@phdthesis{Kamprath2014, author = {Kamprath, Martin}, title = {A microfoundations perspectives on fresight and business models}, pages = {224}, year = {2014}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Huber2016, author = {Huber, Stefan}, title = {Basisaktivierung als Mittel gegen soziale Exklusion?}, series = {Region - Nation - Europa ; 80}, journal = {Region - Nation - Europa ; 80}, publisher = {LIT Verlag}, address = {Berlin}, isbn = {978-3-643-13483-7}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {X, 336}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Seit Jahren steigen Politikverdrossenheit und die Zahl der Menschen an, die sich von der Gesellschaft exkludiert f{\"u}hlen. K{\"o}nnen Basisaktivierung durch Quartiersmanagement und Community Organizing diesen Trends entgegenwirken? F{\"o}rdert die Erm{\"o}glichung der gesellschaftlichen Teilhabe von benachteiligten Bev{\"o}lkerungsgruppen die Sozialkapitalbildung im Sinne Putnams? Um diese Fragen zu beantworten, wurden die vorhandene Literatur analysiert und zahlreiche Experteninterviews gef{\"u}hrt.}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Widdau2016, author = {Widdau, Christoph Sebastian}, title = {Cassirers Leibniz und die Begr{\"u}ndung der Menschenrechte}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-12677-3}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {142}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Christoph Sebastian Widdau leistet mit seinem Buch einen innovativen Beitrag zur Cassirer-Forschung, zu den Leibniz-Studien und zur Begr{\"u}ndung der Menschenrechte. Er wirft ein ideengeschichtlich und philosophisch neues Licht auf die 'Natur' im Naturrecht, die kulturelle Bedeutung des Individuums und den Pluralismus politischer Ordnungen. Mit 'Cassirers Leibniz' zeigt Widdau auf, dass Menschenrechte kein beliebiger Zusatz zur Kultur, sondern vielmehr kulturkonstitutiv sind.}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Ehrentraut2013, author = {Ehrentraut, Stefan}, title = {Challenging Khmer citizenship : minorities, the state, and the international community in Cambodia}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-70355}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, year = {2013}, abstract = {The idea of a distinctly 'liberal' form of multiculturalism has emerged in the theory and practice of Western democracies and the international community has become actively engaged in its global dissemination via international norms and organizations. This thesis investigates the internationalization of minority rights, by exploring state-minority relations in Cambodia, in light of Will Kymlicka's theory of multicultural citizenship. Based on extensive empirical research, the analysis explores the situation and aspirations of Cambodia's ethnic Vietnamese, highland peoples, Muslim Cham, ethnic Chinese and Lao and the relationships between these groups and the state. All Cambodian regimes since independence have defined citizenship with reference to the ethnicity of the Khmer majority and have - often violently - enforced this conception through the assimilation of highland peoples and the Cham and the exclusion of ethnic Vietnamese and Chinese. Cambodia's current constitution, too, defines citizenship ethnically. State-sponsored Khmerization systematically privileges members of the majority culture and marginalizes minority members politically, economically and socially. The thesis investigates various international initiatives aimed at promoting application of minority rights norms in Cambodia. It demonstrates that these initiatives have largely failed to accomplish a greater degree of compliance with international norms in practice. This failure can be explained by a number of factors, among them Cambodia's neo-patrimonial political system, the geo-political fears of a 'minoritized' Khmer majority, the absence of effective regional security institutions, the lack of minority access to political decision-making, the significant differences between international and Cambodian conceptions of modern statehood and citizenship and the emergence of China as Cambodia's most important bilateral donor and investor. Based on this analysis, the dissertation develops recommendations for a sequenced approach to minority rights promotion, with pragmatic, less ambitious shorter-term measures that work progressively towards achievement of international norms in the longer-term.