@article{KuhlmannSeyfried2020, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Comparatice methods B}, series = {Handbook of research methods in public administration, management and policy}, journal = {Handbook of research methods in public administration, management and policy}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing}, address = {Cheltenham}, isbn = {978-1-78990-347-8}, pages = {181 -- 196}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @article{KuhlmannBogumil2018, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Bogumil, J{\"o}rg}, title = {Performance measurement and benchmarking as "reflexive institutions" for local governments}, series = {International journal of public sector management}, volume = {31}, journal = {International journal of public sector management}, number = {4}, publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}, address = {Bingley}, issn = {0951-3558}, doi = {10.1108/IJPSM-01-2017-0004}, pages = {543 -- 562}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss different approaches of performance measurement and benchmarking as reflexive institutions for local governments in England, Germany and Sweden from a comparative perspective. Design/methodology/approach These three countries have been selected because they represent typical (most different) cases of European local government systems and reforms. The existing theories on institutional reflexivity point to the potential contribution of benchmarking to public sector innovation and organizational learning. Based on survey findings, in-depth case studies, interviews and document analyses in these three countries, the paper addresses the major research question as to what extent and why benchmarking regimes vary across countries. It derives hypotheses about the impacts of benchmarking on institutional learning and innovation. Findings The outcomes suggest that the combination of three key features of benchmarking, namely - obligation, sanctions and benchmarking authority - in conjunction with country-specific administrative context conditions and local actor constellations - influences the impact of benchmarking as a reflexive institution. Originality/value It is shown in the paper that compulsory benchmarking on its own does not lead to reflexivity and learning, but that there is a need for autonomy and leeway for local actors to cope with benchmarking results. These findings are relevant because policy makers must decide upon the specific governance mix of benchmarking exercises taking their national and local contexts into account if they want them to promote institutional learning and innovation.}, language = {en} } @incollection{KuhlmannMarienfeldt2023, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Marienfeldt, Justine}, title = {Comparing local government systems and reforms in Europe}, series = {Handbook on local and regional governance}, booktitle = {Handbook on local and regional governance}, editor = {Teles, Filipe}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing}, address = {Cheltenham, UK}, isbn = {978-1-80037-119-4}, doi = {10.4337/9781800371200.00033}, pages = {313 -- 329}, year = {2023}, abstract = {The study of subnational and local government systems and reforms has become an increasingly salient topic in comparative public administration. In many European countries, policy implementation, the execution of public tasks and the delivery of services to citizens are largely carried out by local governments, which, at the same time, have been subjected to multiple reforms and sometimes comprehensive institutional re-organizations. This chapter discusses analytical key concepts and outcomes of the comparative study of local governments and local government reforms. It outlines frameworks and analytical tools to capture the variety of institutional settings and developments at the local level of government. It provides an introduction into crucial comparative dimensions, such as functional, territorial and political profiles of local governments, and analyses current reform approaches and outcomes based on recent empirical findings. Finally, the chapter addresses salient issues to be taken up in future comparative studies about local government.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Rieck2023, author = {Rieck, Christian E.