What is multi-level governance in simple terms?

Important policies are made not by central government alone but jointly across levels by international bodies, states, local governments and private actors.

What is the difference between Type I and Type II?

Type I is a clearly layered structure of general governments like federalism; Type II is a flexible web of overlapping task-specific bodies.

Multi-Level Governance

🏛️ Politics & Public Administration By CampusDown Wiki Editorial Team Last updated October 27, 2026 Views 6

Multi-level governance is the theory that policy authority does not rest with central government alone but is dispersed and intertwined across supranational bodies, states, regions, local governments and non-state actors. Gary Marks first proposed it in the early 1990s while analyzing EU regional policy, and developed it with Liesbet Hooghe. It emerged as an alternative to state-centric theories of integration.

Contents

1. Origins
2. Two types
3. Extensions and critiques
4. FAQ
5. References

Origins

Intergovernmentalism held that member state governments control the pace and scope of European integration. But in the early 1990s Marks found that in EU structural funds policy, the European Commission worked directly with subnational governments, bypassing central governments. Marks, Hooghe and Blank (1996) contrasted a state-centric model with a 'multi-level governance' model in which decision-making is shared across levels, subnational actors act directly in supranational arenas, and states lose their monopoly over information and agendas.

Two types

Hooghe and Marks (2003) distinguished two types. Type I consists of a limited number of general-purpose jurisdictions with non-overlapping territories arranged in levels, as in federalism. Type II consists of many task-specific bodies with overlapping, flexible jurisdictions, echoing the polycentric governance theory of Ostrom, Tiebout and Warren (1961). The distinction is also used in debates on fiscal federalism and public goods provision.

Extensions and critiques

Since Bache and Flinders (2004), multi-level governance has been extended to climate, urban and international organization research. Piattoni (2010) noted that the concept is so broad that its explanatory power weakens and that dispersed responsibility blurs democratic accountability. Hooghe and Marks (2009) later extended the debate with a postfunctionalist theory in which identity politics constrains integration. With international regime theory, the theory helps explain governance beyond the state.

FAQ

What is multi-level governance in simple terms?: Important policies are made not by central government alone but jointly across levels by international bodies, states, local governments and private actors.
What is the difference between Type I and Type II?: Type I is a clearly layered structure of general governments like federalism; Type II is a flexible web of overlapping task-specific bodies.

Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26

References

Marks, G., Hooghe, L., & Blank, K. (1996). European integration from the 1980s: State-centric v. multi-level governance. Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(3), 341–378. State-centric vs multi-level.
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2001). Multi-level governance and European integration. Rowman & Littlefield. The book-length statement.
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243. Type I and Type II.
Ostrom, V., Tiebout, C. M., & Warren, R. (1961). The organization of government in metropolitan areas: A theoretical inquiry. American Political Science Review, 55(4), 831–842. Polycentric roots.
Bache, I., & Flinders, M. (Eds.). (2004). Multi-level governance. Oxford University Press. Applications across fields.
Piattoni, S. (2010). The theory of multi-level governance: Conceptual, empirical, and normative challenges. Oxford University Press. Conceptual and normative challenges.
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2009). A postfunctionalist theory of European integration: From permissive consensus to constraining dissensus. British Journal of Political Science, 39(1), 1–23. Postfunctionalist follow-up.

Reports and materials that use this theory (Korean)

There are no materials dedicated to this theory yet, but you can search related reports in the CampusDown library (Korean).

Find more reports · Search '다층 거버넌스' on CampusDown →

FederalismWhat is federalism? A clear definition, the constitutional basis, real examples, key cases like McCulloch and Lopez, the criticisms, and how Korea compares.⚖️ Law Fiscal FederalismWhat fiscal federalism is: how revenue and spending functions should be divided between central and local governments. Covers the decentralization theorem and first- and second-generation theories.📈 Economics International Regime TheoryWhat international regime theory is: how principles and rules in issue areas sustain cooperation among states. Covers Krasner's definition, regime formation and change, Keohane's neoliberal institutionalism, three schools of thought and critiques.🏛️ Politics & Public Administration Policy DiffusionWhat policy diffusion is: one government's adoption of a policy shapes others' adoption, so policies spread. Covers origins, methods and the mechanisms of diffusion.🏛️ Politics & Public Administration

Latest ArticlesView all ›

New guides for college study and assignments (Korean)

This article was last updated on October 27, 2026. It is based on widely recognized original works and textbooks; when citing it in a paper, please check the original sources listed in the references.