@article{Ulrich2023,
  author    = {Ulrich, Peter},
  title     = {Lokale Partizipation von Digitalen Pionieren in l{\"a}ndlicher Governance},
  series = {KWI-Schriften},
  journal   = {KWI-Schriften},
  number    = {14},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-571-2},
  issn      = {1867-951X},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-63117},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-631178},
  pages     = {85 -- 97},
  year      = {2023},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{Otto2023,
  author    = {Otto, Magdalena},
  title     = {Der Beteiligungsimperativ},
  series = {Theorie und Praxis der Diskursforschung},
  journal   = {Theorie und Praxis der Diskursforschung},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Wiesbaden},
  isbn      = {978-3-65843066-5},
  issn      = {2626-2886},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-658-43067-2},
  pages     = {XIII, 220},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {Sp{\"a}testens seit den 1990-er Jahren erscheint der Begriff Beteiligung in diversen gesellschaftlichen Bereichen als allgemein anerkannter Imperativ, der von unterschiedlichen Akteur*innen als Allheilmittel angepriesen wird. Doch wenn Beteiligung proklamiert wird, bedeutet das mitnichten eine Garantie f{\"u}r gesellschaftliche Teilhabe. Mit Hilfe einer dispositivanalytischen Untersuchung von top-down Beteiligungsmaßnahmen in der Berliner Quartiersentwicklung zeigt Magdalena Otto, wie der Begriff Beteiligung verschiedenartig anschlussf{\"a}hig ist und dadurch eine kaum hinterfragte Legitimationskraft ausstrahlt. Im Zentrum der hier entwickelten Theorie {\"u}ber den Beteiligungsimperativ steht die Rekonstruktion von vier idealtypisch zu verstehenden Deutungsmustern zur Legitimation von Beteiligungsmaßnahmen sowie ihre intendierten und unbeabsichtigten Folgen. Der konstatierte Beteiligungsimperativ zeigt sich dabei als eine auf Aktivierung setzende, neoliberale Gouvernementalit{\"a}t in Reaktion auf st{\"a}dtische Segregations- und Marginalisierungsprozesse, die Krise des Kommunalstaats und damit einhergehende ver{\"a}nderte Steuerungserfordernisse f{\"u}r Regierungshandeln.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{Brandenburger2022,
  author    = {Brandenburger, Bonny},
  title     = {A multidimensional and analytical perspective on Open Educational Practices in the 21st century},
  series = {Frontiers in education},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Frontiers in education},
  publisher = {Frontiers Media},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {2504-284X},
  doi       = {10.3389/feduc.2022.990675},
  pages     = {17},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Participatory approaches to teaching and learning are experiencing a new lease on life in the 21st century as a result of the rapid technology development. Knowledge, practices, and tools can be shared across spatial and temporal boundaries in higher education by means of Open Educational Resources, Massive Open Online Courses, and open-source technologies. In this context, the Open Education Movement calls for new didactic approaches that encourage greater learner participation in formal higher education. Based on a representative literature review and focus group research, in this study an analytical framework was developed that enables researchers and practitioners to assess the form of participation in formal, collaborative teaching and learning practices. The analytical framework is focused on the micro-level of higher education, in particular on the interaction between students and lecturers when organizing the curriculum. For this purpose, the research reflects anew on the concept of participation, taking into account existing stage models for participation in the educational context. These are then brought together with the dimensions of teaching and learning processes, such as methods, objectives and content, etc. This paper aims to make a valuable contribution to the opening up of learning and teaching, and expands the discourse around possibilities for interpreting Open Educational Practices.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HanKuhlicke2019,
  author    = {Han, Sungju and Kuhlicke, Christian},
  title     = {Reducing Hydro-Meteorological Risk by Nature-Based Solutions: What Do We},
  series = {Water},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Water},
  number    = {12},
  publisher = {MDPI},
  address   = {Basel},
  issn      = {2073-4441},
  doi       = {10.3390/w11122599},
  pages     = {23},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Nature-based solutions (NBS) have recently received attention due to their potential ability to sustainably reduce hydro-meteorological risks, providing co-benefits for both ecosystems and affected people. Therefore, pioneering research has dedicated efforts to optimize the design of NBS, to evaluate their wider co-benefits and to understand promoting and/or hampering governance conditions for the uptake of NBS. In this article, we aim to complement this research by conducting a comprehensive literature review of factors shaping people's perceptions of NBS as a means to reduce hydro-meteorological risks. Based on 102 studies, we identified six topics shaping the current discussion in this field of research: (1) valuation of the co-benefits (including those related to ecosystems and society); (2) evaluation of risk reduction efficacy; (3) stakeholder participation; (4) socio-economic and location-specific conditions; (5) environmental attitude, and (6) uncertainty. Our analysis reveals that concerned empirical insights are diverse and even contradictory, they vary in the depth of the insights generated and are often not comparable for a lack of a sound theoretical-methodological grounding. We, therefore, propose a conceptual model outlining avenues for future research by indicating potential inter-linkages between constructs underlying perceptions of NBS to hydro-meteorological risks.},
  language  = {en}
}