@misc{Franzke2019, author = {Franzke, Jochen}, title = {Rezension zu: The Routledge handbook of international local government / edited by Richard Kerley, Joyce Liddle and Pamela T. Dunning. - London: Routledge, 2018. - 528 pp. - ISBN: 978- 11-3823-472-7, ISBN: 978-1-31530-627-8}, series = {Local government studies}, volume = {46}, journal = {Local government studies}, number = {1}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {0300-3930}, doi = {10.1080/03003930.2020.1702771}, pages = {163 -- 165}, year = {2019}, abstract = {When I took up the task of writing a review of the Routledge handbook of international local government, it occurred to me, as a member of the generation of the 1950s, that I had not even considered whether such compendiums were even necessary in times of easy internet searching. This review will look at whether that is indeed the case. Social-science handbooks naturally are very broad. This also applies to the particular handbook under review. It comprises six content-thematic parts with 33 chapters by 73 authors from 21 countries, with the UK and USA dominant. The focal points, discussed in more detail below, are local elections and local governance, local governments in different jurisdictions, the challenges of local government services, citizen engagement in local affairs, and local authorities in multi-level finance systems that shape how municipal governments 'get and spend' public money. These are exactly the topics actually discussed in the international community of political scientists. As a preliminary, the editors work out the theoretical-methodological foundations of the topic. They define 'the local' as 'geographically defined sub-national state administrative or political divisions' (p. 3). As next steps, they analyse the difference between government and governance, and investigate whether local government is globally important and relevant. Fortunately, they conclude that this is indeed the case. Part I of the handbook illustrates 'substantive variations' in the local electoral systems and 'notable divergences in the values and assumptions of local governance among democratic countries' (p. 23). That topic is indeed central to local authorities' legitimacy in democratic political systems. The focus of this part of the handbook is on current research and debates around local electoral systems, the challenges of local political leadership and the councillor's role in modern local policy. Current trends at the local level are analysed from the actors' perspectives or from an economic point of view by comparing institutionalised differences in city managers, mayors and council members across different jurisdictions. Sections that investigate traditional leadership and local government in Pacific Island countries are of particular interest to most Western readers, because in Europe and North America we know too little about such issues in that part of the world. Part II of the handbook presents current development processes and challenges in various local government systems. The chapters are territorially oriented around nation states or sub-national regions. This part of the handbook deal with local government in the Pacific Islands, Latin America, and New Zealand and in the Caribbean. However, the rationale behind country selection is not always clear; important countries like China, India and Nigeria, just to name a few, are absent. Unfortunately, there is no summary article highlighting similarities and differences, as well as the challenges in local government, relating to the countries studied in the book. The development of local services is the focus of Part III of the handbook, however, the definition of local services remains highly controversial and their scope varies widely between the countries. From the 1980s onwards, there was a long-term trend towards the marketisation and economisation of local politics, but since the turn of the millennium, there has been a counter-trend of the return of municipalities and third sector in the fields of local public services (Wollmann 2018). The book analyses the US and Georgia as case studies for development trends, finding that local government entrepreneurship remains an important factor in promoting economic development and strengthening capacities. I was pleased to see that Part IV, the next and most extensive part of the handbook, deals with citizen engagement, because the future of local self-government across the world depends not only on top down activities by local governing elites, but above all on the commitment of the inhabitants of cities and municipalities. Practices and challenges of citizen participation in local government are analysed in inspiring case studies of mid-sized cities in Russia and the United States. The contribution on urban governance of austerity in Europe is also of particular interest. The 2008 global financial crash and the subsequent severe budgetary pressure on municipalities in many countries was a key event in the history and development of local self-government, confronting municipalities with 'the harsh realities of political economy' (p. 293). Several articles analyse the causes of the declining confidence of the citizens in local authorities in some countries. In contrast, the open budget tool in Brazil is as a positive example of collaborative stakeholder engagement. Part V deals with multi-level governance. With the exception of Australia, it is all about Europe, especially the role of municipalities in the EU's multilevel system. The authors conclude that 'local authorities are essential for executing EU legislation, and this turn allows them to shape EU policies' (p. 401). This part of the handbook includes the issue of local territorial reforms, which are central to local autonomy, combined with analyses of redesigning regional government and local-level