@article{FitziMarcucci2017, author = {Fitzi, Gregor and Marcucci, Nicola}, title = {Durkheim in Germany}, series = {Journal of Classical Sociology}, volume = {17}, journal = {Journal of Classical Sociology}, number = {4}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {1468-795X}, doi = {10.1177/1468795X17735991}, pages = {271 -- 275}, year = {2017}, language = {en} } @article{Fitzi2017, author = {Fitzi, Gregor}, title = {Dialogue. Divergence. Veiled Reception. Criticism: Georg Simmel's relationship with Emile Durkheim}, series = {Journal of Classical Sociology}, volume = {17}, journal = {Journal of Classical Sociology}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {1468-795X}, doi = {10.1177/1468795X17735994}, pages = {293 -- 308}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Simmel was the only German sociologist who directly cooperated with Durkheim. After an initial impression of convergence between the sociology of social facts and the sociology of social forms, a break between the two founders of sociology became inevitable. Yet, Durkheim and Simmel went on positioning themselves against one other in the years ahead. Durkheim's allegation of 'individual psychologism' induced Simmel to a veiled reception of Durkheim's methodological approach that permitted him to refine the sociological epistemology he eventually presented in the Soziologie published in 1908. On this basis, he was able to formulate a final criticism of the sociology of social facts as a social psychology.}, language = {en} } @misc{FitziJoasMarcucci2017, author = {Fitzi, Gregor and Joas, Hans and Marcucci, Nicola}, title = {Interview by Gregor Fitzi and Nicola Marcucci with Hans Joas on the reception of Emile Durkheim in Germany. Berlin: Humboldt University of Berlin, 6 October 2014}, series = {Journal of Classical Sociology}, volume = {17}, journal = {Journal of Classical Sociology}, number = {4}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {1468-795X}, doi = {10.1177/1468795X17736131}, pages = {382 -- 398}, year = {2017}, abstract = {The interview offers a reconstruction of the German reception of Durkheim since the middle of the 1970s. Hans Joas, who was one of its major protagonists, discusses the backdrop that finally permitted a scholarly examination of Durkheim's sociology in Germany. Focussing on his personal reception Joas then gives an account of the Durkheimian themes that inspire his work.}, language = {en} } @misc{FitziMarcucciMueller2017, author = {Fitzi, Gregor and Marcucci, Nicola and M{\"u}ller, Hans-Peter}, title = {Interview by Gregor Fitzi and Nicola Marcucci with Hans-Peter M{\"u}ller on the reception of Emile Durkheim in Germany. Berlin: Humboldt University of Berlin, 25 February 2015}, series = {Journal of Classical Sociology}, volume = {17}, journal = {Journal of Classical Sociology}, number = {4}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {1468-795X}, doi = {10.1177/1468795X17736132}, pages = {399 -- 422}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Just after the publication of the Theory of Communicative Action in 1981, a new generation of interpreters started a different reception of Durkheim in Germany. Hans-Peter M{\"u}ller, sociologist and editor of the German translation of Le{\c{c}}ons de sociologie, reconstructs the history of the German Durkheim's Reception and illuminates the reasons for his interest in the French sociologist. He delivers different insights into the background which permitted the post-Habermasian generation to reach a new understanding of Durkheim's work by enlightening the scientific and political conditions from which this new sensibility emerged.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Reiners2017, author = {Reiners, Nina}, title = {Transnational lawmaking coalitions for human rights}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {221, VI}, year = {2017}, language = {en} } @article{Hickmann2017, author = {Hickmann, Thomas}, title = {Voluntary global business initiatives and the international climate negotiations}, series = {Journal of Cleaner Production}, volume = {169}, journal = {Journal of Cleaner Production}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0959-6526}, doi = {10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.183}, pages = {94 -- 104}, year = {2017}, abstract = {The past few years have witnessed the emergence of a plethora of transnational climate governance experiments. They have been developed by a broad range of actors, such as cities, non-profit organizations, and private corporations. Several scholars have lately devoted particular attention to voluntary global business initiatives in the policy domain of climate change. Their studies have provided considerable insights into the role and function of such new modes of climate governance. However, the precise nature of the relationship between the various climate governance experiments and the international climate negotiations has not been analyzed in enough detail. Against this backdrop, the present article explores the interplay of a business sector climate governance experiment, i.e. the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol) with the international climate regime. On the one hand, the article underscores that the GHG Protocol has filled a regulatory gap in global climate policy-making by providing the means for the corporate sector to comprehensively account and report their GHGs. On the other hand, it reveals that the application of the GHG Protocol guidelines depends to a large extent on the existence of an overarching policy framework set up by nation-states at the intergovernmental level. Only if private companies receive a clear political signal that stringent mandatory GHG emission controls and a global market-based instrument are at least likely to be adopted will they put substantial efforts into the accurate measurement and management of their GHGs. Thus, this article points to the limits of climate governance experimentation and suggests that business sector climate governance experiments need to be embedded in a coherent international regulatory setting which generates a clear stimulus for corporate action.