@misc{GuskeJacobHirschnitzGarbersetal.2019,
  author    = {Guske, Anna-Lena and Jacob, Klaus and Hirschnitz-Garbers, Martin and Peuckert, Jan and Schridde, Stefan and Stinner, Sven and Wolf, Franziska and Zahrnt, Dominik and Ziesemer, Florence},
  title     = {Stories that change our world?},
  series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {612},
  issn      = {1867-5808},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-47278},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-472783},
  pages     = {14},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Narratives are shaping our understanding of the world. They convey values and norms and point to desirable future developments. In this way, they justify and legitimize political actions and social practices. Once a narrative has emerged and this world view is supported by broad societal groups, narratives can provide powerful momentum to trigger innovation and changes in the course of action. Narratives, however, are not necessarily based on evidence and precise categories, but can instead be vague and ambiguous in order to be acceptable and attractive to different actors. However, the more open and inclusive a narrative is, the less impact can be expected. We investigate whether there is a shared narrative in research for the sustainable economy and how this can be evaluated in terms of its potential societal impact. The paper carves out the visions for the future that have been underlying the research projects conducted within the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) funding programme "The Sustainable Economy". It then analyzes whether these visions are compatible with narratives dominating societal discourse on the sustainable economy, and concludes how the use of visions and narratives in research can contribute to fostering societal transformations.},
  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}
}
@misc{GanghofEppnerSteckeretal.2019,
  author    = {Ganghof, Steffen and Eppner, Sebastian and Stecker, Christian and Heeß, Katja and Schukraft, Stefan},
  title     = {Do minority cabinets govern more flexibly and inclusively?},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {114},
  issn      = {1867-5808},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-43417},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-434175},
  pages     = {541 -- 561},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {A widespread view in political science is that minority cabinets govern more flexibly and inclusively, more in line with a median-oriented and 'consensual' vision of democracy. Yet there is only little empirical evidence for it. We study legislative coalition-building in the German state of North-Rhine-Westphalia, which was ruled by a minority government between 2010 and 2012. We compare the inclusiveness of legislative coalitions under minority and majority cabinets, based on 1028 laws passed in the 1985-2017 period, and analyze in detail the flexibility of legislative coalition formation under the minority government. Both quantitative analyses are complemented with brief case studies of specific legislation. We find, first, that the minority cabinet did not rule more inclusively. Second, the minority cabinet's legislative flexibility was fairly limited; to the extent that it existed, it follows a pattern that cannot be explained on the basis of the standard spatial model with policy-seeking parties.},
  language  = {en}
}