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Schmidt2016, author = {Schmidt, Peter}, title = {Contributions to EU regional policy}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-90837}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xii, 137}, year = {2016}, abstract = {This cumulative dissertation contains four self-contained articles which are related to EU regional policy and its structural funds as the overall research topic. In particular, the thesis addresses the question if EU regional policy interventions can at all be scientifically justified and legitimated on theoretical and empirical grounds from an economics point of view. The first two articles of the thesis ("The EU structural funds as a means to hamper migration" and "Internal migration and EU regional policy transfer payments: a panel data analysis for 28 EU member countries") enter into one particular aspect of the debate regarding the justification and legitimisation of EU regional policy. They theoretically and empirically analyse as to whether regional policy or the market force of the free flow of labour (migration) in the internal European market is the better instrument to improve and harmonise the living and working conditions of EU citizens. Based on neoclassical market failure theory, the first paper argues that the structural funds of the EU are inhibiting internal migration, which is one of the key measures in achieving convergence among the nations in the single European market. It becomes clear that European regional policy aiming at economic growth and cohesion among the member states cannot be justified and legitimated if the structural funds hamper instead of promote migration. The second paper, however, shows that the empirical evidence on the migration and regional policy nexus is not unambiguous, i.e. different empirical investigations show that EU structural funds hamper and promote EU internal migration. Hence, the question of the scientific justification and legitimisation of EU regional policy cannot be readily and unambiguously answered on empirical grounds. This finding is unsatisfying but is in line with previous theoretical and empirical literature. That is why, I take a step back and reconsider the theoretical beginnings of the thesis, which took for granted neoclassical market failure theory as the starting point for the positive explanation as well as the normative justification and legitimisation of EU regional policy. The third article of the thesis ("EU regional policy: theoretical foundations and policy conclusions revisited") deals with the theoretical explanation and legitimisation of EU regional policy as well as the policy recommendations given to EU regional policymakers deduced from neoclassical market failure theory. The article elucidates that neoclassical market failure is a normative concept, which justifies and legitimates EU regional policy based on a political and thus subjective goal or value-judgement. It can neither be used, therefore, to give a scientifically positive explanation of the structural funds nor to obtain objective and practically applicable policy instruments. Given this critique of neoclassical market failure theory, the third paper consequently calls into question the widely prevalent explanation and justification of EU regional policy given in static neoclassical equilibrium economics. It argues that an evolutionary non-equilibrium economics perspective on EU regional policy is much more appropriate to provide a realistic understanding of one of the largest policies conducted by the EU. However, this does neither mean that evolutionary economic theory can be unreservedly seen as the panacea to positively explain EU regional policy nor to derive objective policy instruments for EU regional policymakers. This issue is discussed in the fourth article of the thesis ("Market failure vs. system failure as a rationale for economic policy? A critique from an evolutionary perspective"). This article reconsiders the explanation of economic policy from an evolutionary economics perspective. It contrasts the neoclassical equilibrium notions of market and government failure with the dominant evolutionary neo-Schumpeterian and Austrian-Hayekian perceptions. Based on this comparison, the paper criticises the fact that neoclassical failure reasoning still prevails in non-equilibrium evolutionary economics when economic policy issues are examined. This is surprising, since proponents of evolutionary economics usually view their approach as incompatible with its neoclassical counterpart. The paper therefore argues that in order to prevent the otherwise fruitful and more realistic evolutionary approach from undermining its own criticism of neoclassical economics and to create a consistent as well as objective evolutionary policy framework, it is necessary to eliminate the equilibrium spirit. Taken together, the main finding of this thesis is that European regional policy and its structural funds can neither theoretically nor empirically be justified and legitimated from an economics point of view. Moreover, the thesis finds that the prevalent positive and instrumental explanation of EU regional policy given in the literature needs to be reconsidered, because these theories can neither scientifically explain the emergence and development of this policy nor are they appropriate to derive objective and scientific policy instruments for EU regional policymakers.