@misc{CaliendoSchmidl2016, author = {Caliendo, Marco and Schmidl, Ricarda}, title = {Youth unemployment and active labor market policies in Europe}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {125}, issn = {1867-5808}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43695}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-436950}, pages = {32}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Since the economic crisis in 2008, European youth unemployment rates have been persistently high at around 20\% on average. The majority of European countries spends significant resources each year on active labor market programs (ALMP) with the aim of improving the integration prospects of struggling youths. Among the most common programs used are training courses, job search assistance and monitoring, subsidized employment, and public work programs. For policy makers, it is of upmost importance to know which of these programs work and which are able to achieve the intended goals - may it be the integration into the first labor market or further education. Based on a detailed assessment of the particularities of the youth labor market situation, we discuss the pros and cons of different ALMP types. We then provide a comprehensive survey of the recent evidence on the effectiveness of these ALMP for youth in Europe, highlighting factors that seem to promote or impede their effectiveness in practice. Overall, the findings with respect to employment outcomes are only partly promising. While job search assistance (with and without monitoring) results in overwhelmingly positive effects, we find more mixed effects for training and wage subsidies, whereas the effects for public work programs are clearly negative. The evidence on the impact of ALMP on furthering education participation as well as employment quality is scarce, requiring additional research and allowing only limited conclusions so far.}, language = {en} } @article{Kalczewiak2020, author = {Kalczewiak, Mariusz}, title = {Yiddish Buenos Aires and the struggle to leave the margins}, series = {East European Jewish affairs}, volume = {50}, journal = {East European Jewish affairs}, number = {1-2}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {1350-1674}, doi = {10.1080/13501674.2020.1774275}, pages = {115 -- 133}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Yiddish culture developed in Argentina within the context of a self-perception that figured Buenos Aires as a marginal and peripheral locale on the global Yiddish map. Against this backdrop, Argentine Yiddish culturalists argued for the strengthening of local Yiddish culture with a goal of elevating Buenos Aires's status within the international hierarchies of Yiddish culture. Buenos Aires indeed emerged in the 1920s as a producer of Yiddish cultural contents, maintained networks of international cultural contacts with other Yiddish centers, financially supported Eastern European Yiddish establishments, and hoped that these contacts would allow for solving Buenos Aires reputation problems. The pre-World War II preoccupation with the status of Buenos Aires as a center of Yiddish culture provided a basis upon which post-Holocaust discourse of Argentine Jewish responsibility for the maintenance of Yiddish culture was constructed.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Heinzel2021, author = {Heinzel, Mirko Noa}, title = {World Bank staff and project implementation}, year = {2021}, language = {en} } @article{Doerfler2023, author = {D{\"o}rfler, Thomas}, title = {Why rules matter: shaping security council sanctions policy in counterterrorism and beyond}, series = {Journal of global security studies}, volume = {8}, journal = {Journal of global security studies}, number = {1}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {2057-3170}, doi = {10.1093/jogss/ogac041}, pages = {19}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Sanctions are critical to the Security Council's efforts to fight terrorism. What is striking is that the Council's sanctions regimes are subject to detailed sets of rules and decision criteria. The scholarship on human rights in counterterrorism assumes that rights advocacy and court litigation have prompted this development. The article complements this literature by highlighting an unexplored internal driver of legal-regulatory decision-making and explores how mixed-motive interest constellations among Security Council members have affected the extent of committee regulations and the content of decisions taken by sanctions committees. Based on internal documents and diplomatic cables, a comparative analysis of the Iraq sanctions regime and the counterterrorism sanctions regime demonstrates that mixed-motive interest constellations among Security Council members provide incentives to elaborate rules to guide decision-making resulting in legal-regulatory sanctions governance, even if the human rights of targeted individuals are not at stake. For comparative leverage and to assess the limits of the proposed mechanism, the analysis is briefly extended to other sanctions regimes targeting individuals (Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sudan). The findings have implications for this essential tool of the Security Council to react to threats to peace as diverse as counterterrorism, nonproliferation, and internal armed conflict.