@article{Doerfler2018, author = {D{\"o}rfler, Thomas}, title = {Die Sanktionsaussch{\"u}sse zwischen Macht und Regeln}, series = {Vereinte Nationen : Zeitschrift f{\"u}r die Vereinten Nationen und ihre Sonderorganisationen}, volume = {66}, journal = {Vereinte Nationen : Zeitschrift f{\"u}r die Vereinten Nationen und ihre Sonderorganisationen}, number = {2}, publisher = {BWV}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {0042-384X}, pages = {62 -- 66}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Sanktionen sind ein wichtiges Instrument des UN-Sicherheitsrats zur Erhaltung des Weltfriedens. Viele zentrale Entscheidungen, wie etwa die Listung und Entlistung terrorverd{\"a}chtiger Personen, werden fernab der {\"O}ffentlichkeit in Sanktionsaussch{\"u}ssen getroffen. Die Einsetzung dieser Aussch{\"u}sse hat die Entscheidungsdynamiken im Rat erheblich ver{\"a}ndert.}, language = {de} } @article{Yilmaz2018, author = {Yilmaz, Zafer}, title = {Revising the culture of political protest after the gezi uprising in Turkey}, series = {Mediterranean Quarterly}, volume = {29}, journal = {Mediterranean Quarterly}, number = {3}, publisher = {Duke Univ. Press}, address = {Durham}, issn = {1047-4552}, doi = {10.1215/10474552-7003168}, pages = {55 -- 77}, year = {2018}, abstract = {The Gezi uprising can be considered a crucial turning in Turkish politics. As a response to countrywide democratic protests, the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government revived the security state, escalated authoritarian tendencies, and started to organize a nationalist, Islamist, and conservative backlash. This essay argues that the Gezi Park protests revealed both the fragility of the AKP's hegemony and the limits of the dominant political group habitus, which were promoted by the party to consolidate political polarization in favor of the party's hegemony. Moreover, it is argued that the Gezi uprising transformed the culture of political protests in the country and paved the way for the emergence of affirmative resistance, radical imagination, and a new politics of desire and dignity against authoritarian and neoliberal policies.}, language = {en} } @article{Wenzel2018, author = {Wenzel, Bertolt}, title = {Rational instrument or symbolic signal?}, series = {Public Policy and Administration}, volume = {33}, journal = {Public Policy and Administration}, number = {2}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {0952-0767}, doi = {10.1177/0952076716683764}, pages = {149 -- 169}, year = {2018}, abstract = {This article examines the reorganization of formal coordination structures in the Directorate-General for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs of the European Commission. While rational approaches in organization theory emphasize functional efficiency as an explanation for organizational design and coordination structures, the findings of this study indicate that the reorganization was not driven primarily for reasons of efficiency and to increase the coordination capacity of the organization. The study demonstrates that, even in a highly technical policy area such as fisheries management in the European Union, the (re-)design of formal organizational structures does not follow primarily a technical-instrumental rationale. Instead, the formal coordination structures have also been adapted to live up to changing expectations in the institutional environment, to modern management concepts in marine governance, and to ensure the legitimacy of the organization. However, although the empirical findings of this study substantiate the theoretical assumptions of an institutional perspective, institutional explanations alone are insufficient to comprehensively understand why organizational structures are reorganized and changed.}, language = {en} } @article{Nuesiri2018, author = {Nuesiri, Emmanuel O.}, title = {Strengths and Limitations of Conservation NGOs in Meeting Local Needs}, series = {the Anthropology of Conservation NGOS}, journal = {the Anthropology of Conservation NGOS}, publisher = {Palgrave}, address = {Basingstoke}, isbn = {978-3-319-60579-1}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-60579-1_8}, pages = {203 -- 225}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Conservation nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) are often involved in the design and implementation of global forest management initiatives such as the REDD+, which currently is being rolled out by the UNFCCC, the UN-REDD Programme and the World Bank as part of efforts to mitigate climate change. Nigeria joined the UN-REDD in 2010 and submitted its REDD+ readiness proposal in 2011. The proposal has a national component and subnational forestry activities in the Cross River State (CRS) as the pilot site. This chapter examines the involvement of local NGOs in the CRS consultative participatory meetings to validate the Nigeria-REDD proposal. It shows that political representation of local communities in the validation exercise was through customary authorities and NGOs who claim to speak for and are recognised as advocates for the communities. Local government authorities, the substantive political representatives of local communities were left out of the process. The chapter also shows how the CRS Forestry Commission, which organised the validation exercise, used NGOs as pawns to legitimise it, and how these NGOs were powerless to challenge the Forestry Commission. In contrast, local governments, the third tier of government and political authority routinely disrespected by state-level administrators, regularly challenge such higher level government actors in the courts and the national legislature. Thus, local NGOs may speak and work for local social development but compared to the substantive political representatives at the local level (e.g., local government authorities), local NGOs have limited resources to challenge the political shenanigans of the state.