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Heuberger2022, author = {Heuberger, Moritz}, title = {Coordinating digital government}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-56269}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-562691}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xiii, 136}, year = {2022}, abstract = {This thesis is analyzing multiple coordination challenges which arise with the digital transformation of public administration in federal systems, illustrated by four case studies in Germany. I make various observations within a multi-level system and provide an in-depth analysis. Theoretical explanations from both federalism research and neo-institutionalism are utilized to explain the findings of the empirical driven work. The four articles evince a holistic picture of the German case and elucidate its role as a digital government laggard. Their foci range from macro, over meso to micro level of public administration, differentiating between the governance and the tool dimension of digital government. The first article shows how multi-level negotiations lead to expensive but eventually satisfying solutions for the involved actors, creating a subtle balance between centralization and decentralization. The second article identifies legal, technical, and organizational barriers for cross-organizational service provision, highlighting the importance of inter-organizational and inter-disciplinary exchange and both a common language and trust. Institutional change and its effects on the micro level, on citizens and the employees in local one-stop shops, mark the focus of the third article, bridging the gap between reforms and the administrative reality on the local level. The fourth article looks at the citizens' perspective on digital government reforms, their expectations, use and satisfaction. In this vein, this thesis provides a detailed account of the importance of understanding the digital divide and therefore the necessity of reaching out to different recipients of digital government reforms. I draw conclusions from the factors identified as causes for Germany's shortcomings for other federal systems where feasible and derive reform potential therefrom. This allows to gain a new perspective on digital government and its coordination challenges in federal contexts.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Danken2017, author = {Danken, Thomas}, title = {Coordination of wicked problems}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-396766}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {VI, 237}, year = {2017}, abstract = {The thesis focuses on the inter-departmental coordination of adaptation and mitigation of demographic change in East Germany. All Eastern German States (L{\"a}nder) have set up inter-departmental committees (IDCs) that are expected to deliver joint strategies to tackle demographic change. IDCs provide an organizational setting for potential positive coordination, i.e. a joint approach to problem solving that pools and utilizes the expertise of many departments in a constructive manner from the very beginning. Whether they actually achieve positive coordination is contested within the academic debate. This motivates the first research question of this thesis: Do IDCs achieve positive coordination? Interdepartmental committees and their role in horizontal coordination within the core executive triggered interest among scholars already more than fifty years ago. However, we don't know much about their actual importance for the inter-departmental preparation of cross-cutting policies. Until now, few studies can be found that analyzes inter-departmental committees in a comparative way trying to identify whether they achieve positive coordination and what factors shape the coordination process and output of IDCs. Each IDC has a chair organization that is responsible for managing the interactions within the IDCs. The chair organization is important, because it organizes and structures the overall process of coordination in the IDC. Consequently, the chair of an IDC serves as the main boundary-spanner and therefore has remarkable influence by arranging meetings and the work schedule or by distributing internal roles. Interestingly, in the German context we find two organizational approaches: while some states decided to put a line department (e.g. Department of Infrastructure) in charge