}, language = {en} } @article{HeroldLieseBuschetal.2021, author = {Herold, Jana and Liese, Andrea and Busch, Per-Olof and Feil, Hauke}, title = {Why national ministries consider the policy advice of international bureaucracies}, series = {International studies quarterly : the journal of the International Studies Association}, volume = {65}, journal = {International studies quarterly : the journal of the International Studies Association}, number = {3}, publisher = {Oxford Univ. Press}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0020-8833}, doi = {10.1093/isq/sqab044}, pages = {669 -- 682}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Scholars of international relations and public administration widely assume that international bureaucracies, in their role as policy advisors, directly influence countries' domestic policies. Yet, this is not true across the board. Why do some countries closely consider the advice of international bureaucracies while others do not? This article argues that international bureaucracies' standing as sources of expertise is crucial. We tested this argument using data from a unique survey that measured prevalent practices of advice utilization in thematically specialized policy units of national ministries in a representative sample of more than a hundred countries. Our findings show that ministries' perceptions of international bureaucracies' expertise, that is, specialized and reliable knowledge, are the key factor. International bureaucracies influence national ministries directly and without the support of other actors that may also have an interest in the international bureaucracies' policy advice. Our analysis also demonstrates that the effects of alternative means of influence, such as third-party pressure and coercion, are themselves partly dependent on international bureaucracies' reputation as experts. The findings presented in this article reinforce the emphasis on expertise as a source of international bureaucracies' influence, and provide a crucial test of its importance.}, language = {en} } @misc{GieblerRuthTanneberg2018, author = {Giebler, Heiko and Ruth, Saskia P. and Tanneberg, Dag}, title = {Why choice matters}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {104}, issn = {1867-5808}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-42789}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-427891}, pages = {10}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Measures of democracy are in high demand. Scientific and public audiences use them to describe political realities and to substantiate causal claims about those realities. This introduction to the thematic issue reviews the history of democracy measurement since the 1950s. It identifies four development phases of the field, which are characterized by three recurrent topics of debate: (1) what is democracy, (2) what is a good measure of democracy, and (3) do our measurements of democracy register real-world developments? As the answers to those questions have been changing over time, the field of democracy measurement has adapted and reached higher levels of theoretical and methodological sophistication. In effect, the challenges facing contemporary social scientists are not only limited to the challenge of constructing a sound index of democracy. Today, they also need a profound understanding of the differences between various measures of democracy and their implications for empirical applications. The introduction outlines how the contributions to this thematic issue help scholars cope with the recurrent issues of conceptualization, measurement, and application, and concludes by identifying avenues for future research.}, language = {en} } @article{HolthausStockmann2020, author = {Holthaus, Leonie and Stockmann, Nils}, title = {Who makes the world?}, series = {New perspectives}, volume = {28}, journal = {New perspectives}, number = {3}, publisher = {Sage Publications}, address = {Thousand Oaks, CA}, issn = {2336-825X}, doi = {10.1177/2336825X20935246}, pages = {413 -- 427}, year = {2020}, abstract = {In this essay, we consider the role of academics as change-makers. There is a long line of reflection about academics' sociopolitical role(s) in international relations (IR). Yet, our attempt differs from available considerations in two regards. First, we emphasize that academics are not a homogenous group. While some keep their distance from policymakers, others frequently provide policy advice. Hence, positions and possibilities of influence differ. Second, our argument is not oriented towards the past but the future. That is, we develop our reflections on academics as change-makers by outlining the vision of a 'FutureLab', an innovative, future forum that brings together different world-makers who are united in their attempt to improve 'the world'. Our vision accounts for current, perhaps alarming trends in academia, such as debates about the (in)ability to confront post-truth politics. Still, it is a (critically) optimistic one and can be read as an invitation for experimentation. Finally, we sympathize with voices demanding the democratization of academia and find that further cross-disciplinary dialogues within academia and dialogues between different academics, civil society activists and policymakers may help in finding creditable solutions to problems such as climate change and populism.