fore with EU membership in Sweden, advocate a horizontal and bottom-up regionalization logic based on the cooperation of actors in different layers, rather than a vertical and top-down understanding of politics.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Regional administrations, which are still in the testing process in the areas already mentioned, consciously limit Sweden’s integration into the EU.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The subject of this study is the regionalization experience and multi-level governance activities of Sweden after her EU membership (1995). EU policies on regional autonomy and regional development, which came to the fore with EU membership in Sweden, advocate a horizontal and bottom-up regionalization logic based on the cooperation of actors in different layers, rather than a vertical and top-down understanding of politics. Sweden has cautiously focused on both regionalization and multi-level governance after membership and pilot region studies. In this context, it has started to implement both the issue of regionalization and governance after testing in smaller areas. Regional administrations, which are still in the testing process in the areas already mentioned, consciously limit Sweden’s integration into the EU.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın konusu, İsveç’in AB üyeliği (1995) sonrası bölgeselleşme deneyimi ve çok-katmanlı yönetişim çalışmalarıdır. İsveç’te AB üyeliğiyle birlikte gündeme gelen bölgesel özerklik ve bölgesel kalkınma eksenli AB politikaları, hiyerarşik ve merkeziyetçi bir siyaset anlayışı yerine, farklı katmanlarda aktörlerin işbirliğine dayanan yatay yönlü ve adem-i merkeziyetçi bir bölgeselleşme mantığını savunmaktadır. İsveç üyelik sonrası hem bölgeselleşme hem de çok-katmanlı yönetişime temkinli yaklaşarak pilot bölge çalışmalarına ağırlık vermiştir. Bu bağlamda, gerek bölgeselleşme, gerekse yönetişim konusunu daha küçük alanlarda test ettikten sonra hayata geçirmeye başlamıştır. Bugün hala bahsedilen alanlarda test sürecinde olan bölge yönetimleri İsveç’in AB’ye entegrasyonunu bilinçli olarak sınırlandırmaktadır

🔖

Cite This Article

AKARÇAY, P. (2020). Regionalism and Multi-level Governance in Sweden. Çağdaş Yerel Yönetimler, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 3, 1–23. https://ajindex.com/articles/148693

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Bäck, H. ve V. Johansson. (2010). Sweden. Changing Government Relations in Europe: From Localism to Intergovernmentalism. (Ed. M. Goldsmith ve E.C. Page). London: Routledge. Ds (2000). Tillvaxt i hela Sverige (Growth in the whole of Sweden), Naringsdepartement: Stockholm. Ds (2001). Rapport om tillvaxtavtalen Första aret (Report on the first year of the regional growth agreements), Regeringskansliet, Naringsdepartementet: Stockholm. Ds (2001/02). Regional samverkan och statlig lansförvaltning (Regional co-operation and central government regional administration) Naringsdepartement: Stockholm. Ds (2002). Rapport om tillvaxtavtalen Andra aret (Report on the regional growth agreements. The second year), Regeringskansliet, Naringsdepartementet: Stockholm. Ds (2003). Rapport om tillvaxtavtalen Tredje aret – fran tillvaxtavtal till tillvaxtprogram (Report on the regional growth agreements. The third year – from growth agreement to growth programme), Regeringskansliet, Naringsdepartementet: Stockholm. Ehn, P. (1998). I Skärningspunkten – Landshövdingarna och den centrala och regionala samord-ningen. Rapport til Den Parlamentariska regionkommitten (PARK). Stockholm: PARK. Feltenius, D. (2015). “Multi-Level Governance as ‘Post-Constitutional’ Politics: Subnational Actors and the Swedish Constitution”, Local Government Studies, 41 (2), 301-319.
  2. Harrison, J. (2006). “Re-reading the New Regionalism: A Sympathetic Critique”, Space and Polity, 10 (1), 21-46.
  3. Hooghe, L. (1996). Cohesion Policy and European Integration: Building Multi-Level Governance. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  4. Hooghe, L. ve G. Marks (2003). “Unraveling the Central State, but How? Types of Multi-Level Governance”, American Political Science Review, 97, 233-243.
  5. Hörnström, L. (2010). Redistributive Regionalism. Narratives on Regionalisation in the Nordic Periphery. Umea˚: Umea˚ University. Hudson, C. (2005). “Regional Development Partnerships in Sweden: Putting the Government Back in Governance?”, Regional and Federal Studies, 15 (3), 311- 327. Instrument of Government, Chapter 14, Section 2, https://www.riksdagen.se.
  6. Keating, M. (1998). The New Regionalism in WesternEurope. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Lindström, B. (2005). Regionalpolitiken som tillvaxtpolitik. Retorik och substans i den regionalautvecklingenspolitiken A2005:01. Östersund: ITPS Institutet för Tillvaxtpolitiska Studier. Lindqvist, M. (2010). Regional Development in the Nordic Countries. Nordregio Report 2010: 2. Lovering, J. (1999