@misc{Liese2022,
  author    = {Liese, Andrea},
  title     = {Rezension zu: The power of global performance indicators / Hrsg.: Judith G. Kelley ; Beth A. Simmons. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020. - 450 p.},
  series = {Perspectives on politics / American Political Science Association},
  volume    = {20},
  journal   = {Perspectives on politics / American Political Science Association},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press},
  address   = {Cambridge},
  isbn      = {978-1-108-48720-7},
  issn      = {1537-5927},
  doi       = {10.1017/S1537592721003716},
  pages     = {380 -- 382},
  year      = {2022},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HolzscheiterGholiaghaLiese2022,
  author    = {Holzscheiter, Anna and Gholiagha, Sassan and Liese, Andrea},
  title     = {Advocacy coalition constellations and norm collisions},
  series = {Global society : journal of interdisciplinary international relations},
  volume    = {36},
  journal   = {Global society : journal of interdisciplinary international relations},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Taylor \& Francis},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {1360-0826},
  doi       = {10.1080/13600826.2021.1885352},
  pages     = {25 -- 48},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {To date, there has been little research on how advocacy coalitions influence the dynamic relationships between norms. Addressing norm collisions as a particular type of norm dynamics, we ask if and how advocacy coalitions and the constellations between them bring such norm collisions to the fore. Norm collisions surface in situations in which actors claim that two or more norms are incompatible with each other, promoting different, even opposing, behavioural choices. We examine the effect of advocacy coalition constellations (ACC) on the activation and varying evolution of norm collisions in three issue areas: international drug control, human trafficking, and child labour. These areas have a legally codified prohibitive regime in common. At the same time, they differ with regard to the specific ACC present. Exploiting this variation, we generate insights into how power asymmetries and other characteristics of ACC affect norm collisions across our three issue areas.},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{LieseHeinzel2022,
  author    = {Liese, Andrea and Heinzel, Mirko Noa},
  title     = {Reputation and influence},
  series = {International public administrations in global public policy},
  booktitle = {International public administrations in global public policy},
  editor    = {Knill, Christoph and Steinebach, Yves},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {London},
  isbn      = {978-1-032-34673-1},
  doi       = {10.4324/9781003323297-5},
  pages     = {52 -- 81},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {International public administrations (IPAs) are collective bodies within international organizations (IOs) made up of international civil servants that support the intergovernmental bodies and member states. Over the last decade, research on these bodies has "gained substantial momentum". Comparative assessments of IPAs reputation among stakeholders are rare. The literature on the sociological legitimacy of IOs is most advanced in this respect. A comparative agenda on IPAs reputation for expertise or neutrality is still in its infancy. Research has shown that different stakeholders view the same IPA quite differently. Reputation is a crucial concept in political science and IR research and has been widely used to predict states' future behavior, notably regarding cooperation and conflict. IPAs seem to vary substantially in their reputation for expertise among critical interlocutors. In financial policy, several prominent IPAs are seen as experts, including the European Central Bank and the IMF.},
  language  = {en}
}