@incollection{HasselPohlmann, author = {Hassel, Anke and Pohlmann, Christoph}, title = {Market and state in European social democracy : contours of a Progressive economic and social policy for the 21st century}, series = {Market and state in European social democracy : progressive perspectives on developing a social and sustainable market model}, booktitle = {Market and state in European social democracy : progressive perspectives on developing a social and sustainable market model}, publisher = {Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung}, address = {Berlin}, isbn = {978-3-86872-386-1}, pages = {3 -- 7}, language = {en} } @incollection{Hassel, author = {Hassel, Anke}, title = {Multi-level governance and organized interests}, series = {Handbook on multi-level governance}, booktitle = {Handbook on multi-level governance}, publisher = {Elgar}, address = {Cheltenham [u.a.]}, isbn = {978-1-84980-629-9}, pages = {153 -- 168}, language = {en} } @article{Dawson, author = {Dawson, Mark}, title = {Editorial: Learning from past Failures? Governance in the European Union from Lisbon 2000 to Lisbon 2020}, series = {Maastricht Journal of European \& Comparative Law}, volume = {17}, journal = {Maastricht Journal of European \& Comparative Law}, number = {2}, publisher = {Intersentia}, address = {Cambridge}, issn = {1023-263X}, pages = {107 -- 115}, language = {en} } @article{Dawson, author = {Dawson, Mark}, title = {Transforming into what?: New Governance in the EU and the "Managerial Sensibility" in Modern Law}, series = {Wisconsin Law Review}, volume = {2010}, journal = {Wisconsin Law Review}, number = {2}, publisher = {University of Wisconsin Law School}, address = {Madison}, issn = {0043-650X}, pages = {390 -- 440}, abstract = {As part of his account of "fragmentation" in international law, Martti Koskenniemi has described the advance of a "managerial sensibility" in modern law. This sensibility incorporates two claims—first, the increasing differentiation of international rules; and second, a tendency to see law not as an end in itself, but as a managerial technique. It is not difficult to apply both tenets of managerialism to the practice of "new governance." On the one hand, methods like the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) attest to a feeling that law is too distanced a register to capture the kinds of detailed intervention that EU regulation requires, leading to differentiation between policy fields. On the other hand, this has been carried out in order to "specialize," allowing overall targets to be reached through narrow administrative elites. Managerialism is present in processes like the OMC both as a differentiation of legal procedures, and as a view of rules as "flexible" in service of the evolving goals and self-image of a particular policy community. While this managerial ethos would seem suitable for a particular vision of the EU polity—the depoliticized regulatory state—it is increasingly problematic. As the principle vehicle for the delivery of the Lisbon strategy, determining the indicators and objectives of the OMC is a far from technical task. What appears and has been marketed as a "micro-politics" of expert based benchmarking has the potential to invoke larger strategic questions for the EU while simultaneously placing them out of public view. In response, new avenues for politicizing new governance or for opening its principle procedures and indicators up to critical evaluation and scrutiny (including to a non-expert public) may be needed. While this is no easy task, this Article will explore two modest proposals—first, the scrutiny role of the European Parliament, and second, the development of the European Ombudsman as an avenue to provide non-judicial means for addressing problems of intransparency and accountability in EU governance. In both cases, while a full politicization of the method may be difficult, a partial strategy may be an important first step in reconciling new governance procedures with the democratic values upon which the Treaties of the EU claim to be based.}, language = {en} } @article{HammerschmidMeyer, author = {Hammerschmid, Gerhard and Meyer, Renate E.}, title = {The degree of decentralization and individual decision making in central government human resource management: A European comparative perspective}, series = {Public Administration : an international journal}, volume = {88}, journal = {Public Administration : an international journal}, number = {2}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Oxford [u.a.]}, issn = {0033-3298}, doi = {10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01798.x}, pages = {455 -- 478}, abstract = {This article reports a comparative study of human resource management (HRM) practices in Europe. We focus on the extent to which decision-making authority is decentralized, that is, passed down to management, and individualized in the sense of being in the discretion of a single decision maker. Using these two dimensions, this paper gives a picture of the distinct way HR decision-making practices are organized in Europe: although decentralization has been a common goal of modernization initiatives, we still find a rather high degree of centralization. Moreover, we find that decentralized decision making frequently goes hand in hand with a higher degree of shared decision making. In addition, we examine the influence of several cultural and institutional factors to address the question of embeddedness in more detail. Our results show that national culture, administrative traditions and institutional arrangements play an important role as explanatory factors for the organization of HR decision-making in Europe.}, language = {en} } @incollection{HammerschmidTamyko, author = {Hammerschmid, Gerhard and Tamyko, Ysa}, title = {Empirical PPP Experiences in Europe: National Variations of a Global Concept}, series = {International Handbook on Public-Private-Partnerships}, booktitle = {International Handbook on Public-Private-Partnerships}, editor = {Graeme, Hodge and Greve, Carsten and Boardman, Anthony E.}, publisher = {Elgar Publ.}, address = {Cheltenham [u.a.]