of managing the IDC, others rely on the State Chancelleries, i.e. the center of government. This situation allows for comparative research design that can address the role of the State Chancellery in inter-departmental coordination of cross-cutting policies. This is relevant, because the role of the center is crucial when studying coordination within central government. The academic debate on the center of government in the German politico-administrative system is essentially divided into two camps. One camp claims that the center can improve horizontal coordination and steer cross-cutting policy-making more effectively, while the other camp points to limits to central coordination due to departmental autonomy. This debate motivates the second research question of this thesis: Does the State Chancellery as chair organization achieve positive coordination in IDCs? The center of government and its role in the German politic-administrative system has attracted academic attention already in the 1960s and 1970s. There is a research desiderate regarding the center's role during the inter-departmental coordination process. There are only few studies that explicitly analyze centers of government and their role in coordination of cross-cutting policies, although some single case studies have been published. This gap in the academic debate will be addressed by the answer to the second research question. The dependent variable of this study is the chair organization of IDCs. The value of this variable is dichotomous: either an IDC is chaired by a Line department or by a State Chancellery. We are interested whether this variable has an effect on two dependent variables. First, we will analyze the coordination process, i.e. interaction among bureaucrats within the IDC. Second, the focus of this thesis will be on the coordination result, i.e. the demography strategies that are produced by the respective IDCs. In terms of the methodological approach, this thesis applies a comparative case study design based on a most-similar-systems logic. The German Federalism is quite suitable for such designs. Since the institutional framework largely is the same across all states, individual variables and their effect can be isolated and plausibly analyzed. To further control for potential intervening variables, we will limit our case selection to states located in East Germany, because the demographic situation is most problematic in the Eastern part of Germany, i.e. there is a equal problem pressure. Consequently, we will analyze five cases: Thuringia, Saxony-Anhalt (line department) and Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Saxony (State Chancellery). There is no grand coordination theory that is ready to be applied to our case studies. Therefore, we need to tailor our own approach. Our assumption is that the individual chair organization has an effect on the coordination process and output of IDCs, although all cases are embedded in the same institutional setting, i.e. the German politico-administrative system. Therefore, we need an analytical approach than incorporates institutionalist and agency-based arguments. Therefore, this thesis will utilize Actor-Centered Institutionalism (ACI). Broadly speaking, ACI conceptualizes actors' behavior as influenced - but not fully determined - by institutions. Since ACI is rather abstract we need to adapt it for the purpose of this thesis. Line Departments and State Chancelleries will be modeled as distinct actors with different action orientations and capabilities to steer the coordination process. However, their action is embedded within the institutional context of governments, which we will conceptualize as being comprised of regulative (formal rules) and normative (social norms) elements.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Winkler2018, author = {Winkler, Katrin}, title = {Demokratische Praxis und Pragmatismus}, series = {B{\"u}rgergesellschaft und Demokratie}, volume = {2018}, journal = {B{\"u}rgergesellschaft und Demokratie}, number = {1}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-20667-3}, pages = {XIII, 405}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Dass sich die repr{\"a}sentative Demokratie in Deutschland im Wandel befindet, ist nicht neu und kaum umstritten. Herausforderungen im Kontext der Partizipation und Repr{\"a}sentation rufen ihrerseits Probleme auf Seiten der Input-Legitimation hervor. Demgem{\"a}ß ist das grundlegende demokratiepolitische Anliegen dieser Arbeit, am Beispiel der Bundes- und Berliner Landesebene darzustellen, wie der repr{\"a}sentative Politikprozess partizipativer und dennoch effektiv gestaltet werden kann. Basierend auf der philosophischen Str{\"o}mung des Pragmatismus verfolgt und diskutiert die Arbeit die