}, language = {en} } @article{Hustedt2018, author = {Hustedt, Thurid}, title = {Germany: the smooth and silent emergence of advisory roles}, series = {Ministers, minders and Mandarins : an international study of relationships at the executive summit of parliamentary democracies (2018)}, journal = {Ministers, minders and Mandarins : an international study of relationships at the executive summit of parliamentary democracies (2018)}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing LTD}, address = {Cheltenham}, isbn = {978-1-78643-169-1}, pages = {72 -- 90}, year = {2018}, language = {en} } @article{ElsaesserHickmannStehle2018, author = {Els{\"a}sser, Joshua Philipp and Hickmann, Thomas and Stehle, Fee}, title = {The Role of Cities in South Africa's Energy Gridlock}, series = {Case Studies in the Environment}, volume = {2}, journal = {Case Studies in the Environment}, number = {1}, publisher = {University of California Press}, address = {Oakland}, issn = {2473-9510}, doi = {10.1525/cse.2018.001297}, pages = {1 -- 7}, year = {2018}, abstract = {South Africa's energy sector finds itself in a gridlock situation. The sector is controlled by the state-owned utility Eskom holding the monopoly on the generation and transmission of electricity, which is almost exclusively produced from domestically extracted coal. At the same time, the constitutional mandate enables municipalities to distribute and sell electricity generated by Eskom to local consumers, which constitutes a large part of the cities' municipal income. This is a strong disincentive for city governments to promote reductions in energy consumption and substantially limits the scope for urban action on energy efficiency and renewable energies. In the present case study, we portray the current development in South Africa's energy policy and trace how deadlocked legal, financial, and institutional barriers block the transition from a coal-based energy system toward a greener and more sustainable energy economy. We furthermore point to the efforts of major South African cities to introduce low-carbon strategies in their jurisdictions and highlight key challenges for the future development of the country's energy sector. By engaging with this case study, readers will become familiar with a prime example of the wider phenomenon of national political-economic obstacles to the progress in sustainable urban development.}, language = {en} } @article{Scheller2018, author = {Scheller, Henrik}, title = {German Federalism: On the Way to a "Cooperative Centralism"?}, series = {Identities, trust, and cohesion in federal systems: public perspectives}, journal = {Identities, trust, and cohesion in federal systems: public perspectives}, publisher = {McGill-Queens University Press}, address = {Montreal}, isbn = {978-1-55339-535-5}, pages = {255 -- 279}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Germany has a long tradition of federalism extending far back in history (Ziblatt 2004; Broschek 2011). This tradition has always been characterized by a discrepancy between the attitudes of the public to its federalism and the reform ideas of the (political) elites. While the public has a strong desire for an equality of living conditions, solidarity, social cohesion, and cooperation between the orders of government, academic discourse is shaped by calls for wide-ranging federalism reforms, which are oriented toward the American model of "dual federalism." Against this background, this chapter contrasts public attitudes on key aspects of the federal system with long-lasting academic recommendations for reform. Light will be shed on the general perception of the federal system as a whole, the division of powers, and in particular the issue of joint decision-making (Politikverflechtung) between the orders of government-all issues that have been repeatedly interrogated in various surveys. A further aspect of these polls is the question of the extent to which solidarity or competition shall be realized between the federal and Land governments-a question that is highly controversial in politics and academia (especially in the fiscal equalization debate), though public perceptions are quite different.}, language = {en} } @article{TranMaiNguyenetal.2018, author = {Tran, C. T. and Mai, N. T. and Nguyen, V. T. and Nguyen, H. X. and Meharg, A. and Carey, M. and Dultz, S. and Marone, F. and Cichy, Sarah Bettina and Nguyen, Minh N.