}, language = {en} } @article{LundgrenTallbergSommereretal.2023, author = {Lundgren, Magnus and Tallberg, Jonas and Sommerer, Thomas and Squatrito, Theresa}, title = {When are international organizations responsive to policy problems?}, series = {International studies quarterly : the journal of the International Studies Association}, volume = {67}, journal = {International studies quarterly : the journal of the International Studies Association}, number = {3}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0020-8833}, doi = {10.1093/isq/sqad045}, pages = {14}, year = {2023}, abstract = {When are international organizations (IOs) responsive to the policy problems that motivated their establishment? While it is a conventional assumption that IOs exist to address transnational challenges, the question of whether and when IO policy-making is responsive to shifts in underlying problems has not been systematically explored. This study investigates the responsiveness of IOs from a large-n, comparative approach. Theoretically, we develop three alternative models of IO responsiveness, emphasizing severeness, dependence, and power differentials. Empirically, we focus on the domain of security, examining the responsiveness of eight multi-issue IOs to armed conflict between 1980 and 2015, using a novel and expansive dataset on IO policy decisions. Our findings suggest, first, that IOs are responsive to security problems and, second, that responsiveness is not primarily driven by dependence or power differentials but by problem severity. An in-depth study of the responsiveness of the UN Security Council using more granular data confirms these findings. As the first comparative study of whether and when IO policy adapts to problem severity, the article has implications for debates about IO responsiveness, performance, and legitimacy.}, language = {en} } @article{BrenneckeErtugKovacsetal.2022, author = {Brennecke, Julia and Ertug, Gokhan and Kov{\´a}cs, Bal{\´a}zs and Zou, Tengjian}, title = {What does homophily do?}, series = {Academy of Management Annals}, volume = {16}, journal = {Academy of Management Annals}, number = {1}, publisher = {Erlbaum}, address = {Mahwah}, issn = {1941-6520}, doi = {10.5465/annals.2020.0230}, pages = {38 -- 69}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Understanding the consequences of homophily, which is among the most widely observed social phenomena, is important, with implications for management theory and practice. Therefore, we review management research on the consequences of homophily. As these consequences have been studied at the individual, dyad, team, organizational, and macro levels, we structure our review accordingly. We highlight findings that are consistent and contradictory, as well as those that point to boundary conditions or moderators. In conducting our review, we also derive implications for management research from insights gained by research in other disciplines on this topic. We raise specific issues and opportunities for future research at each level, and conclude with a discussion of broader future research directions, both empirical and conceptual, that apply across levels. We hope that our review will open new vistas in research on this important topic.}, language = {en} } @techreport{DebreSommerer2023, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Debre, Maria Josepha and Sommerer, Thomas}, title = {Weathering the storm?}, series = {IGCC series on authoritarian regimes and international organizations}, journal = {IGCC series on authoritarian regimes and international organizations}, publisher = {UC Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation}, address = {La Jolla, CA}, pages = {38}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Democratization scholars are currently debating if we are indeed witnessing a third wave of autocratization. While this has led to an extensive debate about the future of the liberal international order, we still know relatively little about the consequences of autocratization for international organizations (IOs). In this article, we explore to what extent autocratization has led to changes in the composition of IO membership. We propose three different ways of conceptualizing autocratization of IO membership. We argue that we should move away from a dichotomous understanding of regime type and regime change, but rather focus on composition of subregime types to understand current developments. We build on updated membership data for 73 IOs through 2020 to map membership configurations based on the V-Dem Electoral Democracy Index. Contrary to current debates on the crisis of the liberal order, we find that many IOs are not (yet) affected by broad autocratization of their membership that would endanger democratic majorities or overall democratic densities. However, we also observe the disappearance of formerly homogenous democratic clubs due to democratic backsliding in a number of European and Latin American IO member states, as well as a return of autocratic clubs in Southeast Asia and Southern Africa. These findings have important implications for the broader research agenda on international democracy promotion and human right protection as well as the study of legitimacy and the effectiveness of international organizations.