@article{FischerHeubergerHeine2021,
  author    = {Fischer, Caroline and Heuberger, Moritz and Heine, Moreen},
  title     = {The impact of digitalization in the public sector},
  series = {Der moderne Staat},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {Der moderne Staat},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Barbara Budrich},
  address   = {Leverkusen-Opladen},
  issn      = {1865-7192},
  doi       = {10.3224/dms.v14i1.13},
  pages     = {3 -- 23},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {The digitalization of public administration is increasingly moving forward. This systematic literature review analyzes empirical studies that explore the impacts of digitalization projects (n=93) in the public sector. Bibliometrically, only a few authors have published several times on this topic so far. Most studies focusing on impact come from the US or China, and are related to Computer Science. In terms of content, the majority of examined articles studies services to citizens, and therefore consider them when measuring impact. A classification of the investigated effects by dimensions of public value shows that the analysis of utilitarian-instrumental values, such as efficiency or performance, is prevalent. More interdisciplinary cooperation is needed to research the impact of digitalization in the public sector. The different dimensions of impact should be linked more closely. In addition, research should focus more on the effects of digitalization within administration.},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{HeubergerSchwab2021,
  author    = {Heuberger, Moritz and Schwab, Christian},
  title     = {Challenges of digital service provision for local governments from the citizens' view},
  series = {The future of local self-government},
  booktitle = {The future of local self-government},
  editor    = {Bergstr{\"o}m, Tomas and Franzke, Jochen and Kuhlmann, Sabine and Wayenberg, Ellen},
  publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan},
  address   = {Cham},
  isbn      = {978-3-030-56058-4},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-030-56059-1_9},
  pages     = {115 -- 130},
  year      = {2021},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Kuhlman2024,
  author    = {Kuhlman, Sabine},
  title     = {Back to bureaucracy?},
  series = {Journal of policy studies},
  volume    = {39},
  journal   = {Journal of policy studies},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Graduate School of Public Administration},
  address   = {Seoul},
  issn      = {2799-9130},
  doi       = {10.52372/jps39202},
  pages     = {11 -- 44},
  year      = {2024},
  abstract  = {In this contribution, the emergence of the neo-Weberian state (NWS) is analyzed with regard to German public administration. Drawing on the concept of a governance space, which consists of a hierarchy, markets, and networks, we distinguish between four empirical manifestations of the NWS, namely, the NWS as (1) come back of the public/ re-municipalization; (2) re-hierarchization; (3) de-agencification; (4) de-escalation in performance management. These movements can, on the one hand, be interpreted as a (partial) reversal of New Public Management (NPM) approaches and a "swinging back of the pendulum" (see Kuhlmann \& Wollmann, 2019) toward public and classical Weberian principles (e.g., hierarchy, regulation, institutional re-aggregation). This reversal re-strengthened the hierarchy within the overall governance space to the detriment of, but without completely replacing, market mechanisms and networks. NPM's failure to deliver what it promised and its inappropriateness as a response to more recent challenges connected to crises and wicked problems have engendered a partial return of the public and a move away from the economization logic of NPM. On the other hand, post-NPM reversals and managerial de-escalation gave rise to hybrid models that merge NPM and classic Weberian administration. While some well-functioning combinations of NPM and Weberianism exist, the hybridization of "old" and "neo" elements has also provoked ambivalent and negative assessments regarding the actual functioning of the NWS in Germany. Our analysis suggests that the NWS is only partially suitable as a model for reform and future administrative modernization, largely depending on the context surrounding reform and implementation practices.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Thomeczek2024,
  author    = {Thomeczek, Jan Philipp},
