@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} } @misc{GieblerRuthTanneberg2018, author = {Giebler, Heiko and Ruth, Saskia P. and Tanneberg, Dag}, title = {Why choice matters}, series = {Politics and Governance}, volume = {6}, journal = {Politics and Governance}, number = {1}, publisher = {Cogitatio Press}, address = {Lisbon}, issn = {2183-2463}, doi = {10.17645/pag.v6i1.1428}, pages = {1 -- 10}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Measures of democracy are in high demand. Scientific and public audiences use them to describe political realities and to substantiate causal claims about those realities. This introduction to the thematic issue reviews the history of democracy measurement since the 1950s. It identifies four development phases of the field, which are characterized by three recurrent topics of debate: (1) what is democracy, (2) what is a good measure of democracy, and (3) do our measurements of democracy register real-world developments? As the answers to those questions have been changing over time, the field of democracy measurement has adapted and reached higher levels of theoretical and methodological sophistication. In effect, the challenges facing contemporary social scientists are not only limited to the challenge of constructing a sound index of democracy. Today, they also need a profound understanding of the differences between various measures of democracy and their implications for empirical applications. The introduction outlines how the contributions to this thematic issue help scholars cope with the recurrent issues of conceptualization, measurement, and application, and concludes by identifying avenues for future research.}, language = {en} } @misc{SchmidtWellenburgLebaron2018, author = {Schmidt-Wellenburg, Christian and Lebaron, Frederic}, title = {There is no such thing as "the Economy"}, series = {Historical Social Research}, volume = {43}, journal = {Historical Social Research}, number = {3}, publisher = {GESIS, Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences}, address = {Cologne}, issn = {0172-6404}, doi = {10.12759/hsr.43.2018.3.7-38}, pages = {7 -- 38}, year = {2018}, abstract = {This introductory essay to the HSR Special Issue "Economists, Politics, and Society" argues for a strong field-theoretical programme inspired by Pierre Bourdieu to research economic life as an integral part of different social forms. Its main aim is threefold. First, we spell out the very distinct Durkheimian legacy in Bourdieu's thinking and the way he applies it in researching economic phenomena. Without this background, much of what is actually part of how Bourdieu analysed economic aspects of social life would be overlooked or reduced to mere economic sociology. Second, we sketch the main theoretical concepts and heuristics used to analyse economic life from a field perspective. Third, we focus on practical methodological issues of field-analytical research into economic phenomena. We conclude with a short summary of the basic characteristics of this approach and discuss the main insights provided by the contributions to this special issue.}, language = {en} } @misc{TurnerContrerasVejar2019, author = {Turner, Bryan S. and Contreras-Vejar, Yuri}, title = {Introduction}, series = {Regimes of happiness : comparative and historical studies}, journal = {Regimes of happiness : comparative and historical studies}, publisher = {Anthem Press}, address = {London}, isbn = {978-1-78308-886-7}, pages = {1 -- 8}, year = {2019}, abstract = {This book started as a conversation about successful societies and human development. It was originally based on a simple idea— it would be unusual if, in a society that might be reasonably deemed as successful, its citizens were deeply unhappy. This combination— successful societies and happy citizens— raised immediate and obvious problems. How might one define "success" when dealing, for example, with a society as large and as complex as the United States? We ran into equally major problems when trying to understand "happiness." Yet one constantly hears political analysts talking about the success or failure of various democratic institutions. In ordinary conversations one constantly hears people talking about being happy or unhappy. In the everyday world, conversations about living in a successful society or about being happy do not appear to cause bewilderment or confusion. "Ordinary people" do not appear to find questions like— is your school successful or are you happily married?— meaningless or absurd. Yet, in the social sciences, both "successful societies" and "happy lives" are seen to be troublesome. As our research into happiness and success unfolded, the conundrums we discussed were threefold: societal conditions, measurements and concepts. What are the key social factors that are indispensable for the social and political stability of any given society? Is it possible to develop precise measures of social success that would give us reliable data? There are a range of economic indicators that might be associated with success, such as labor productivity, economic growth rates, low inflation and a robust GDP. Are there equally reliable political and social measures of a successful society and human happiness? For example, rule of law and the absence of large- scale corruption might be relevant to the assessment of societal happiness. These questions about success led us inexorably to what seems to be a futile notion: happiness. Economic variables such as income or psychological measures of well- being in terms of mental health could be easily analyzed; however, happiness is a dimension that has been elusive to the social sciences. In our unfolding conversation, there was also another stream of thought, namely that the social sciences appeared to be more open to the study of human unhappiness rather than happiness.}, language = {en} } @misc{GroteWagemann2019, author = {Grote, J{\"u}rgen R. and Wagemann, Claudius}, title = {Preface}, series = {Social Movements and Organized Labour. Passions and Interests}, journal = {Social Movements and Organized Labour. Passions and Interests}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {Abingdon}, isbn = {978-1-315-60955-3}, pages = {X -- XII}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @misc{Schenck2020, author = {Schenck, Marcia C.}, title = {Africa's forgotten refugee convention Africa is a Country}, series = {Histories of Refuge - Geschichten der Zuflucht}, journal = {Histories of Refuge - Geschichten der Zuflucht}, publisher = {Forum Transregionale Studien eV}, address = {Berlin}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @misc{Schenck2020, author = {Schenck, Marcia C.}, title = {History without borders}, series = {African Refugees Crossroads}, journal = {African Refugees Crossroads}, publisher = {H-Net: Humanities \& Social Sciences Online}, address = {East Lansing}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @misc{HlepasKerstingKuhlmannetal.2018, author = {Hlepas, Nikos and Kersting, Norbert and Kuhlmann, Sabine and Swianiewicz, Pawel and Teles, Filipe}, title = {Introduction: Decentralization beyond the municipal tier}, series = {Sub-Municipal Governance in Europe}, journal = {Sub-Municipal Governance in Europe}, publisher = {Palgrave}, address = {Basingstoke}, isbn = {978-3-319-64725-8}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-64725-8_1}, pages = {1 -- 24}, year = {2018}, abstract = {In Europe, different countries developed a rich variety of sub-municipal institutions. Out of the plethora of intra- and sub-municipal decentralization forms (reaching from local outposts of city administration to "quasi-federal" structures), this book focuses on territorial sub-municipal units (SMUs) which combine multipurpose territorial responsibility with democratic legitimacy and can be seen as institutions promoting the articulation and realization of collective choices at a sub-municipal level. Country chapters follow a common pattern that is facilitating systematic comparisons, while at the same time leaving enough space for national peculiarities and priorities chosen and highlighted by the authors, who also take advantage of the eventually existing empirical surveys and case studies.}, language = {en} } @misc{Buerkner2020, author = {B{\"u}rkner, Hans-Joachim}, title = {Europeanisation versus Euroscepticism}, series = {Geopolitics}, volume = {25}, journal = {Geopolitics}, number = {3}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Philadelphia, Pa. [u.a]}, issn = {1465-0045}, doi = {10.1080/14650045.2020.1723964}, pages = {545 -- 566}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Several overlapping crises which affected the EU during the past ten years have recently aggravated. Especially the progressing refugee crisis, the persisting financial crisis and geopolitical turmoil in the EU's neighbourhood contributed to the rise of anti-EU movements and diverse articulations of Euroscepticism. Although public opinion and mainstream political analysis have easily identified right-wing populism as one of the most important drivers, it is still doubtful if it can be equated with Euroscepticism without further ado. To date it is by no means clear how and where Euroscepticism exactly originates.}, language = {en} }