Europeanisation. Subsequently, by comparing the local government systems of Southern Europe (France, Italy, Portugal and Spain), the authors underline convincingly the role of traditions, identity, legal frameworks and institutions in local government. Part VI of the book deals with the financial dimension of local self-government under the heading 'Getting and spending'. This is indeed the 'key source of dispute between local and central government' (p. 467) and the crucial factor shaping true local autonomy. Meritoriously, this part also contains a chapter on the fight against corruption and unethical behaviour by public servants. Based on research linking corruption to transparency and accountability, two case studies describe how Tbilisi (Georgia) and Lviv (Ukraine) try to reduce corruption in government budgeting and procurement. Enhancing Value-For-Money audit in local government highlights another important side of local finance. An interesting comparison reveals significant differences in local government revenues in European Union member states between 2000 and 2014. Of course, even in a 530-page book, some important aspects remain underexposed. Above all, I would have liked more attention on some of the enormous future challenges facing democratic systems and with them local governments all over the world, such as digitisation (e.g. in smart cities), the integration of migrants or climate change. The international networking of municipalities should also be given greater prominence. To sum it up, The Routledge Handbook on International Local Government is indeed 'ambitiously titled' as the editors underline. Yet, despite my critical objections about its focus on current issues rather than future challenges, they largely fulfil this promise and their general approach has worked well. Across continents and political-administrative cultures, illustrated with many new research findings, they have created an outstanding publication focusing on the challenges and policy of local self-governmental authorities and other local stakeholders. There is a good chance that this handbook will belong in future to the social science standard works on local issues, and be included in academic political science teaching. May the publisher's wish come true; that this book stimulates its readers to develop further research ideas. Finally, I come back to my initial question. 'Old fashioned' printed handbooks like these continue to make sense, even in modern digital times.}, language = {en} } @article{Heucher2019, author = {Heucher, Angela}, title = {Evolving Order? Inter-Organizational Relations in the Organizational}, series = {Forum for Development Studies}, volume = {46}, journal = {Forum for Development Studies}, number = {3}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {0803-9410}, doi = {10.1080/08039410.2018.1562962}, pages = {501 -- 526}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Global food security governance is fraught with fragmentation, overlap and complexity. While calls for coordination and coherence abound, establishing an inter-organizational order at this level seems to remain difficult. While the emphasis in the literature has so far been on the global level, we know less about dynamics of inter-organizational relations in food security governance at the country level, and empirical studies are lacking. It is this research gap the article seeks to address by posing the following research question: In how far does inter-organizational order develop in the organizational field of food security governance at the country level? Theoretically and conceptually, the article draws on sociological institutionalism, and on work on inter-organizational relations. Empirically, the article conducts an exploratory case study of the organizational field of food security governance in C{\^o}te d'Ivoire, building on a qualitative content analysis of organizational documents covering a period from 2003 to 2016 and semi-structured interviews with staff of international organizations from 2016. The article demonstrates that not all of the developments attributed to food security governance at the global level play out in the same way at the country level. Rather, in the case of C{\^o}te d'Ivoire there are signs for a certain degree of coherence between IOs in the field of food security governance and even for an - albeit limited - division of labour. However, this only holds for specific dimensions of the inter-organizational order and appears to be subject to continuous contestation and reinterpretation under the surface.}, 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{Fitzi2019, author = {Fitzi, Gregor}, title = {Max Weber's concept of 'modern politics}, series = {Journal of Classical Sociology}, volume = {19}, journal = {Journal of Classical Sociology}, number = {4}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {1468-795X}, doi = {10.1177/1468795X19851368}, pages = {361 -- 376}, year = {2019}, abstract = {In a critical approach to Mommsen's classical thesis, which states the dependence of Weber's sociology on his political position, the article reconstructs the foundation of Weber's 'The Profession and Vocation of Politics' on his sociological analyses of the political domain in the manuscripts for the posthumous publication of Economy and Society. The first two pages of his 1919 lecture particularly show that Weber can fall back on the definitions of State and politics that he had already developed for his political sociology. Yet, to appreciate the full extent of this theoretical contribution, it is necessary to present Weber's entire ideal-typical analysis of the political. The article then shows that Weber provides an unlabelled definition of 'modern politics' that negates ante litteram Carl Schmitt's foundation of politics on the idea of enmity. In this context, Weber's sound plea for parliamentarism and against the fascination of civil war comes to the fore that he wanted to deliver to his audience of young revolutionaries in January 1919.