@article{BuenningHipp2022, author = {B{\"u}nning, Mareike and Hipp, Lena}, title = {How can we become more equal?}, series = {Journal of European social policy}, volume = {32}, journal = {Journal of European social policy}, number = {2}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {0958-9287}, doi = {10.1177/09589287211035701}, pages = {182 -- 196}, year = {2022}, abstract = {This study examines how public policies affect parents' preferences for a more egalitarian division of paid and unpaid work. Based on the assumption that individuals develop their preferences within a specific policy context, we examine how changes in three policies affect mothers' and fathers' work-family preferences: the availability of high-quality, affordable childcare; the right to return to a full-time job after having reduced hours to part-time and an increase in the number of 'partner months' in parental leave schemes. Analysing a unique probability sample of parents with young children in Germany from 2015 (N = 1756), we find that fathers would want to work slightly fewer hours if they had the right to return to a full-time position after working part-time, and mothers would want to work slightly more hours if childcare opportunities were improved. Full-time working parents, moreover, are found to prefer fewer hours independent of the policy setting, while non-employed parents would like to work at least some hours. Last but not least, our analyses show that increasing the number of partner months in the parental leave scheme considerably increases fathers' preferences for longer and mothers' preferences for shorter leave. Increasing the number of partner months in parental schemes hence has the greatest potential to increase gender equality.}, language = {en} } @article{RockstroemKotzeMilutinovićetal.2024, author = {Rockstr{\"o}m, Johan and Kotz{\´e}, Louis and Milutinović, Svetlana and Biermann, Frank and Brovkin, Victor and Donges, Jonathan and Ebbesson, Jonas and French, Duncan and Gupta, Joyeeta and Kim, Rakhyun and Lenton, Timothy and Lenzi, Dominic and Nakicenovic, Nebojsa and Neumann, Barbara and Schuppert, Fabian and Winkelmann, Ricarda and Bosselmann, Klaus and Folke, Carl and Lucht, Wolfgang and Schlosberg, David and Richardson, Katherine and Steffen, Will}, title = {The planetary commons}, series = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America}, volume = {121}, journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America}, number = {5}, publisher = {National Academy of Sciences}, address = {Washington, DC}, issn = {1091-6490}, doi = {10.1073/pnas.2301531121}, pages = {10}, year = {2024}, abstract = {The Anthropocene signifies the start of a no- analogue tra­jectory of the Earth system that is fundamentally different from the Holocene. This new trajectory is characterized by rising risks of triggering irreversible and unmanageable shifts in Earth system functioning. We urgently need a new global approach to safeguard critical Earth system regulating functions more effectively and comprehensively. The global commons framework is the closest example of an existing approach with the aim of governing biophysical systems on Earth upon which the world collectively depends. Derived during stable Holocene conditions, the global commons framework must now evolve in the light of new Anthropocene dynamics. This requires a fundamental shift from a focus only on governing shared resources beyond national jurisdiction, to one that secures critical functions of the Earth system irrespective of national boundaries. We propose a new framework—the planetary commons—which differs from the global commons frame­work by including not only globally shared geographic regions but also critical biophysical systems that regulate the resilience and state, and therefore livability, on Earth. The new planetary commons should articulate and create comprehensive stewardship obligations through Earth system governance aimed at restoring and strengthening planetary resilience and justice.}, language = {en} } @misc{vanHeldenReichard2018, author = {van Helden, Jan and Reichard, Christoph}, title = {Management control and public sector performance management}, series = {Baltic Journal of Management}, volume = {14}, journal = {Baltic Journal of Management}, number = {1}, publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}, address = {Bingley}, issn = {1746-5265}, doi = {10.1108/BJM-01-2018-0021}, pages = {158 -- 176}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether and how evolving ideas about management control (MC) emerge in research about public sector performance management (PSPM). Design/methodology/approach This is a literature review on PSPM research through using a set of key terms derived from a review of recent developments in MC. Findings MC research, originating in the management accounting discipline, is largely disconnected from PSPM research as part of public administration and public management disciplines. Overlaps between MC and PSPM research are visible in a cybernetic control approach, control variety and contingency-based reasoning. Both academic communities share an