Between Coordination and Regulation

Conceptualizing Governance in Internet Governance

GigaNet Symposium 2014, Istanbul

Prof. Dr. Jeanette Hofmann, Social Science Center Berlin Christian Katzenbach, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet & Society Kirsten Gollatz, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet & Society

Structure

Internet governance

reflexive coordination in: Internet governance

reflexive

coordination

“Internet Governance”

governance as

“Internet Governance”

“ A common definition

Internet governance is the

development and application by Governments, the private sector and civil society,

in their respective roles,

of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes

that shape the evolution and use of the Internet. (WGIG 2005)

Contradictions and shortcomings of Internet governance research

“shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes”

versus governance as side-effects

versus distributed agency

? “steering and shaping”

Scope – What is not Internet governance?

Modes – Governance and regulation: Are they the same?

Reflection of governance and regulation literature?

Internet governance

The Concept of Governance

Different terminological traditions

European Approach Anglo-American Approach

Governance = Government 3-step paradigm shift: (Mayntz 2003)

Public planning

Public steering

Governance

-  hierarchical, command & control

-  distributed, cooperative, network

Governance versus Regulation

Modes of Coordination Constellation of Actors Structure Formation

non-hierarchal regulation

distinction between steering subject and steering object

intentional

simple governance

integration of steering subject and steering object

intentional

complex governance

integration of steering subject and steering object

non-intentional

(Translation of Grande 2012: 583)

Governance versus Regulation: Analytical Shortcomings

Regulation – misses empirical phenomena that cannot be explained as outcomes of rational problem solving

Governance – vague term without clear boundaries: what is outside of governance?

Task – Specifying a middle ground between concepts too narrow and too broad

reflexive

coordination governance as

When simple coordination fails it becomes reflexive

Coordination – building blocks of social order, varying by reach, stability and number of people involved

Governance = coordinating coordination

Critical moments – actors articulate formerly implicit understandings and norms to evaluate the situation and consider new rules

Periods of simple and reflexive coordination may alternate over time

– institutions designed to enable coordination cause new coordination issues

Coordination, Regulation, Governance

Definition Evaluation Criteria

Coordination reciprocal social processes

mutual adjustments

Regulation intentional interventions

outcome, achievement of pre-defined goals

Governance legitimacy, acceptance, smooth process

reflexive coordination

reflexive coordination in: Internet governance

Internet Governance as Reflexive Coordination: The IGF

(Epstein 2011: 6)

Conditions of coordination – (re-)shaping its own context

Coordinating coordination – “recursive loops” (p.3) Critical moments – compromising different worldviews

and conflicting opinions Bottom-up perspective – debating the formal and

informal practices Reflexivity – boundaries are enacted and constantly

negotiated by the actors involved Outcome – a fluid concept

Summary

Shortcomings – lack of a systematic reflection of governance in Internet governance

Task – specifying a conceptual and pragmatic ground

Approach – governance as reflexive coordination

Further research – empirical applicability in Internet governance arrangements, contextualization, theoretical extensions