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Janetschek2016, author = {Janetschek, Hannah}, title = {Water development programs in India}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-401337}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {279}, year = {2016}, abstract = {In the past decades, development cooperation (DC) led by conventional bi- and multilateral donors has been joined by a large number of small, private or public-private donors. This pluralism of actors raises questions as to whether or not these new donors are able to implement projects more or less effectively than their conventional counterparts. In contrast to their predecessors, the new donors have committed themselves to be more pragmatic, innovative and flexible in their development cooperation measures. However, they are also criticized for weakening the function of local civil society and have the reputation of being an intransparent and often controversial alternative to public services. With additional financial resources and their new approach to development, the new donors have been described in the literature as playing a controversial role in transforming development cooperation. This dissertation compares the effectiveness of initiatives by new and conventional donors with regard to the provision of public goods and services to the poor in the water and sanitation sector in India. India is an emerging country but it is experiencing high poverty rates and poor water supply in predominantly rural areas. It lends itself for analyzing this research theme as it is currently being confronted by a large number of actors and approaches that aim to find solutions for these challenges . In the theoretical framework of this dissertation, four governance configurations are derived from the interaction of varying actor types with regard to hierarchical and non-hierarchical steering of their interactions. These four governance configurations differ in decision-making responsibilities, accountability and delegation of tasks or direction of information flow. The assumption on actor relationships and steering is supplemented by possible alternative explanations in the empirical investigation, such as resource availability, the inheritance of structures and institutions from previous projects in a project context, gaining acceptance through beneficiaries (local legitimacy) as a door opener, and asymmetries of power in the project context. Case study evidence from seven projects reveals that the actors' relationship is important for successful project delivery. Additionally, the results show that there is a systematic difference between conventional and new donors. Projects led by conventional donors were consistently more successful, due to an actor relationship that placed the responsibility in the hands of the recipient actors and benefited from the trust and reputation of a long-term cooperation. The trust and reputation of conventional donors always went along with a back-up from federal level and trickled down as reputation also at local level implementation. Furthermore, charismatic leaders, as well as the acquired structures and institutions of predecessor projects, also proved to be a positive influencing factor for successful project implementation. Despite the mixed results of the seven case studies, central recommendations for action can be derived for the various actors involved in development cooperation. For example, new donors could fulfill a supplementary function with conventional donors by developing innovative project approaches through pilot studies and then implementing them as a supplement to the projects of conventional donors on the ground. In return, conventional donors would have to make room the new donors by integrating their approaches into already programs in order to promote donor harmonization. It is also important to identify and occupy niches for activities and to promote harmonization among donors on state and federal sides. The empirical results demonstrate the need for a harmonization strategy of different donor types in order to prevent duplication, over-experimentation and the failure of development programs. A transformation to successful and sustainable development cooperation can only be achieved through more coordination processes and national self-responsibility.