}, title = {Region ohne Richtung}, series = {Zwischen Moskau, Peking und Washington: Lateinamerika in der Großmachtkonkurrenz}, booktitle = {Zwischen Moskau, Peking und Washington: Lateinamerika in der Großmachtkonkurrenz}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Baden-Baden}, isbn = {978-3-7560-0033-3}, doi = {10.5771/9783748936121}, pages = {121 -- 130}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Welche Auswirkungen wird die aufziehende Großm{\"a}chtekonkurrenz also auf die regionale Sicherheitsordnung haben? Der Beitrag n{\"a}hert sich dieser Frage {\"u}ber die regionalen Bedingungsfaktoren, die den Rahmen f{\"u}r jegliche Ingerenz extraregionaler M{\"a}chte bilden: Die regionalen Sicherheitskomplexe in Lateinamerika und der Karibik, einschließlich der Regionalorganisationen und Regionalm{\"a}chte, sowie der Einflusssph{\"a}ren und Anreizsysteme der Großm{\"a}chte. Am Ende wagt der Beitrag einen Ausblick auf die Entwicklung der lateinamerikanischen Sicherheitspolitik im Angesicht der Geopolitik der Großm{\"a}chte. Die hier vorgestellte Kernthese wagt ein strukturelles und deshalb wenig alarmistisches Argument: Die Großm{\"a}chtekonkurrenz wird die bestehende Fragmentierung der regionalen Sicherheitsordnung weiter vertiefen, doch wird die Region gleichzeitig nicht substanziell an Agency gegen{\"u}ber den Großm{\"a}chten verlieren. Der Schl{\"u}ssel hierzu ist die außenpolitische Maxime der „gebundenen {\"A}quidistanz", die Dependenzen diversifiziert und damit nicht als Widerspruch, sondern als Positivsummenspiel versteht.}, language = {de} } @article{Juchler2020, author = {Juchler, Ingo}, title = {1960er: Aufwind f{\"u}r die Politische Bildung}, series = {Geschichte der politischen Bildung}, journal = {Geschichte der politischen Bildung}, publisher = {Bundesausschuss Politische Bildung (bap) e.V.}, address = {Bonn}, pages = {7}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Zur Jahreswende 1959/60 sorgten Hakenkreuzschmierereien an j{\"u}dischen Einrichtungen in K{\"o}ln und anderswo f{\"u}r Entsetzen und Emp{\"o}rung. Diese Vorkommnisse machten bewusst, was im Verlauf der 1960er Jahre zu einem Politikum f{\"u}r die j{\"u}ngere Generation werden sollte: Die mangelnde Aufarbeitung der nationalsozialistischen Vergangenheit. Diese Thematik sowie der von den USA in Vietnam gef{\"u}hrte Krieg stellten mobilisierende Faktoren f{\"u}r die Herausbildung einer außerparlamentarischen Opposition (APO) in der Bundesrepublik dar, die sich in der zweiten H{\"a}lfte der 1960er Jahre verbreitert. Prof. Ingo Juchler beschreibt den Weg der Politischen Bildung durch die 60er Jahre und die Entwicklung hin zur sog. „didaktischen Wende".}, language = {de} } @article{Juchler2020, author = {Juchler, Ingo}, title = {Zur Mensch-Tier-Beziehung in der politischen Bildung}, series = {Wie geht gute politische Bildung?}, journal = {Wie geht gute politische Bildung?}, publisher = {Bundesausschuss Politische Bildung (bap) e.V.}, address = {Bonn}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Eigentlich leben wir heute im Holoz{\"a}n, dem Erdzeitalter, das mit dem Ende der letzten großen Eiszeit vor etwa 12.000 Jahren seinen Ausgang nahm. Doch seit geraumer Zeit ist in Wissenschaft und {\"O}ffentlichkeit die Rede vom Anthropoz{\"a}n als der vom Menschen bestimmten gegenw{\"a}rtigen Epoche. Mit der Begriffssch{\"o}pfung soll der gravierende Einfluss des Menschen auf die Umwelt zum Ausdruck gebracht werden, der sich nicht zuletzt in der Versauerung der Meere, im Artensterben und Klimawandel {\"a}ußert. Doch wie spiegelt sich diese Erkenntnis in der Politischen Bildung wider?}, language = {de} } @article{Liese2020, author = {Liese, Andrea}, title = {Autorit{\"a}t in den internationalen Beziehungen}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r internationale Beziehungen}, volume = {27}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r internationale Beziehungen}, number = {1}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Baden-Baden}, issn = {0946-7165}, doi = {10.5771/0946-7165-2020-1-97}, pages = {97 -- 109}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Der Beitrag setzt sich w{\"u}rdigend und kritisch mit Michael Z{\"u}rns Arbeiten zur internationalen Autorit{\"a}t auseinander. Dessen potenziell autoritatives Autorit{\"a}tskonzept weist mehrere Vorz{\"u}ge auf: Erstens bietet es eine Erkl{\"a}rung f{\"u}r ein Paradox. Warum sollten souver{\"a}ne Staaten die Kompetenz Externer anerkennen, ihnen Ratschl{\"a}ge