Democracy Today.indb - Universidade do Minho

often used to indicate a new mode of governing that is distinct from the
hierarchical control model, a more cooperative mode where state and
non-state actors participate in mixed public/private networks” (Ibid.).
Figure 1
40
DEMOCRACY TODAY
Whereas ‘government’ supposes a differentiation between the three
societal spheres, in ‘governance’ the state incorporates market- and
society-actors. This is the case insofar as private actors regulate “publicly
relevant issues” or whenever “state policy depends [on their cooperation]
without being able to mandate and sanction such cooperation” (Ibid.,
552). We will not understand this ‘blurring of borders’ as the prediction of
the end of demonstrable societal spheres. Overlaps between the different
societal spheres have always existed, but today these border zones, where
the different societal spheres overlap, are becoming ever more crucial
in political decision-making. This implies a holistic restructuring of the
complex of state, society and market. The question of how we should read
this restructuring can be answered in two possible ways. Some see it as
an extension of the state, some as a substitution of the state (Offe 2009,
555). I will focus here on the first meaning, which states that the state is
looking beyond its ‘borders’ in search of helping hands.
The catchphrase of this doctrine is that the state should limit itself to
steering and leave the rowing to other actors. One could also speak of
auxiliary forces within civil society who, through appropriate means and
according to their specific competences and resources are being recruited
for cooperation in the fulfillment of public tasks, become subject to regulatory
oversight and economic incentives, and are thus licensed to privately
exercise (previously exclusively) public functions (Ibid.).