}, title = {Phytolith-associated potassium in fern}, series = {Soil use and Management}, volume = {34}, journal = {Soil use and Management}, number = {1}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {0266-0032}, doi = {10.1111/sum.12409}, pages = {28 -- 36}, year = {2018}, abstract = {In recent time, phytoliths (silicon deposition between plant cells) have been recognized as an important nutrient source for crops. The work presented here aims at highlighting the potential of phytolith-occluded K pool in ferns. Dicranopteris linearis (D.linearis) is a common fern in the humid subtropical and tropical regions. Burning of the fern D.linearis is, in slash-and-burn regions, a common practice to prepare the soil before planting. We characterised the phytolith-rich ash derived from the fern D.linearis and phytolith-associated potassium (K) (phytK), using X-ray tomographic microscopy in combination with kinetic batch experiments. D.linearis contains up to 3.9g K/kgd.wt, including K subcompartmented in phytoliths. X-ray tomographic microscopy visualized an interembedding structure between organic matter and silica, particularly in leaves. Corelease of K and Si observed in the batch experiments confirmed that the dissolution of ash phytoliths is one of major factors controlling K release. Under heat treatment, a part of the K is made available, while the remainder entrapped into phytoliths (ca. 2.0-3.3\%) is unavailable until the phytoliths are dissolved. By enhanced removal of organic phases, or forming more stable silica phases, heat treatment changes dissolution properties of the phytoliths, affecting K release for crops and soils. The maximum releases of soluble K and Si were observed for the phytoliths treated at 500-800 degrees C. For quantitative approaches for the K provision of plants from the soil phytK pool in soils, factors regulating phytolith dissolution rate have to be considered.}, language = {en} } @article{Reiners2018, author = {Reiners, Nina}, title = {Kontroversen um die Reform der UN-Menschenrechtsvertragsorgane}, series = {Vereinte Nationen}, volume = {66}, journal = {Vereinte Nationen}, number = {6}, publisher = {BWV, Berliner Wiss.-Verl.}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {0042-384X}, pages = {266 -- 271}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Das UN-Menschenrechtssystem steht unter gewaltigem Druck. In den aktuellen Diskussionen um die Reform der Menschenrechtsvertragsorgane offenbart sich eine Kluft zwischen Staaten in der Generalversammlung und Ausschussmitgliedern mit zivilgesellschaftlichen Akteuren.}, language = {de} } @misc{GrumGronau2018, author = {Grum, Marcus and Gronau, Norbert}, title = {Process modeling within augmented reality}, series = {Business Modeling and Software Design, BMSD 2018}, volume = {319}, journal = {Business Modeling and Software Design, BMSD 2018}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Berlin}, isbn = {978-3-319-94214-8}, issn = {1865-1348}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-94214-8_7}, pages = {99 -- 115}, year = {2018}, abstract = {The collaboration during the modeling process is uncomfortable and characterized by various limitations. Faced with the successful transfer of first process modeling languages to the augmented world, non-transparent processes can be visualized in a more comprehensive way. With the aim to rise comfortability, speed, accuracy and manifoldness of real world process augmentations, a framework for the bidirectional interplay of the common process modeling world and the augmented world has been designed as morphologic box. Its demonstration proves the working of drawn AR integrations. Identified dimensions were derived from (1) a designed knowledge construction axiom, (2) a designed meta-model, (3) designed use cases and (4) designed directional interplay modes. Through a workshop-based survey, the so far best AR modeling configuration is identified, which can serve for benchmarks and implementations.}, language = {en} } @article{KerstingKuhlmann2018, author = {Kersting, Norbert and Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Sub-municipal Units in Germany}, series = {Sub-municipal Units in Germany: Municipal and Metropolitan Districts}, journal = {Sub-municipal Units in Germany: Municipal and Metropolitan Districts}, publisher = {Palgrave}, address = {Basingstoke}, isbn = {978-3-319-64725-8}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-64725-8_5}, pages = {93 -- 118}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Sub-municipal units (SMUs) in Germany differ in German L{\"a}nder. In Berlin, Hamburg and M{\"u}nchen Metropole Districts fulfill a number of quasi-municipal self-government rights and functions. They have their own budget and strong councils, as well as mayors. In all other L{\"a}nder, most sub-municipal councils were subordinated under the municipal council and directly elected mayor heading the administration. SMUs were introduced as a kind of compensation with different territorial reforms in the 1970s. Although directly elected, sub-municipal councilors are weak, and their advisory role competes with other newly established advisory boards. Here the focus remains on traffic and town planning. Some sub-municipal councils fulfill smaller administrative functions and become more relevant and important in recent decentralization strategies of neighborhood development.