IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ijurrs/v32y2008i3p531-547.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Local Governance as Government–Business Cooperation in Western Democracies: Analysing Local and Intergovernmental Effects by Multi‐Level Comparison

Author

Listed:
  • CLEMENTE J. NAVARRO YÁÑEZ
  • ANNICK MAGNIER
  • M. ANTONIA RAMÍREZ

Abstract

The internationalization of economics and politics has forced local governments to develop new context‐appropriate strategies; these strategies, characterized by a greater degree of interaction with non‐governmental key actors and with the business world in particular, have been termed local or urban governance. This article is intended to illustrate the impact of three factors — local leadership, local political arenas and intergovernmental relationships — on the formation of cooperative networks between local governments and business organizations as one of the basic types of urban governance model. To achieve this, a comparative multi‐level analysis presenting the CEO's perpective on such issues was conducted. The results show how local and intergovernmental opportunity costs and leadership are the factors that largely determine the degree of collaboration between local government and business. Résumé L’internationalisation de l’économie et de la politique a forcé les gouvernements locaux àélaborer de nouvelles stratégies en fonction des contextes ; caractérisées par une interaction plus forte avec des acteurs‐clés non gouvernementaux et avec le monde de l’entreprise en particulier, ces stratégies ont reçu l’appellation de gouvernance locale ou urbaine. L’impact de trois facteurs — autorité locale, arènes politiques locales et relations intergouvernementales — sur la formation des réseaux de coopération entre gouvernements locaux et entreprises est présenté comme l’un des types essentiels de modèle de gouvernance urbaine. Pour ce faire, une analyse comparative multi‐niveaux a été menée sur la vision des directions générales d’entreprises concernant ces questions. Les résultats montrent la manière dont les autorités et les coûts d’opportunité locaux et intergouvernementaux déterminent en grande partie le degré de collaboration entre les gouvernements locaux et le monde des affaires.

