This book explores the theoretical issues, empirical evidence, and normative debates elicited by the concept of multi‐level governance (MLG). The concept is a useful descriptor of decision‐making processes that involve the simultaneous mobilization of public authorities at different jurisdictional levels as well as that of non‐governmental organizations and social movements. It has become increasingly relevant with the weakening of territorial state power and effectiveness and the increase in international interdependencies which serve to undermine conventional governmental processes. This boo ... More

This book explores the theoretical issues, empirical evidence, and normative debates elicited by the concept of multi‐level governance (MLG). The concept is a useful descriptor of decision‐making processes that involve the simultaneous mobilization of public authorities at different jurisdictional levels as well as that of non‐governmental organizations and social movements. It has become increasingly relevant with the weakening of territorial state power and effectiveness and the increase in international interdependencies which serve to undermine conventional governmental processes. This book moves towards the construction of a theory of multi‐level governance by defining the conceptual contours of this term, identifying the processes that can uniquely be denoted by it, and discussing the normative issues that are raised by its diffusion, particularly in the European Union. Three policy areas are investigated to prove the usefulness of MLG as a theoretical and empirical concept—cohesion, environment, higher education—with particular reference to two member‐states, the UK and Germany. Finally, both the input and output legitimacy of multi‐level governance decisions and arrangements and its contribution to EU democracy are discussed. The book concludes by theorizing that as state sovereignty is pooled upwards, lower level jurisdictions are induced to participate in policy‐making ”as if“ they promoted private, particular interests, while civil society organizations are encouraged to participate in policy‐making ”as if“ they were public, general interests. It further suggests that legitimacy problems may be addressed all the more effectively the more subnational authorities develop strong linkages with civil society.