}, isbn = {9781848443563}, pages = {333 -- 353}, abstract = {Gerhard Hammerschmid and Tamyko Ysa Global diffusion of an Anglo-Saxon concept The idea of public-private partnership (PPP) as a model for public procurement and financing public investments arrived on a wave of public management modernization issues in the early 1990s in Europe and was first implemented on a broader basis in the UK under the Private Finance Initiative (PFI). A European Investment Bank (2007) report clearly shows that the UK is still a forerunner in terms of both number of PPP projects and volume. Out of a cumulative value of €194.7 billion that has been signed up until the end of 2006, the UK accounts for 57.7 per cent. However, it is also clear that the UK market is maturing (e.g. Ysa, 2007), whereas the rest of the European PPP market is growing. International organizations such as the World Bank, the OECD and the International Monetary Fund, together with multinational professional companies (e.g. PwC, 2005; Deloitte, 2006a, 2006b; DLA Piper, 2007; Ernst \& Young, 2008), played an important role in the international diffusion of PPPs both as promoters and as knowledge carriers. Within Europe especially, the European Commission has given a strong impetus in a similar form when launching a Green Paper on PPPs in 2004 (European Commission, 2004). PPPs have raised high expectations among scholars, governments and practitioners in Europe alike. They are seen as 'a new generation of management reforms' (Pollitt, 2003, p. 53) and have found their way into many government programmes throughout Europe. The German federal...(Publishers information)}, language = {en} } @techreport{KreyenfeldKubisch, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Kubisch, Olga}, title = {Data Documentation Germany: Documentation for the Human Fertility Base}, publisher = {Max-Planck-Institut f{\"u}r demografische Forschung}, address = {Rostock}, abstract = {The Human Fertility Database (HFD) is a joint project of the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research (MPIDR) in Rostock, Germany and the Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) in Vienna, Austria, based at MPIDR. We seek to provide free and user-friendly access to detailed and high-quality data on period and cohort fertility and thus to facilitate research on changes and inter-country differences in fertility in the past and in the modern era. The HFD is entirely based on official vital statistics and places a great emphasis on data checking and documentation and on warranting data comparability across time and countries by means of uniform methodology}, language = {en} } @techreport{KreyenfeldPerelliHarrisKubisch, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Perelli-Harris, Brienna and Kubisch, Karolin}, title = {Harmonized histories : Manual for the preparation of comparative fertility and union histories}, series = {MPIDR Working Paper (No. 11/2010)}, journal = {MPIDR Working Paper (No. 11/2010)}, publisher = {Max-Planck Institut f{\"u}r demografische Forschung}, address = {Rostock}, pages = {32}, abstract = {This document describes the standardization process of the Harmonized Histories. The Harmonized Histories is a comparative database of rich reproductive and union histories from surveys conducted in a number of countries in Europe. Given that birth and union data has been collected in a number of ways in different surveys, it has been very difficult to conduct cross-national analyses of recent union and fertility behavior over time. A team of researchers called the Nonmarital Childbearing Network has cleaned and standardized the surveys according to guidelines set out in this manual. Currently, the database includes data from the Generations and Gender Surveys (GGSs) in Italy, Germany, France, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, and Russia; the 2003 Dutch Fertility and Family Survey; and the British Household Panel Survey.}, language = {en} } @incollection{KreyenfeldScholz, author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Scholz, Rembrandt}, title = {Fertility and mortality data for Germany}, series = {Building on progress: expanding the research infrastructure for the social, economic, and behavioral sciences}, booktitle = {Building on progress: expanding the research infrastructure for the social, economic, and behavioral sciences}, publisher = {Budrich UniPress}, address = {Opladen}, isbn = {ISBN 978-3-940755-58-}, pages = {739 -- 751}, abstract = {In recent years, considerable progress has been made in improving the data infrastructure for fertility and morality researchers in Germany. Several large scale data sets have been made available through the research data centers: the micro-censuses of the 1970s and 1980s, the censuses of the GDR and FRG, the micro-census panel, data from the pension registers, individual level data from the vital statistics, and the central foreigner registers have become available for scientific usage. Vital statistics have been reformed, and the micro-census now includes information on number of children ever born. Despite these improvements, there are still some "weak spots" in Germany's data infrastructure. Germany is lacking official counts of reconstituted families. We know little about the mortality risks of immigrants. In addition, the data infrastructure for studying the socio-economic differences in mortality risks could be improved, thus enabling Germany to catch up with international developments in this area. This paper concludes by making some suggestions for improving the data available.}, language = {en} } @article{KreyenfeldPerelliHarrisSigleRushtonetal., author = {Kreyenfeld, Michaela and Perelli-Harris, Brienna and Sigle-Rushton, Wendy and Lappegard, Trude and Berghammer, Caroline and Keizer, Renske}, title = {The educational gradient of nonmarital childbearing in Europe}, series = {Population and Development Review}, volume = {36}, journal = {Population and Development Review}, number = {4}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Hoboken (NJ) [u.a.]}, issn = {0098-7921}, pages = {775 -- 801}, abstract = {Nearly every European Country has experienced some increase in nonmarital childbearing, largely due to increasing births within cohabitation. Relatively few studies in Europe, however, investigate the educational gradient of childbearing within cohabitation or how it changed over time. Using retrospective union and fertility histories, we employ competing risk hazard models to examine the educational gradient of childbearing in cohabitation in eight countries across europe. In all countries studied, birth risks within cohabitation demonstrated a negative educational gradient. When directly comparing cohabiting fertility with marital fertility, the negative educational gradient persists in all countries except Italy, although differences were not significant in Austria, France, and West Germany. To explain these findings, we present an alternative explanation for the increase in childbearing within cohabitation that goes beyond the explanation of the Second Demographic Transition and provides a new interpretation of the underlying mechanisms that may influence childbearing within cohabitation.}, language = {en} }