}, language = {en} } @misc{BouckaertKuhlmann2018, author = {Bouckaert, Geert and Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Foreword}, series = {Sub-Municipal Governance in Europe: Decentralization Beyond the Municipal Tier}, journal = {Sub-Municipal Governance in Europe: Decentralization Beyond the Municipal Tier}, publisher = {Palgrave}, address = {Basingstoke}, isbn = {978-3-319-64725-8}, pages = {V -- VI}, year = {2018}, 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} } @article{GanghofEppner2019, author = {Ganghof, Steffen and Eppner, Sebastian}, title = {Faire Repr{\"a}sentation versus klare Richtungsentscheide? Zur Reform des Wahl- und Regierungssystems Fair representation versus clear decisions On the reform of the electoral system and form of government}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft}, volume = {13}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft}, number = {3}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, issn = {1865-2646}, doi = {10.1007/s12286-019-00431-7}, pages = {375 -- 397}, year = {2019}, abstract = {The increased fragmentation of European party systems and the resulting difficulties of government formation have led to renewed debates about electoral systems. Some authors characterize certain electoral systems as optimal compromises between "proportional" and "majoritarian" conceptions of democracy. We argue that these optimality arguments are biased towards the majoritarian conception. Ambitious proportional conceptions embrace the goals of mechanical proportionality, multidimensional representation and flexible, issue-specific legislative coalitions. However, in parliamentary systems of government these goals cannot be reconciled with majoritarian goals. This is because in parliamentarism the same electoral threshold applies to parliamentary representation and to participation in the vote of non-confidence procedure. The first threshold is crucial for the proportional, the latter for the majoritarian conception of democracy. If we are willing to decouple the two thresholds - and hence change the form of government - new avenues for reform open up. We illustrate our arguments using data for 29 democratic systems between 1995 and 2015.}, language = {de} } @article{Leib2019, author = {Leib, Julia}, title = {The security and justice approach in liberia's peace process}, series = {Peace economics, peace science, and public policy}, volume = {25}, journal = {Peace economics, peace science, and public policy}, number = {4}, publisher = {de Gruyter}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {1554-8597}, doi = {10.1515/peps-2019-0033}, pages = {6}, year = {2019}, abstract = {From the international perspective, the peace process in Liberia has generally been described as a successful model for international peacebuilding interventions. But how do Liberians perceive the peace process in their country? The aim of this paper is to complement an institutionalist approach looking at the security and justice mechanism in Liberia with some insights into local perceptions in order to answer the following question: how do Liberians perceive the peace process in their country and which institutions have been supportive for the establishment of sustaining peace? After briefly introducing the background of the Liberian conflict and the data collection, I present first results, analyzing the mechanism linking two peacebuilding institutions (peacekeeping and transitional justice) with the establishment of sustaining peace in Liberia.}, language = {en} } @article{GehringDoerfler2019, author = {Gehring, Thomas and D{\"o}rfler, Thomas}, title = {Constitutive mechanisms of UN Security Council practices}, series = {Review of International Studies}, volume = {45}, journal = {Review of International Studies}, number = {1}, publisher = {Univ.}, address = {Cambridge}, issn = {0260-2105}, doi = {10.1017/S0260210518000268}, pages = {120 -- 140}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Based upon the current debate on international practices with its focus on taken-for-granted everyday practices, we examine how Security Council practices may affect member state action and collective decisions on intrastate conflicts. We outline a concept that integrates the structuring effect of practices and their emergence from interaction among reflective actors. It promises to overcome the unresolved tension between understanding practices as a social regularity and as a fluid entity. We analyse the constitutive mechanisms of two Council practices that affect collective decisions on intrastate conflicts and elucidate how even reflective Council members become enmeshed with the constraining implications of evolving practices and their normative implications. (1) Previous Council decisions create precedent pressure and give rise to a virtually uncontested permissive Council practice that defines the purview for intervention into such conflicts. (2) A ratcheting practice forces opponents to choose between accepting steadily reinforced Council action, as occurred regarding Sudan/Darfur, and outright blockade, as in the case of Syria. We conclude that practices constitute a source of influence that is not captured by the traditional perspectives on Council activities as the consequence of geopolitical interests or of externally evolving international norms like the 'responsibility to protect' (R2P).}, language = {en} } @book{Doerfler2019, author = {D{\"o}rfler, Thomas}, title = {Security council sanctions governance}, series = {Routledge research on the United Nations ; 6}, journal = {Routledge research on the United Nations ; 6}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {London}, isbn = {978-0-42944-232-2}, doi = {10.4324/9780429442322}, pages = {xiii, 239}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Little is known about how far-reaching decisions in UN Security Council sanctions committees are made. Developing a novel committee governance concept and using examples drawn from sanctions imposed on Iraq, Al-Qaida, Congo, Sudan and Iran, this book shows that Council members tend to follow the will of the powerful, whereas sanctions committee members often decide according to the rules. This is surprising since both Council