understanding of certain issues, although under diverging labels, especially enabling controls or, in a more general sense, usable performance controls, horizontal controls and control packaging. Specific MC concepts are valuable for future PSPM research, i.e. trust as a complement of performance-based controls in complex settings, and strategy as a variable in contingency-based studies. Research limitations/implications Breaking the boundaries between two currently remote research disciplines, on the one hand, might dismantle "would-be" innovations in one of these disciplines, and, on the other hand, may provide a fertile soil for mutual transfer of knowledge. A limitation of the authors' review of PSPM research is that it may insufficiently cover research published in the public sector accounting journals, which could be an outlet for MC-inspired PSPM research. Originality/value The paper unravels the "apparent" and "real" differences between MC and PSPM research, and, in doing so, takes the detected "real" differences as a starting point for discussing in what ways PSPM research can benefit from MC achievements.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Dribbisch2017, author = {Dribbisch, Katrin}, title = {Translating innovation}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-104719}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {VIII, 217}, year = {2017}, abstract = {This doctoral thesis studies the process of innovation adoption in public administrations, addressing the research question of how an innovation is translated to a local context. The study empirically explores Design Thinking as a new problem-solving approach introduced by a federal government organisation in Singapore. With a focus on user-centeredness, collaboration and iteration Design Thinking seems to offer a new way to engage recipients and other stakeholders of public services as well as to re-think the policy design process from a user's point of view. Pioneered in the private sector, early adopters of the methodology include civil services in Australia, Denmark, the United Kingdom, the United States as well as Singapore. Hitherto, there is not much evidence on how and for which purposes Design Thinking is used in the public sector. For the purpose of this study, innovation adoption is framed in an institutionalist perspective addressing how concepts are translated to local contexts. The study rejects simplistic views of the innovation adoption process, in which an idea diffuses to another setting without adaptation. The translation perspective is fruitful because it captures the multidimensionality and 'messiness' of innovation adoption. More specifically, the overall research question addressed in this study is: How has Design Thinking been translated to the local context of the public sector organisation under investigation? And from a theoretical point of view: What can we learn from translation theory about innovation adoption processes? Moreover, there are only few empirical studies of organisations adopting Design Thinking and most of them focus on private organisations. We know very little about how Design Thinking is embedded in public sector organisations. This study therefore provides further empirical evidence of how Design Thinking is used in a public sector organisation, especially with regards to its application to policy work which has so far been under-researched. An exploratory single case study approach was chosen to provide an in-depth analysis of the innovation adoption process. Based on a purposive, theory-driven sampling approach, a Singaporean Ministry was selected because it represented an organisational setting in which Design Thinking had been embedded for several years, making it a relevant case with regard to the research question. Following a qualitative research design, 28 semi-structured interviews (45-100 minutes) with employees and managers were conducted. The interview data was triangulated with observations and documents, collected during a field research research stay in Singapore. The empirical study of innovation adoption in a single organisation focused on the intra-organisational perspective, with the aim to capture the variations of translation that occur during the adoption process. In so doing, this study opened the black box often assumed in implementation studies. Second, this research advances translation studies not only by showing variance, but also by deriving explanatory factors. The main differences in the translation of Design Thinking occurred between service delivery and policy divisions, as well as between the first adopter and the rest of the organisation. For the intra-organisational translation of Design Thinking in the Singaporean Ministry the following five factors played a role: task type, mode of adoption, type of expertise, sequence of adoption, and the adoption of similar practices.