Abstrakt: | The foregoing deliberations lead to several possible conclusions. First of all, it should
be noted that public goods have long been an element of the economic analysis of politics
at a national level (Connolly, Munro, 1999: p. 36). However, the globalisation process
was the reason why many issues once confined to domestic politics have been moved
to a level where these issues have a global impact and reference. As a result, one can accept
that part of the assumptions concerning national conception of public goods provision
currently has a purely historical quality. In view of the arisen doubt towards the
adequacy of the appointed concept, a problem appears in relation to the provision of
regional and global public goods. A particular role in this area is ascribed to networks,
which can not only assist co-ordination and co-operation in the area of global public
good production, but also help in understanding and expressing preferences and guarantee
a fair form of division. It is worth noting that the network is characterised by flexibility,
the ability to self-organise, and by an orientation focused on unveiling problems.
It is fully given by W. Reinicke, who emphasises that “networks relate to supranational
issues, which cannot be solved by any other group” (Reinicke, 2000: p. 24). As a final
word, the role of global administrative law should be indicated, which for the time being
does not concentrate on norms of substantive law, but on the usage of principles,
process regulations, rules of inspection and other mechanisms related to responsibility,
lucidity and the assurance of lawfulness in global administration. |