and committees are staffed by the same member states. Offering a fascinating account of Security Council micro-politics and decision-making processes on sanctions, this rigorous comparative and theory-driven analysis treats the Council and its sanctions committees as distinguishable entities that may differ in decision practice despite having the same members. Drawing extensively on primary documents, diplomatic cables, well-informed press coverage, reports by close observers and extensive interviews with committee members, Council diplomats and sanctions experts, it contrasts with the conventional wisdom on decision-making within these bodies, which suggests that the powerful permanent members would not accept rule-based decisions against their interests. This book will be of interest to policy practitioners and scholars working in the broad field of international organizations and international relations theory as well as those specializing in sanctions, international law, the Security Council and counter-terrorism.}, language = {en} } @article{LieseReiners2019, author = {Liese, Andrea Margit and Reiners, Nina}, title = {The Eye of the Beholder?}, series = {The International Rule of Law: Rise or Decline?}, journal = {The International Rule of Law: Rise or Decline?}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, address = {Oxford}, isbn = {0191879398}, doi = {10.1093/oso/9780198843603.003.0021}, pages = {335 -- 343}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @misc{SchulzeGabrechten2019, author = {Schulze-Gabrechten, Lena}, title = {An organizational approach to public governance}, series = {Public administration}, volume = {97}, journal = {Public administration}, number = {2}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {0033-3298}, doi = {10.1111/padm.12590}, pages = {483 -- 485}, year = {2019}, abstract = {In this volume, Egeberg and Trondal put forward an 'organizational approach to public governance' (p. 1) that, in their view, complements existing explanations for organizational change and behaviour in governance processes ('Understanding') and produces relevant advice for practitioners, specifically anyone involved in reorganizing public administration ('Design'). Following the authors' introduction of the theoretical reasoning behind their approach (chapter 1), they present supporting findings that are based on new material (chapters 2 and 9), but mainly draw on six previously published research articles (chapters 3-8). Egeberg and Trondal conclude with possible 'design implications' of said findings (chapter 9). Their 'organizational approach' focuses on the impact of selected organizational characteristics on decision-making in and on behalf of government organizations in policy-making generally ('public governance') and administrative politics more specifically ('meta-governance'). The authors concentrate on three sets of 'classical' organizational characteristics: structure (mainly vertical and horizontal specialization), demography (personnel composition), and locus (geographical location). The conceptual part of the volume convincingly summarizes 'formal organization matters'—arguments from the literature for each of the individual organizational factors. Their main, already well-established argument is that the way an organization is formally set up makes some (reform) decisions more likely than others—a line of reasoning that the authors present as neglected in governance literature. In the following five empirical chapters, the authors show that aspects of horizontal and vertical specialization—mainly operationalized by Gulicks' principles of horizontal specialization and the idea of primary versus secondary affiliation of staff—affect organizational behaviour. Readers learn that whether government levels are organized according to a territorial or non-territorial principle impacts the power relationship between levels: non-territorial organization at the supranational level tends to empower the centre against lower levels of government. There are two chapters on the decision-making behaviour of commissioners and officials in the European Commission, both showing that organizational affiliation trumps demographic background factors such as nationality, even with temporary staff. Chapter 5 addresses coordination dynamics in the European multi-level system and finds that coordination at the territorially organized national level thwarts non-territorially organized coordination at the supranational level, resulting in the phenomenon of 'direct' national administration bypassing their national executives. Further, the authors show that vertical specialization—while controlling for other factors such as issue salience—has an effect on officials' behaviour at the national level: agency officials in Norway report significantly less sensitivity towards political signals from the political executive than their colleagues in ministries. Chapter 7 discusses the relevance of geographical location for the relationship between subordinated organizations and their political executive. The authors find that the site of Norwegian agencies does not significantly affect their autonomy, influence, or inter-institutional coordination with the superior ministry. The last empirical chapter focuses on the effect of formal organization on meta-governance, that is, administrative politics. Based on a qualitative case study of a reorganization process in Norway in 2003 involving the synchronized relocation of several