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{vonKaphengst2019, author = {von Kaphengst, Dragana}, title = {Project's management quality in development cooperation}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43099}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-430992}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xvii, 237}, year = {2019}, abstract = {In light of the debate on the consequences of competitive contracting out of traditionally public services, this research compares two mechanisms used to allocate funds in development cooperation—direct awarding and competitive contracting out—aiming to identify their potential advantages and disadvantages. The agency theory is applied within the framework of rational-choice institutionalism to study the institutional arrangements that surround two different money allocation mechanisms, identify the incentives they create for the behavior of individual actors in the field, and examine how these then transfer into measurable differences in managerial quality of development aid projects. In this work, project management quality is seen as an important determinant of the overall project success. For data-gathering purposes, the German development agency, the Gesellschaft f{\"u}r Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), is used due to its unique way of work. Whereas the majority of projects receive funds via direct-award mechanism, there is a commercial department, GIZ International Services (GIZ IS) that has to compete for project funds. The data concerning project management practices on the GIZ and GIZ IS projects was gathered via a web-based, self-administered survey of project team leaders. Principal component analysis was applied to reduce the dimensionality of the independent variable to total of five components of project management. Furthermore, multiple regression analysis identified the differences between the separate components on these two project types. Enriched by qualitative data gathered via interviews, this thesis offers insights into everyday managerial practices in development cooperation and identifies the advantages and disadvantages of the two allocation mechanisms. The thesis first reiterates the responsibility of donors and implementers for overall aid effectiveness. It shows that the mechanism of competitive contracting out leads to better oversight and control of implementers, fosters deeper cooperation between the implementers and beneficiaries, and has a potential to strengthen ownership of recipient countries. On the other hand, it shows that the evaluation quality does not tremendously benefit from the competitive allocation mechanism and that the quality of the component knowledge management and learning is better when direct-award mechanisms are used. This raises questions about the lacking possibilities of actors in the field to learn about past mistakes and incorporate the finings into the future interventions, which is one of the fundamental issues of aid effectiveness. Finally, the findings show immense deficiencies in regard to oversight and control of individual projects in German development cooperation.}, language = {en} } @article{Debre2021, author = {Debre, Maria Josepha}, title = {Clubs of autocrats}, series = {The review of international organizations}, volume = {17}, journal = {The review of international organizations}, number = {3}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Boston}, issn = {1559-7431}, doi = {10.1007/s11558-021-09428-y}, pages = {485 -- 511}, year = {2021}, abstract = {While scholars have argued that membership in Regional Organizations (ROs) can increase the likelihood of democratization, we see many autocratic regimes surviving in power albeit being members of several ROs. This article argues that this is the case because these regimes are often members in "Clubs of Autocrats" that supply material and ideational resources to strengthen domestic survival politics and shield members from external interference during moments of political turmoil. The argument is supported by survival analysis testing the effect of membership in autocratic ROs on regime survival between 1946 to 2010. It finds that membership in ROs composed of more autocratic member states does in fact raise the likelihood of regime survival by protecting incumbents against democratic challenges such as civil unrest or political dissent. However, autocratic RO membership does not help to prevent regime breakdown due to autocratic challenges like military coups, potentially because these types of threats are less likely to diffuse to other member states. The article thereby adds to our understanding of the limits of democratization and potential reverse effects of international cooperation, and contributes to the literature addressing interdependences of international and domestic politics in autocratic regimes.}, language = {en} } @misc{Juchler2022, author = {Juchler, Ingo}, title = {Narrationen in der f{\"a}cher{\"u}bergreifenden politischen Bildung}, publisher = {bbp, Bundeszentrale f{\"u}r politische Bildung}, address = {Bonn}, pages = {19}, year = {2022}, abstract = {In welchem Verh{\"a}ltnis stehen Literatur und das Politische? F{\"o}rdert narrative politische Bildung Ambiguit{\"a}tstoleranz und Mehrstimmigkeit? Der Beitrag diskutiert aktuelle didaktische Theorien und Beispiele.}, language = {de} }