Suggested Citation

  • Clemente J. Navarro Yáñez & Annick Magnier & M. Antonia Ramírez, 2008. "Local Governance as Government–Business Cooperation in Western Democracies: Analysing Local and Intergovernmental Effects by Multi‐Level Comparison," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 531-547, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ijurrs:v:32:y:2008:i:3:p:531-547
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00816.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00816.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00816.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keith Dowding, 2001. "Explaining Urban Regimes," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 7-19, March.
    2. Bowers, Jake & Drake, Katherine W., 2005. "EDA for HLM: Visualization when Probabilistic Inference Fails," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 301-326.
    3. Stone, Clarence N., 1980. "Systemic Power in Community Decision Making: A Restatement of Stratification Theory," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 978-990, December.
    4. Keith M. Dowding, 1991. "Rational Choice And Political Power," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 149.
    5. Olivier Borraz & Peter John, 2004. "The Transformation of Urban Political Leadership in Western Europe," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 107-120, March.
    6. Gelman, Andrew, 2005. "Two-Stage Regression and Multilevel Modeling: A Commentary," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 459-461.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:rri:wpaper:201004 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Junbo Yu & Peter Nijkamp, 2010. "Methodological Challenges and Institutional Barriers in the Use of Experimental Method for the Evaluation of Business Incubators: Lessons from the US, EU, and China," Working Papers Working Paper 2010-04, Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University.
    3. Edgar Quispe-Mamani & Pascual Ayamamani-Collanqui, 2023. "Unitarian Illusion in Peru: Recentralization and Intergovernmental Conflicts from the Perspective of Local Governments," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 985-1000, September.
    4. Théodore METAXAS & Marie-Noëlle DUQUENNE, 2017. "Partnerships and development policies for small-medium enterprises in Greece: a CFA approach," Region et Developpement, Region et Developpement, LEAD, Universite du Sud - Toulon Var, vol. 45, pages 131-158.
    5. María Jesús Rodríguez-García & Clemente J. Navarro-Yáñez & Ángel R. Zapata-Moya, 2022. "Local Welfare Systems and Health Inequalities: The Effects of Institutional Overlapping and Local Variations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-16, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/5405 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Gillad Rosen & Eran Razin, 2009. "The Rise of Gated Communities in Israel: Reflections on Changing Urban Governance in a Neo-liberal Era," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 46(8), pages 1702-1722, July.
    3. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5405 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5405 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Gizem Arikan & Pazit Ben-Nun Bloom, 2019. "“I was hungry and you gave me food”: Religiosity and attitudes toward redistribution," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, March.
    6. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/5405 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Ioannis Chorianopoulos & Theodoros Iosifides, 2006. "The Neoliberal Framework of EU Urban Policy in Action: Supporting Competitiveness and Reaping Disparities," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 21(4), pages 409-422, November.
    8. Yung, Esther H.K. & Sun, Yi, 2020. "Power relationships and coalitions in urban renewal and heritage conservation: The Nga Tsin Wai Village in Hong Kong," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    9. Xiang Li & Sun Sheng Han & Hao Wu, 2019. "Urban consolidation, power relations, and dilapidated residential redevelopment in Mutoulong, Shenzhen, China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(13), pages 2802-2819, October.
    10. Andrew M. Wood, 2004. "Domesticating Urban Theory? US Concepts, British Cities and the Limits of Cross-national Applications," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(11), pages 2103-2118, October.
    11. Walter J. Nicholls, 2005. "Power and Governance: Metropolitan Governance in France," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(4), pages 783-800, April.
    12. Clemens Tesch-Römer & Andreas Motel-Klingebiel & Martin Tomasik, 2008. "Gender Differences in Subjective Well-Being: Comparing Societies with Respect to Gender Equality," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 85(2), pages 329-349, January.
    13. Bruno Chiarini & Antonella D'Agostino & Elisabetta Marzano & Andrea Regoli, 2017. "Housing Environmental Risk in Urban Areas: Cross Country Comparison and Policy Implications," CESifo Working Paper Series 6822, CESifo.
    14. Mark Sandford, 2020. "Conceptualising ‘generative power’: Evidence from the city-regions of England," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(10), pages 2098-2114, August.
    15. Nurit Alfasi & Talia Margalit, 2014. "The challenge of regulating private planning initiatives," Chapters, in: David Emanuel Andersson & Stefano Moroni (ed.), Cities and Private Planning, chapter 13, pages 269-294, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Thomas König & Thomas Bräuninger, 1998. "The Inclusiveness of European Decision Rules," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 10(1), pages 125-142, January.
    17. Francesco Angelini & Guido Candela & Massimiliano Castellani, 2020. "Governance efficiency with and without government," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(1), pages 183-200, January.
    18. Mark Sandford, 2019. "Money talks: The finances of English Combined Authorities," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 34(2), pages 106-122, March.
    19. Pongou, Roland & Tchantcho, Bertrand, 2021. "Round-robin political tournaments: Abstention, truthful equilibria, and effective power," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 331-351.
    20. Keith Dowding, 2000. "Institutionalist Research on the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 125-144, February.
    21. Franz Urban Pappi & Christian H. C. A. Henning, 1998. "Policy Networks: More Than a Metaphor?," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 10(4), pages 553-575, October.
    22. Joseph Leibovitz, 2003. "Institutional Barriers to Associative City-region Governance: The Politics of Institution-building and Economic Governance in 'Canada's Technology Triangle'," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 40(13), pages 2613-2642, December.
    23. Carlo Salone, 2013. "Defining the urban economic and administrative spaces," Chapters, in: Peter Karl Kresl & Jaime Sobrino (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Urban Economies, chapter 9, pages 205-234, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    24. Johannes Urpelainen, 2011. "The origins of social institutions," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(2), pages 215-240, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ijurrs:v:32:y:2008:i:3:p:531-547. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0309-1317 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.