agencies after many failed attempts, the authors conclude that administrative reforms can be politically steered and controlled through the organization of the reform process. They argue that amongst other factors the strategic exclusion of opposing actors from the reform process as well as the deliberate increase in situations demanding quick decisions ('action rationality', p. 119) by political leaders helps explain the reform's unexpected success. The last chapter is dedicated to the synthesis of the results and to design implications. Supported by new data from a 2016 survey among Norwegian public officials, the authors conclude that organizational position is the most important influencer of decision-making behaviour, with educational background and previous job experience also playing a large role (p. 135). Consequently, their suggestions for practitioners involved in meta-governance processes concentrate on aspects of the deliberate crafting of organizational specialization to shape organizational positions, and spend less time discussing location and employee demographics. The authors illustrate and contextualize their recommendations with the help of three empirical examples: organizing good governance by balancing political control and independence in the case of agencification, organizing for coping with boundary-spanning challenges such as climate change through inter-organizational structural arrangements, and designing permanent organizational structures for innovative reforms in the public sector (pp. 137 ff.). This volume is an excellent compilation of theoretically informed applications of the all too often undefined 'organization matters' argument. It juxtaposes—particularly in the theory chapter and in the last chapter on design implications—organizational arguments against other explanations of organizational change like historical institutionalism or the garbage can model of decision-making. However, two major aspects of the book's approach are less convincing. First, supplementary explanations such as the garbage can model that are discussed in the reflections on meta-governance are neither argumentatively nor empirically applied to public governance; why should, for example, the 'solutions in search of a problem' idea only be applicable to decisions on reform policy, but not to decisions in all other policy areas? Similarly, it would have been nice to read more on the authors' idea on the interaction between organizational factors and between them and other explanations in the empirical cases on public governance—this would have allowed the reader to get a better idea about how much formal organization matters. The view on bureaucrats' demographic background is slightly confusing: it is presented as a competing approach (p. 7), but also as one of the main organizational factors (p. 12). Second, as the authors themselves state, the concept of governance is about 'steering through collective action' (p. 3) and focuses on interactive processes, and explicitly includes non-governmental actors in the policy-making equation. Against this background it seems unfortunate that most of the work presented in the book takes an exclusively governmental perspective and the justification for it remains rather superficial. It would be preferable and even necessary to see the organizational arguments—at least theoretically or through discussing appropriate literature—applied to interactive governance processes involving other actors and/or to non-bureaucratic organizations. Regarding its methodology, the specifics of the proposed approach deserve to be addressed more systematically and critically in the book. Except for chapters 2, 3 and 5 (literature-based studies) as well as chapter 8 (single case study), the empirical studies follow a quantitative logic and are informed by data on self-reported behaviour through large-N panel surveys with public officials. In terms of analysis, descriptive statistics or basic inferential statistics (linear regression) are employed. Certainly, the authors are aware of the limitations of their data sources, such as the results being possibly affected by social desirability, and they discuss and justify them in the chapters individually (e.g., on pp. 47, 89). Still, their approach could be strengthened with a more cautious account on the extent to which their choice of data and methods is able to uncover the 'causal impact of organizational factors in public governance processes' (p. 131, emphasis added) and with some suggestions for widening their methodological toolbox in the future. On this note, the survey method presented as new on p. 135 is not a particularly convincing choice. The authors do not lay out a research agenda; a surprising omission. This is, however, somewhat made up for by the concluding chapter's stimulating discussion of the possible real-world implications of their findings and perspective, skilfully using organization theory as a 'craft' (p. 29).}, language = {en} } @misc{Heucher2019, author = {Heucher, Angela}, title = {Reconsidering overlap in global food security governance}, series = {Food security : the science, sociology and economics of food production and access to food}, volume = {11}, journal = {Food security : the science, sociology and economics of food production and access to food}, number = {3}, publisher = {Springer Netherlands}, address = {Dordrecht}, issn = {1876-4517}, doi = {10.1007/s12571-019-00916-z}, pages = {555 -- 558}, year = {2019}, language = {en} }