}, language = {en} } @article{Hickmann2017, author = {Hickmann, Thomas}, title = {The reconfiguration of authority in global climate governance}, series = {International Studies Review}, volume = {19}, journal = {International Studies Review}, publisher = {Oxford Univ. Press}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {1521-9488}, doi = {10.1093/isr/vix037}, pages = {430 -- 451}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Much of the literature in the field of international relations is currently concerned with the changing patterns of authority in world politics. This is particularly evident in the policy domain of climate change, where a number of authors have observed a relocation of authority in global climate governance. These scholars claim that multilateral treaty making has lost much of its spark, and they emphasize the emergence of transnational governance arrangements, such as city networks, private certification schemes, and business self-regulation. However, the different types of interactions between the various transnational climate initiatives and the intergovernmental level have not been studied in much detail and only recently attracted growing scholarly interest. Therefore, the present article addresses this issue and focuses on the interplay between three different transnational climate governance arrangements and the international climate regime. The analysis in this article underscores that substate and nonstate actors have attained several authoritative functions in global climate policy making. Nevertheless, the three case studies also demonstrate that this development does not imply that we are witnessing a general shift of authority away from the intergovernmental level toward transnational actors. Instead, what can be observed in global climate governance is an ongoing reconfiguration of authority, which apparently reaffirms the centrality of the international climate regime. Thus, this article points to the need for a more nuanced perspective on the changing patterns of authority in global climate governance. In a nutshell, this study shows that the international climate regime is not the only location where the problem of climate change is addressed, while it highlights the persistent authority of state-based forms of regulation.}, language = {en} } @article{DavydchykMehlhausenPriesmeyerTkocz2017, author = {Davydchyk, Maria and Mehlhausen, Thomas and Priesmeyer-Tkocz, Weronika}, title = {The price of success, the benefit of setbacks}, series = {Futures : the journal of policy, planning and futures studies}, volume = {97}, journal = {Futures : the journal of policy, planning and futures studies}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0016-3287}, doi = {10.1016/j.futures.2017.06.004}, pages = {35 -- 46}, year = {2017}, abstract = {This article explores the various futures of relations between the European Union (EU) and Ukraine. After distilling two major drivers we construct a future compass in order to conceive of four futures of relations between the EU and Ukraine. Our scenarios aim to challenge deep-rooted assumptions on the EU's neighbourhood with Ukraine: How will the politico-economic challenges in the European countries influence the EU's approach towards the East? Will more EU engagement in Ukraine contribute to enduring peace? Does peace always come with stability? Which prospects does the idea of Intermarium have? Are the pivotal transformation players in Ukraine indeed oligarchs or rather small- and medium-sized entrepreneurs? After presenting our scenarios, we propose indicators to know in the years to come, along which path future relations do develop. By unearthing surprising developments we hope to provoke innovative thoughts on Eastern Europe in times of post truth societies, confrontation between states and hybrid warfare.}, language = {en} } @article{MeerReichardRingeling2017, author = {Meer, Frans-Bauke van der and Reichard, Christoph and Ringeling, Arthur}, title = {Becoming a Student of Reform}, series = {Theory and practice of public sector reform}, volume = {27}, journal = {Theory and practice of public sector reform}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {New York}, isbn = {978-1-315-71414-1}, pages = {265 -- 283}, year = {2017}, language = {en} } @misc{NeubauerWankoSchaubetal.2017, author = {Neubauer, Kai and Wanko, Philipp and Schaub, Torsten H. and Haubelt, Christian}, title = {Enhancing symbolic system synthesis through ASPmT with partial assignment evaluation}, series = {Proceedings of the Design, Automation \& Test in Europe Conference \& Exhibition (DATE), 2017}, journal = {Proceedings of the Design, Automation \& Test in Europe Conference \& Exhibition (DATE), 2017}, publisher = {IEEE}, address = {New York}, isbn = {978-3-9815370-9-3}, issn = {1530-1591}, doi = {10.23919/DATE.2017.7927005}, pages = {306 -- 309}, year = {2017}, abstract = {The design of embedded systems is becoming continuously more complex such that efficient system-level design methods are becoming crucial. Recently, combined Answer Set Programming (ASP) and Quantifier Free Integer Difference Logic (QF-IDL) solving has been shown to be a promising approach in system synthesis. However, this approach still has several restrictions limiting its applicability. In the paper at hand, we propose a novel ASP modulo Theories (ASPmT) system synthesis approach, which (i) supports more sophisticated system models, (ii) tightly integrates the QF-IDL solving into the ASP solving, and (iii) makes use of partial assignment checking. As a result, more realistic systems are considered and an early exclusion of infeasible solutions improves the entire system synthesis.}, language = {en} }