  title     = {The voting potential of B{\"u}ndnis Sahra Wagenknecht},
  series = {Political studies review},
  journal   = {Political studies review},
  publisher = {Sage Publications},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {1478-9299},
  doi       = {10.1177/14789299241264975},
  pages     = {1 -- 9},
  year      = {2024},
  abstract  = {A new challenger seeks to enter the German party system: B{\"u}ndnis Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW). With her new party, former Die Linke politician Sahra Wagenknecht combines a left-authoritarian profile (economically left-leaning, but culturally conservative) with anti-US, pro-Russia and anti-elitist stances. This article provides the first large-n academic study of the voter potential of this new party by using a quasi-representative sample (n = 6,000) drawn from a Voting Advice Application-like dataset that comes from a website designed to explore the B{\"u}ndnis Sahra Wagenknecht's positions. The results show that congruence with foreign policy positions and anti-elitism are strong predictors of the propensity to vote for the B{\"u}ndnis Sahra Wagenknecht. In contrast, social/welfare and immigration policies are less predictive for assessing the party's potential. Among the different socio-demographic groups, the B{\"u}ndnis Sahra Wagenknecht has a strong potential among baby boomers, the less educated and East Germans. Regarding party voters, the B{\"u}ndnis Sahra Wagenknecht is favoured by supporters of some minor parties like dieBasis, Freie W{\"a}hler and Die PARTEI, but also non-voters. Among the established parties, the party's potential is high among Die Linke voters and, to a lesser extent, voters of the Social democrats (SPD) and Alternative for Germany (AfD). A potential below the average is reported for the supporters of the Liberals (FDP) and Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and most clearly for Green and Volt voters.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{Krause2023,
  author    = {Krause, Werner},
  title     = {Die Macht der Sonntagsfrage},
  series = {Verfassungsblog : on matters constitutional},
  journal   = {Verfassungsblog : on matters constitutional},
  publisher = {Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {2366-7044},
  doi       = {10.17176/20231222-111226-0},
  pages     = {7},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {F{\"u}r das Jahr 2024 sind entscheidende Wahlen geplant - unter ihnen die US-Pr{\"a}sidentschaftswahl und die Wahlen zum Europ{\"a}ischen Parlament. In Deutschland werden in Brandenburg, Sachsen und Th{\"u}ringen die Landtage gew{\"a}hlt. Wahlumfragen, insbesondere die Sonntagsfrage, sind zu einem integralen Bestandteil von Wahlk{\"a}mpfen geworden; gleichzeitig steht auch deren Zuverl{\"a}ssigkeit im Zentrum medialer Aufmerksamkeit. Eine Debatte {\"u}ber die Kommunikation und Darstellung von Meinungsumfragen ist in Deutschland dringend notwendig. Eine bindende Selbstverpflichtung der Umfrageinstitute und Medienh{\"a}user w{\"a}re eine vielversprechende L{\"o}sung.},
  language  = {de}
}
@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}
}
@phdthesis{Blanz2024,
  author    = {Blanz, Alkis},
  title     = {Essays on the macroeconomics of climate change and policy},
  pages     = {166},
  year      = {2024},
  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}
}
@misc{Liese2022,
  author    = {Liese, Andrea},
  title     = {The Power of Global Performance Indicators. Edited by Judith G. Kelley and Beth A. Simmons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020. 450p. \$120.00 cloth.},
  series = {Perspectives on politics / American Political Science Association},
  volume    = {20},
  journal   = {Perspectives on politics / American Political Science Association},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press},
  address   = {Cambridge},
  isbn      = {978-1-108-48720-7},
  issn      = {1537-5927},
  doi       = {10.1017/S1537592721003716},
  pages     = {380 -- 382},
  year      = {2022},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{Liese2024,
  author    = {Liese, Andrea},
  title     = {Norm research on conflictive norm relations how norms collide in times of complexity, contestation, and crisis},
  series = {Contesting the world},
  booktitle = {Contesting the world},
  editor    = {Orchard, Phil and Wiener, Antje},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
  address   = {Cambridge},
  isbn      = {978-1-00-947917-2},
  pages     = {64 -- 84},
  year      = {2024},
  language  = {en}
}