 
|
|
Completed research programs |
 |
|
Research Unit: Civil Society and Transnational Networks |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
WZB Discussion Paper Abstracts |
|
|
|
|
2000 |
|
| |
v
2005
I
2004
I
2003
I
2002
I
2001
I 2000
I
1999
I
1998
I
1997
I
1996
I
1995
I
1994
I
1993
I
1992
|
|
|
The different research units of the WZB
publish their reports in "Discussion papers" (DIN A4-format).
They are available from the WZB's
Press and
Information Office. Please order the Discussion Papers by
email or
mail and include the number (SP IV …) and title of the
Discussion Paper in your order form . (Only written orders are
accepted.)
Delivery Terms
The WZB also offers the complete text of a number of discussion
papers for downloading in portable document format (PDF).
(Documents available in PDF are indicated by the Adobe PDF symbol to
the left of the title just under the paper number.) You
can view PDF documents with the original formatting on your screen
as well as print them out. To do so, you need
¬Adobe's free "Acrobat Reader" software. Be sure to use version
4 or higher of Acrobat Reader, as our documents are not readable
with older versions. |
|
 |
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
FS II 00-301
 |
Kristine Kern: Institutionelle Arrangements und Formen
der Handlungskoordination im Mehrebenensystem der USA. 25 S. |
|
English Abstract: |
The relationship between the policy levels in the U.S.
multilevel system can be characterized by three types: first,
central regulation, i.e. the hierarchical coordination of the
policy levels. Second, decentral regulation comprising
regulatory competition as well as the emergence of horizontal
joint-decision systems between the states. Both forms lose
importance as a third type, multilevel regulation, becomes
prevalent. Two variants of these novel institutional
arrangements that are superior to both other types of
regulation, are described. On the one hand, competition
between the policy levels is stimulated by a combination of
hierarchical elements with the regulative competition between
the states, e.g., by setting national minimum standards. On
the other hand, a change of the intergovernmental relations
between the federal government and the states can be observed,
fostering the emergence of vertical joint-decision systems.
The U.S. development shows that hierarchical elements are
hardly dispensable when institutional arrangements are
combined. Moreover, it can be seen that dynamic policy
developments result not only from regulative competition
between states but also from competition between policy
levels. (Author's abstract) |
|
|
FS
II 00-302
|
Andrea Scharnhorst: Evolution in Adaptive Landscapes —
Examples of Science and Technology Development. 17 S. + 13
Abb. |
|
English Abstract: |
In science and technology studies it is very common to
describe structure formation and structure development by
using spatial representations. Maps of such knowledge
landscapes allow the dynamic character of the research
processes to be visualized. In this paper, we discuss how
concepts, methods and mathematical models that allow the
dynamics and the evolution of complex systems to be described
can be applied to this area. A special approach is considered,
which we call 'geometrically oriented evolution theory'
(GOETHE). First steps towards implementing this new method in
the context of the development of national science systems are
discussed. (Author's abstract) |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Last change: 2005-03-22 13:36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