}, language = {en} } @article{TuttnauerWegmann2022, author = {Tuttnauer, Or and Wegmann, Simone}, title = {Voting for Votes}, series = {American political science review}, volume = {116}, journal = {American political science review}, number = {4}, publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press}, address = {New York}, issn = {0003-0554}, doi = {10.1017/S0003055422000338}, pages = {1357 -- 1374}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Scholars frequently expect parties to act strategically in parliament, hoping to affect their electoral fortunes. Voters assumingly assess parties by their activity and vote accordingly. However, the retrospective voting literature looks mostly at the government's outcomes, leaving the opposition understudied. We argue that, for opposition parties, legislative voting constitutes an effective vote-seeking activity as a signaling tool of their attitude toward the government. We suggest that conflictual voting behavior affects voters through two mechanisms: as a signal of opposition valence and as means of ideological differentiation from the government. We present both aggregate- and individual-level analyses, leveraging a dataset of 169 party observations from 10 democracies and linking it to the CSES survey data of 27,371 respondents. The findings provide support for the existence of both mechanisms. Parliamentary conflict on legislative votes has a general positive effect on opposition parties' electoral performance, conditional on systemic and party-specific factors.}, language = {en} } @misc{BielawskiJurišićLenzetal.2006, author = {Bielawski, Martina and Jurišić, J. and Lenz, T. and Maxian Rusche, T. and Nippert, C.}, title = {Via : communis Europa ; Europe's architecture in 2020}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-48454}, year = {2006}, abstract = {Forum: EU-Diplomatie im Jahre 2020}, language = {en} } @article{HaenelBratu2021, author = {H{\"a}nel, Hilkje Charlotte and Bratu, Christine}, title = {Varieties of hermeneutical injustice}, series = {Moral philosophy and politics}, volume = {8}, journal = {Moral philosophy and politics}, number = {2}, publisher = {de Gruyter}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {2194-5616}, doi = {10.1515/mopp-2020-0007}, pages = {331 -- 350}, year = {2021}, abstract = {In this paper, we have two goals. First, we argue for a blueprint for hermeneutical injustice that allows us to schematize existing and discover new varieties of hermeneutical injustices. The underlying insight is that Fricker provides both a general concept of hermeneutical injustice and a specific conception thereof. By distinguishing between the general concept and its specific conceptions, we gain a fruitful tool to detect such injustices in our everyday lives. Second, we use this blueprint to provide a further example of hermeneutical injustice that draws our attention to yet another distinction: Some hermeneutical injustices result from a lack or distortion in the collective conceptual resource and some are due to problems in the application of existing concepts. We argue that to combat hermeneutical injustices, we have to make sure not only that individuals have accurate concepts at their disposal but that they have the capabilities to use these concepts adequately.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Elsaesser2023, author = {Els{\"a}sser, Joshua Philipp}, title = {United Nations beyond the state? Interactions of intergovernmental treaty secretariats in global environmental governance}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-62165}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-621651}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xi, 204}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Within the context of United Nations (UN) environmental institutions, it has become apparent that intergovernmental responses alone have been insufficient for dealing with pressing transboundary environmental problems. Diverging economic and political interests, as well as broader changes in power dynamics and norms within global (environmental) governance, have resulted in negotiation and implementation efforts by UN member states becoming stuck in institutional gridlock and inertia. These developments have sparked a renewed debate among scholars and practitioners about an imminent crisis of multilateralism, accompanied by calls for reforming UN environmental institutions. However, with the rise of transnational actors and institutions, states are not the only relevant actors in global environmental governance. In fact, the fragmented architectures of different policy domains are populated by a hybrid mix of state and non-state actors, as well as intergovernmental and transnational institutions. Therefore, coping with the complex challenges posed by severe and ecologically interdependent transboundary environmental problems requires global cooperation and careful management from actors beyond national governments. This thesis investigates the interactions of three intergovernmental UN treaty secretariats in global environmental governance. These are the secretariats of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. While previous research has acknowledged the increasing autonomy and influence of treaty secretariats in global policy-making, little attention has been paid to their strategic interactions with non-state actors, such as non-governmental organizations, civil society actors, businesses, and transnational institutions and networks, or their coordination with other UN agencies. Through qualitative case-study research, this thesis explores the means and mechanisms of these interactions and investigates their consequences for enhancing the effectiveness and coherence of institutional responses to underlying and interdependent environmental issues. Following a new institutionalist ontology, the conceptual and