Synthese aus der pragmatistischen Demokratiekonzeption von Archon Fung und dem empirischen Forschungsprogramm der kriterienbasierten Evaluation demokratischer Innovationen. Dabei wird das analytische Vorgehen Archon Fungs kritisch erweitert, um dem dieser Arbeit zugrunde liegenden Konzept einer komplexen B{\"u}rgergesellschaft - als normativer und praktischer Bezugspunkt - gerecht zu werden. Fungs Konzept wird demnach um die liberale Sph{\"a}re der {\"O}ffentlichkeit, mithin um die zivilgesellschaftlichen Handlungszusammenh{\"a}nge erg{\"a}nzt. Auf Grundlage der Diskussion von demokratischen Innovationen werden schließlich demokratie- und engagementpolitische Handlungsempfehlungen in der Dimension der Partizipation und in der Dimension der Repr{\"a}sentation formuliert. Mithin verfolgt die Arbeit eine problem- und l{\"o}sungsorientierte Erg{\"a}nzung der repr{\"a}sentativen Demokratie. Gleichwohl ist die Arbeit als eine pragmatistisch angeleitete Konzeptstudie f{\"u}r die Entwicklung einer beteiligungsorientierten Praxis in der repr{\"a}sentativen Demokratie zu verstehen, die trotz ihres theoretischen Charakters ganz im Sinne des Pragmatismus die notwendige empirische Orientierung aufweist. Damit wird das zuweilen problematische Verh{\"a}ltnis zwischen Politischer Theorie und empirischer Demokratieforschung {\"u}berwunden.}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Berg2023, author = {Berg, Carsten}, title = {Der Beitrag der europ{\"a}ischen B{\"u}rgerinitiative zur Demokratisierung der Europ{\"a}ischen Union}, pages = {387}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Der Untersuchungsgegenstand der vorliegenden Arbeit ist die Praxis der Europ{\"a}ischen B{\"u}rgerinitiative (EBI) nach Art. 11 Abs. 4 EUV, dem weltweit ersten und einzigen Instrument transnationaler, partizipativer und digitaler Demokratie. Im Mittelpunkt der Untersuchung steht die Frage, welchen Beitrag die EBI zur weiteren Demokratisierung der EU leisten kann und auf welche Art und Weise insoweit noch weitere Verbesserungen erzielt werden k{\"o}nnen. Nach zehnj{\"a}hriger Anwendungspraxis von 2012 bis 2022 liegen inzwischen ausreichend empirische Daten vor, um den Forschungsgegenstand umfassend zu erforschen und das Instrument mit Blick auf seinen von den EU-Institutionen versprochenen Legitimations- und Demokratisierungsbeitrag bewerten zu k{\"o}nnen. Insbesondere wird das EBI-Verfahren in dieser Arbeit auf seine empirisch nachweisbare Nutzung, auf seine prozedurale Nutzerfreundlichkeit sowie auf seine politische wie rechtliche Wirkm{\"a}chtigkeit untersucht. Zum Zwecke der korrekten Kategorisierung, Bewertung sowie der nutzerfreundlichen Ausgestaltung des EBI-Verfahrens werden Vergleiche mit B{\"u}rger- und Volksinitiativverfahren in den EU-Mitgliedstaaten sowie mit B{\"u}rgerbeteiligungsverfahren auf EU-Ebene vorgenommen. Den empirischen und komparativen Analysen werden eine historische Analyse {\"u}ber die Genese der EBI seit dem EU-Verfassungskonvent sowie theoretisch-normative {\"U}berlegungen und praktische Untersuchungen zu unterschiedlichen beteiligungszentrierten Demokratiemodellen vorangestellt, um die EBI einzuordnen und die Steigerungsm{\"o}glichkeiten ihres Demokratisierungsbeitrags zu erschließen. Letzteres zielt schließlich auf die Frage nach der prozeduralen Kombination und Kompatibilit{\"a}t der EBI mit demokratischen Innovationen aus dem Bereich der deliberativen und direkten Demokratie ab. Die Arbeit schließt mit einem Ausblick und unterbreitet umfassende EBI-Reformoptionen sowohl auf der prim{\"a}r- und sekund{\"a}rrechtlichen als auch auf der informellen Ebene.}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Kilgus2018, author = {Kilgus, Tobias}, title = {Der Integrationsprozess Kosovos in die Europ{\"a}ische Union}, series = {Region - Nation - Europa}, journal = {Region - Nation - Europa}, number = {84}, publisher = {LIT}, address = {M{\"u}nster}, isbn = {978-3-643-14079-1}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {558}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Die Republik Kosovo stellt einen Beitrittskandidaten sui generis in der Erweiterungsgeschichte der Europ{\"a}ischen Union dar. Die besonderen Beziehungen zwischen der EU und dem "potenziellen" Kandidaten resultieren aus dem ungel{\"o}sten Territorialkonflikt mit Serbien, dem unvollendeten Staatsaufbau sowie der eingeschr{\"a}nkten Souver{\"a}nit{\"a}t Kosovos. Diese Einzelfallstudie untersucht Kosovos Integrationsprozess in den Staatenverbund im Kontext der Spezifika des Beitrittsaspiranten, der stockenden EU-S{\"u}dosterweiterung und der multiplen EU-Krise. Davon ausgehend werden vier Zukunftsszenarien f{\"u}r Kosovos Integrationsverlauf, auch mit Blick auf differenzierte Integrationsoptionen, entwickelt.}, language = {de} }