}, language = {en} } @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{Heucher2019, author = {Heucher, Angela}, title = {Evolving order?}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {110}, issn = {1867-5808}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43308}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-433086}, pages = {26}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Global food security governance is fraught with fragmentation, overlap and complexity. While calls for coordination and coherence abound, establishing an inter-organizational order at this level seems to remain difficult. While the emphasis in the literature has so far been on the global level, we know less about dynamics of inter-organizational relations in food security governance at the country level, and empirical studies are lacking. It is this research gap the article seeks to address by posing the following research question: In how far does inter-organizational order develop in the organizational field of food security governance at the country level? Theoretically and conceptually, the article draws on sociological institutionalism, and on work on inter-organizational relations. Empirically, the article conducts an exploratory case study of the organizational field of food security governance in C{\^o}te d'Ivoire, building on a qualitative content analysis of organizational documents covering a period from 2003 to 2016 and semi-structured interviews with staff of international organizations from 2016. The article demonstrates that not all of the developments attributed to food security governance at the global level play out in the same way at the country level. Rather, in the case of C{\^o}te d'Ivoire there are signs for a certain degree of coherence between IOs in the field of food security governance and even for an - albeit limited - division of labour. However, this only holds for specific dimensions of the inter-organizational order and appears to be subject to continuous contestation and reinterpretation under the surface.}, language = {en} } @article{KlinnertElSafadi2019, author = {Klinnert, Anne and El-Safadi, Majd}, title = {Deutsches Versagen im Fall Khashoggi}, series = {WeltTrends : das außenpolitische Journal}, volume = {27}, journal = {WeltTrends : das außenpolitische Journal}, number = {147}, publisher = {WeltTrends}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-947802-01-2}, issn = {0944-8101}, pages = {70 -- 71}, year = {2019}, language = {de} } @book{OPUS4-43038, title = {Die verschwundene Diplomatie}, editor = {Crome, Erhard and Franzke, Jochen and Kr{\"a}mer, Raimund}, edition = {2. , unver{\"a}nderte Ausg.}, publisher = {Berliner Debatte Wissenschaftsverlag}, address = {Berlin}, isbn = {978-3-947802-27-2}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Das sechste Potsdamer Textbuch ist eine solide und kritische Bilanz der Außenpolitik der DDR. Weder rechtfertigt und verkl{\"a}rt sie nostalgisch eingef{\"a}rbt das vergangene System, noch verurteilt sie pauschal. Den Beitr{\"a}gen liegen sowohl umfangreiche Recherchen in den Archiven als auch lebensweltliche Erfahrungen mit der Außenpolitik des deutschen Realsozialismus zugrunde. Der Band, der zum 70. Geburtstag des ehemaligen Professors am Institut f{\"u}r Internationale Beziehungen der DDR Claus Montag erschien, macht generelle Linien der ostdeutschen Außenpolitik sichtbar und zeigt zugleich sehr konkret die internationale Vernetzung der DDR in den verschiedenen Phasen des Kalten Krieges.}, language = {de} } @article{KraemerWallraf2019, author = {Kr{\"a}mer, Raimund and Wallraf, Wolfram}, title = {Diplomatie oder Parteiarbeiter?}, series = {Die verschwundene Diplomatie}, journal = {Die verschwundene Diplomatie}, edition = {2. , unver{\"a}nderte Ausg.}, publisher = {WeltTrends}, address = {Potsdam}, pages = {59 -- 72}, year = {2019}, language = {de} } @misc{Ganghof2019, author = {Ganghof, Steffen}, title = {Designing Democratic Constitutions}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {120}, issn = {1867-5808}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-44540}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-445408}, pages = {13}, year = {2019}, abstract = {This article analyses salient trade-offs in the design of democracy. It grounds this analysis in a distinction between two basic models of democracy: simple and complex majoritarianism. These models differ not only in their electoral and party systems, but also in the style of coalition-building. Simple majoritarianism concentrates executive power in a single majority party; complex majoritarianism envisions the formation of shifting, issue-specific coalitions among multiple parties whose programs differ across multiple conflict dimensions. The latter pattern of coalition formation is very difficult to create and sustain under pure parliamentary government. A separation of powers between executive and legislature can facilitate such a pattern, while also achieving central goals of simple majoritarianism: identifiable cabinet alternatives before the election and stable cabinets afterward. The separation of powers can thus balance simple and complex majoritarianism in ways that are unavailable under parliamentarism. The article also compares the presidential and semi-parliamentary versions of the separation of powers. It argues that the latter has important advantages, e.g., when it comes to resolving inter-branch deadlock, as it avoids the concentration of executive power in a single human being.}, language = {en} } @article{ForlenzaTurner2019, author = {Forlenza, Rosario and Turner, Bryan S.