<section name="raw">
    <SEQUENTIAL>
      <record key="001" att1="001" value="161485" att2="161485">001   161485</record>
      <field key="037" subkey="x">englisch</field>
      <field key="050" subkey="x">E-Paper</field>
      <field key="076" subkey="">Politikwissenschaft</field>
      <field key="079" subkey="y">http://www.ihs.ac.at/publications/lib/ep8.pdf</field>
      <field key="079" subkey="z">Smismans, Stijn, New Modes of Governance and the Participatory Myth (pdf)</field>
      <field key="100" subkey="">Smismans, Stijn</field>
      <field key="103" subkey="">Faculty of Sociology, University of Trento</field>
      <field key="200" subkey="b">(Connecting Excellence on European Governance (CONNEX) (Ed.))</field>
      <field key="204" subkey="b">(New Modes of Governance (NewGov) (Ed.))</field>
      <field key="331" subkey="">New Modes of Governance and the Participatory Myth</field>
      <field key="335" subkey="">EUROGOV is funded by the EU's 6th Framework Programme, Priority 7</field>
      <field key="403" subkey="">1. Ed.</field>
      <field key="425" subkey="">2006, March</field>
      <field key="433" subkey="">23 pp.</field>
      <field key="451" subkey="">European Governance Papers; No. N-06-01</field>
      <field key="451" subkey="h">Fossum, John Erik (Ed.) ; Falkner, Gerda (Ed.) ; Scherhaufer, Patrick (Ed.) ; et al.</field>
      <field key="461" subkey="">EUROGOV</field>
      <field key="517" subkey="c">from the Table of Contents: Old and new governance; Participation under the Community Method; Participation in the new modes of</field>
      <field key="gov" subkey="e">rnance: The Bilbao Agency; The European  social dialogue; Comitology; Implementation and control; The Open Method of</field>
      <field key="Coo" subkey="r">dination; Conclusion; List of References; Annex on interviews;</field>
      <field key="542" subkey="">1813-6826</field>
      <field key="544" subkey="">EP8</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Civil society</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Governance</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Interest representation</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Legitimacy</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Open coordination</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Comitology</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Expert committees</field>
      <field key="753" subkey="">Abstract: One of the most common arguments about 'new governance' is that it is characterised by heterarchy rather than by</field>
      <field key="hie" subkey="r">archy, creating horizontal modes of governance among a multitude of actors ? public and private ?involving all relevant</field>
      <field key="sta" subkey="k">eholders. Often implicitly, but sometimes explicitly, this argument is linked with a normative democratic claim that praises</field>
      <field key="the" subkey="">particular participatory features of 'new governance' as compared to 'old governance'. Using as a case study Community</field>
      <field key="occ" subkey="u">pational health and safety policy, characterised by a clear shift from 'old' to 'new governance' since the 1990s, this paper</field>
      <field key="war" subkey="n">s us that one should be very cautious in making normative claims on new governance. More horizontal and</field>
      <field key="het" subkey="e">rarchicalgovernance does not mean automatically more participatory governance in normative democratic terms.;</field>
    </SEQUENTIAL>
  </section>