zu geben bzw. Forderungen an sie zu richten, und zudem noch bereit sein, diesen zu folgen? Zweitens konkretisiert es die u.a. bei Hannah Arendt angelegte Idee der fraglosen Anerkennung, indem es Autorit{\"a}tsadressaten zugesteht, bestimmte Qualit{\"a}ten der Autorit{\"a}t zu pr{\"u}fen. Drittens entkoppelt es Legitimit{\"a}t und Autorit{\"a}t, ohne die Legitimationsbed{\"u}rftigkeit von Autorit{\"a}t zu opfern. Dies anerkennend pl{\"a}diert der Beitrag aber daf{\"u}r, die Legitimationsbed{\"u}rftigkeit internationaler Autorit{\"a}t nicht auf formal institutionalisierte Beziehungen zu reduzieren, sondern diese auch weiterhin auf informellere, d.h. der Praxis entstammende, Anerkennung und Folgebereitschaft innerhalb von Autorit{\"a}tsbeziehungen zu beziehen. Die {\"u}berzeugende begr{\"u}ndungstheoretische Fundierung von Autorit{\"a}t sollte zudem nicht dazu verf{\"u}hren, Sozialisationsprozesse in Autorit{\"a}tsbeziehungen zu {\"u}bersehen, zumal deren Legitimit{\"a}t kritisch hinterfragbar ist.}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Elsaesser2023, author = {Els{\"a}sser, Joshua Philipp}, title = {United Nations beyond the state? Interactions of intergovernmental treaty secretariats in global environmental governance}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-62165}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-621651}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xi, 204}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Within the context of United Nations (UN) environmental institutions, it has become apparent that intergovernmental responses alone have been insufficient for dealing with pressing transboundary environmental problems. Diverging economic and political interests, as well as broader changes in power dynamics and norms within global (environmental) governance, have resulted in negotiation and implementation efforts by UN member states becoming stuck in institutional gridlock and inertia. These developments have sparked a renewed debate among scholars and practitioners about an imminent crisis of multilateralism, accompanied by calls for reforming UN environmental institutions. However, with the rise of transnational actors and institutions, states are not the only relevant actors in global environmental governance. In fact, the fragmented architectures of different policy domains are populated by a hybrid mix of state and non-state actors, as well as intergovernmental and transnational institutions. Therefore, coping with the complex challenges posed by severe and ecologically interdependent transboundary environmental problems requires global cooperation and careful management from actors beyond national governments. This thesis investigates the interactions of three intergovernmental UN treaty secretariats in global environmental governance. These are the secretariats of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. While previous research has acknowledged the increasing autonomy and influence of treaty secretariats in global policy-making, little attention has been paid to their strategic interactions with non-state actors, such as non-governmental organizations, civil society actors, businesses, and transnational institutions and networks, or their coordination with other UN agencies. Through qualitative case-study research, this thesis explores the means and mechanisms of these interactions and investigates their consequences for enhancing the effectiveness and coherence of institutional responses to underlying and interdependent environmental issues. Following a new institutionalist ontology, the conceptual and theoretical framework of this study draws on global governance research, regime theory, and scholarship on international bureaucracies. From an actor-centered perspective on institutional interplay, the thesis employs concepts such as orchestration and interplay management to assess the interactions of and among treaty secretariats. The research methodology involves structured, focused comparison, and process-tracing techniques to analyze empirical data from diverse sources, including official documents, various secondary materials, semi-structured interviews with secretariat staff and policymakers, and observations at intergovernmental conferences. The main findings of this research demonstrate that secretariats employ tailored orchestration styles to manage or bypass national