theoretical framework of this study draws on global governance research, regime theory, and scholarship on international bureaucracies. From an actor-centered perspective on institutional interplay, the thesis employs concepts such as orchestration and interplay management to assess the interactions of and among treaty secretariats. The research methodology involves structured, focused comparison, and process-tracing techniques to analyze empirical data from diverse sources, including official documents, various secondary materials, semi-structured interviews with secretariat staff and policymakers, and observations at intergovernmental conferences. The main findings of this research demonstrate that secretariats employ tailored orchestration styles to manage or bypass national governments, thereby raising global ambition levels for addressing transboundary environmental problems. Additionally, they engage in joint interplay management to facilitate information sharing, strategize activities, and mobilize relevant actors, thereby improving coherence across UN environmental institutions. Treaty secretariats play a substantial role in influencing discourses and knowledge exchange with a wide range of actors. However, they face barriers, such as limited resources, mandates, varying leadership priorities, and degrees of politicization within institutional processes, which may hinder their impact. Nevertheless, the secretariats, together with non-state actors, have made progress in advancing norm-building processes, integrated policy-making, capacity building, and implementation efforts within and across framework conventions. Moreover, they utilize innovative means of coordination with actors beyond national governments, such as data-driven governance, to provide policy-relevant information for achieving overarching governance targets. Importantly, this research highlights the growing interactions between treaty secretariats and non-state actors, which not only shape policy outcomes but also have broader implications for the polity and politics of international institutions. The findings offer opportunities for rethinking collective agency and actor dynamics within UN entities, addressing gaps in institutionalist theory concerning the interaction of actors in inter-institutional spaces. Furthermore, the study addresses emerging challenges and trends in global environmental governance that are pertinent to future policy-making. These include reflections for the debate on reforming international institutions, the role of emerging powers in a changing international world order, and the convergence of public and private authority through new alliance-building and a division of labor between international bureaucracies and non-state actors in global environmental governance.}, language = {en} } @article{SeyfriedAnsmann2018, author = {Seyfried, Markus and Ansmann, Moritz}, title = {Unfreezing higher education institutions?}, series = {Higher Education}, volume = {75}, journal = {Higher Education}, number = {6}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Dordrecht}, issn = {0018-1560}, doi = {10.1007/s10734-017-0185-2}, pages = {1061 -- 1076}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Quality management (QM) in teaching and learning has strongly "infected" the higher education sector and spread around the world. It has almost everywhere become an integral part of higher education reforms. While existing research on QM mainly focuses on the national level from a macro-perspective, its introduction at the institutional level is only rarely analyzed. The present article addresses this research gap. Coming from the perspective of organization studies, it examines the factors that were crucial for the introduction of QM at higher education institutions in Germany. As the introduction of QM can be considered to be a process of organizational change, the article refers to Kurt Lewin's seminal concept of "unfreezing" organizations as a theoretical starting point. Methodologically, a mixed methods approach is applied by combining qualitative data derived from interviews with institutional quality managers and quantitative data gathered from a nationwide survey. The results show that the introduction of QM is initiated by either internal or external processes. Furthermore, some institutions follow a rather voluntary approach of unfreezing, while others show modes of forced unfreezing. Consequently, the way how QM was introduced has important implications for its implementation.