}, title = {Das Abendland}, series = {Critical research on religion : crr}, volume = {7}, journal = {Critical research on religion : crr}, number = {1}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {Thousand Oaks}, issn = {2050-3032}, doi = {10.1177/2050303218774891}, pages = {6 -- 23}, year = {2019}, abstract = {The religious borders of Europe, which are more evident and controversial than ever, challenge established forms of political legitimacy and the legal requirements for citizenship. Perhaps covertly rather than overtly, they shape politics and policies. While scholars have once again resorted to Edward Said's Orientalism to describe the dynamic at play, this article argues that the Orientalism narrative of East and West is too simple to capture the actual complexity of Europe's borders. There are four religious and thus four cultural-symbolic borders, which are increasingly defining the continent: north-western Europe is Protestant, southern Europe is Catholic, the East is Orthodox and increasingly nationalist, and the South and Near East are Muslim. The cultural purity and the values that Europe craves in search of identity and order are simply not available in a world of global interconnectedness and social diversity.}, 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} } @article{LewisWaligorska2019, author = {Lewis, Simon and Waligorska, Magdalena}, title = {Introduction: Poland's Wars of Symbols}, series = {East European Politics and Societies: and Cultures}, volume = {33}, journal = {East European Politics and Societies: and Cultures}, number = {2}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {Thousand Oaks}, issn = {0888-3254}, doi = {10.1177/0888325418821418}, pages = {423 -- 434}, year = {2019}, abstract = {This introduction to the special section on Poland's wars of symbols analyzes the symbolic contestation that has characterized the country in recent years, studying a range of phenomena including nation, gender, memory, and religious symbolism within the overall framework of political conflict. In doing so, it offers a multidisciplinary view on political fractures that have resonated throughout Europe and the "West." Overall, the four case studies in this section study ways in which national symbols, topoi, and narratives have been deployed as tools in drawing and redrawing boundaries within society, polarizing and mobilizing the political camps as well as contesting and resisting power. These studies enable us to situate recent political events in a historical perspective, mapping the rise of populism in Poland against the background of legacies specific to the East-Central European region.}, language = {en} } @misc{Hickmann2019, author = {Hickmann, Thomas}, title = {Rezension zu: Andonova, Liliana B: Governance Entrepreneurs: International Organizations and the Rise of Global Public-Private Partnerships. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. - XI,275 S. - ISBN 978-1-107-16566-3}, series = {Global environmental politics}, volume = {19}, journal = {Global environmental politics}, number = {2}, publisher = {MIT Press}, address = {Cambridge}, issn = {1526-3800}, doi = {10.1162/glep_r_00510}, pages = {175 -- 177}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @article{JannWegrich2019, author = {Jann, Werner and Wegrich, Kai}, title = {Generalists and specialists in executive politics: Why ambitious meta-policies so often fail}, series = {Public administration}, volume = {97}, journal = {Public administration}, number = {4}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {0033-3298}, doi = {10.1111/padm.12614}, pages = {845 -- 860}, year = {2019}, abstract = {This article contributes to the politics of policy-making in executive government. It introduces the analytical distinction between generalists and specialists as antagonistic players in executive politics and develops the claim that policy specialists are in a structurally advantaged position to succeed in executive politics and to fend off attempts by generalists to influence policy choices through cross-cutting reform measures. Contrary to traditional textbook public administration, we explain the views of generalists and specialists not through their training but their positions within an organization. We combine established approaches from public policy and organization theory to substantiate this claim and to define the dilemma that generalists face when developing government-wide reform policies ('meta-policies') as well as strategies to address this problem. The article suggests that the conceptual distinction between generalists and specialists allows for a more precise analysis of the challenges for policy-making across government organizations than established approaches.}, language = {en} } @article{Kaya2019, author = {Kaya, Muzaffer}, title = {The potentials and challenges of left populism in Turkey}, series = {British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies}, volume = {46}, journal = {British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies}, number = {5}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {1353-0194}, doi = {10.1080/13530194.2019.1634398}, pages = {797 -- 812}, year = {2019}, abstract = {In spring 2015, Turkey witnessed the unexpected rise of the HDP, founded by the Kurdish Liberation Movement together with the Turkish radical left, against President Erdoğan's authoritarian rule. In this article, I will employ contemporary literature on left populism to explain the HDP's rise as an alternative left hegemonic project against the neoliberal authoritarianism that Erdoğan represents. After discussing the historical context from which the HDP emerged and grew, I will evaluate its discourse and strategies based on a conceptualization of left-wing populism. Lastly, I will discuss the challenges that the HDP confronted after the June 2015 elections and the differences between the Turkish and Western European contexts for a left-wing populist strategy.}, language = {en} }