governments, thereby raising global ambition levels for addressing transboundary environmental problems. Additionally, they engage in joint interplay management to facilitate information sharing, strategize activities, and mobilize relevant actors, thereby improving coherence across UN environmental institutions. Treaty secretariats play a substantial role in influencing discourses and knowledge exchange with a wide range of actors. However, they face barriers, such as limited resources, mandates, varying leadership priorities, and degrees of politicization within institutional processes, which may hinder their impact. Nevertheless, the secretariats, together with non-state actors, have made progress in advancing norm-building processes, integrated policy-making, capacity building, and implementation efforts within and across framework conventions. Moreover, they utilize innovative means of coordination with actors beyond national governments, such as data-driven governance, to provide policy-relevant information for achieving overarching governance targets. Importantly, this research highlights the growing interactions between treaty secretariats and non-state actors, which not only shape policy outcomes but also have broader implications for the polity and politics of international institutions. The findings offer opportunities for rethinking collective agency and actor dynamics within UN entities, addressing gaps in institutionalist theory concerning the interaction of actors in inter-institutional spaces. Furthermore, the study addresses emerging challenges and trends in global environmental governance that are pertinent to future policy-making. These include reflections for the debate on reforming international institutions, the role of emerging powers in a changing international world order, and the convergence of public and private authority through new alliance-building and a division of labor between international bureaucracies and non-state actors in global environmental governance.}, language = {en} } @article{PoensgenSteinitz2020, author = {Poensgen, Daniel and Steinitz, Benjamin}, title = {Alltagspr{\"a}gende Erfahrungen sichtbar machen}, series = {Das neue Unbehagen - Antisemitismus in Deutschland heute}, journal = {Das neue Unbehagen - Antisemitismus in Deutschland heute}, edition = {2. unver{\"a}nderte}, publisher = {Olms}, address = {Hildesheim}, isbn = {978-3-7582-0358-9}, pages = {173 -- 197}, year = {2020}, language = {de} } @article{TsebelisThiesCheibubetal.2023, author = {Tsebelis, George and Thies, Michael and Cheibub, Jos{\´e} Antonio and Dixon, Rosalind and Bog{\´e}a, Daniel and Ganghof, Steffen}, title = {Review symposium}, series = {European political science}, journal = {European political science}, publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan}, address = {Basingstoke}, issn = {1680-4333}, doi = {10.1057/s41304-023-00426-9}, pages = {20}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Steffen Ganghof's Beyond Presidentialism and Parliamentarism: Democratic Design and the Separation of Powers (Oxford University Press, 2021) posits that "in a democracy, a constitutional separation of powers between the executive and the assembly may be desirable, but the constitutional concentration of executive power in a single human being is not" (Ganghof, 2021). To consider, examine and theorise about this, Ganghof urges engagement with semi-parliamentarism. As explained by Ganghof, legislative power is shared between two democratically legitimate sections of parliament in a semi-parliamentary system, but only one of those sections selects the government and can remove it in a no-confidence vote. Consequently, power is dispersed and not concentrated in the hands of any one person, which, Ganghof argues, can lead to an enhanced form of parliamentary democracy. In this book review symposium, George Tsebelis, Michael Thies, Jos{\´e} Antonio Cheibub, Rosalind Dixon and Daniel Bog{\´e}a review Steffen Ganghof's book and engage with the author about aspects of research design, case selection and theoretical argument. This symposium arose from an engaging and constructive discussion of the book at a seminar hosted by Texas A\&M University in 2022. We thank Prof Jos{\´e} Cheibub (Texas A\&M) for organising that seminar and Dr Anna Fruhstorfer (University of Potsdam) for initiating this book review symposium.}, language = {en} }