}, language = {en} } @misc{Terhalle2011, author = {Terhalle, Maximilian}, title = {Understanding the limits of power}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {102}, issn = {1867-5808}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-41372}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-413722}, pages = {631 -- 640}, year = {2011}, abstract = {The main thread of this review article is to identify the reasons of how to account for the trajectory of American power in the region. Leaving behind the vast amount of highly politicised and hastily compiled volumes of recent years (notwithstanding valuable exceptions), the monographs composed by Lawrence Freedman, Trita Parsi and Oliver Roy attempt to subtly disentangle the intricacies of US involvement in the region from highly distinct perspectives. One caveat for International Relations theorists is that none of the aforementioned authors intends to provide theoretical frameworks for his examination. However, since IR theory has damagingly neglected history in the last decades, the works under review here, at least in part, compensate for this disciplinary and intellectual failure. In conclusion, Freedman's in-depth approach as a diplomatic historian, with its under-lying reference to the various traditions in US foreign policy thinking, is most illuminating, while Parsi's contestable account focuses too narrowly on the Iran-Israel relationship. Roy's explications fail to show how and why the 'ideological' element in US foreign policy came to carry exceedingly more weight after 2001 than it did in the 1990s.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Dannemann2024, author = {Dannemann, Udo}, title = {Understanding neoliberal subjectification}, series = {Economy, society and politics : socio-economic and political education in schools and universities}, booktitle = {Economy, society and politics : socio-economic and political education in schools and universities}, editor = {Fridrich, Christian and Hagedorn, Udo and Hedtke, Reinhold and Mittnik, Philipp and Tafner, Georg}, publisher = {Springer Fachmedien}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-42524-1}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-658-42525-8_10}, pages = {217 -- 236}, year = {2024}, abstract = {The contribution explores how an understanding of neoliberal subjectification in socio-economic education can serve to counteract the trend marketisation of democracy. Drawing on Foucault's lectures on biopolitics and Brown's current analysis of neoliberalism, it lays out a sociological explanation that treats the idea of homo economicus as a structuring element of our society and outlines the threat this poses to the liberal democratic order. The second part of the contribution outlines - through immanent critique - an ideology-critical analytical competence that uses key problems to illuminate socially critical perspectives on social reality. The objective is to challenge some of the foundations of social order (Salomon, D. Kritische politische Bildung. Ein Versuch. In B. Widmaier \& Overwien, B. (Hrsg.), Was heißt heute kritische politische Bildung? (S. 232-239). Wochenschau, 2013) in pursuit of the ultimate objective of an educated and assertive citizenry.}, language = {en} } @article{FleischerBuzogany2023, author = {Fleischer, Julia and Buzog{\´a}ny, Aron}, title = {Unboxing international public administrations}, series = {The American review of public administration}, volume = {53}, journal = {The American review of public administration}, number = {1}, publisher = {Sage}, address = {Thousand Oaks, Calif.}, issn = {0275-0740}, doi = {10.1177/02750740221136488}, pages = {23 -- 35}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Recent debates in international relations increasingly focus on bureaucratic apparatuses of international organizations and highlight their role, influence, and autonomy in global public policy. In this contribution we follow the recent call made by Moloney and Rosenbloom in this journal to make use of "public administrative theory and empirically based knowledge in analyzing the behavior of international and regional organizations" and offer a systematic analysis of the inner structures of these administrative bodies. Changes in these structures can reflect both the (re-)assignment of responsibilities, competencies, and expertise, but also the (re)allocation of resources, staff, and corresponding signalling of priorities. Based on organizational charts, we study structural changes within 46 international bureaucracies in the UN system. Tracing formal changes to all internal units over two decades, this contribution provides the first longitudinal assessment of structural change at the international level. We demonstrate that the inner structures of international bureaucracies in the UN system became more fragmented over time but also experienced considerable volatility with periods of structural growth and retrenchment. The analysis also suggests that IO's political features yield stronger explanatory power for explaining these structural changes than bureaucratic determinants. We conclude that the politics of structural change in international bureaucracies is a missing piece in the current debate on international public administrations that complements existing research perspectives by reiterating the importance of the political context of international bureaucracies as actors in global governance.}, language = {en} } @article{Mitra2011, author = {Mitra, Subrata}, title = {Turning Aliens into Citizens}, series = {WeltTrends-Papiere}, journal = {WeltTrends-Papiere}, number = {19}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1864-0656}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-63558}, pages = {120 -- 127}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Inhalt: Empirical results of the survey ; A cumulative index of citizenship ; Jammu and Kashmir: Contesting "Indian" citizenship ; Conclusion}, language = {en} }