TY - CHAP A1 - Babendreier, Christian A1 - Beyer, Tobias A1 - Mai, Jana T1 - Georg Büchner: Woyzeck T2 - Politische Bildung im Theater Y1 - 2016 SP - 95 EP - 120 PB - Springer CY - Wiesbaden ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Bachmayer, Rene A1 - Hager, Anna A1 - Hofer, Simone T1 - Friedrich Schiller: Don Karlos T2 - Politische Bildung im Theater Y1 - 2016 SP - 73 EP - 94 PB - Springer CY - Wiesbaden ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Balk, Jennifer A1 - Inan, Aylin A1 - Senneke, Marie T1 - Yasmina Reza: Der Gott des Gemetzels T2 - Politische Bildung im Theater Y1 - 2016 SP - 205 EP - 228 PB - Springer CY - Wiesbaden ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Bauschke, Cedric A1 - Beyer, Karoline A1 - Zaake, David T1 - Gotthold Ephraim Lessing: Nathan der Weise T2 - Politische Bildung im Theater Y1 - 2016 SP - 47 EP - 71 PB - Springer CY - Wiesbaden ER - TY - THES A1 - Borgnäs, Kajsa T1 - Governing through 'governing images' BT - Understanding the policy role of sustainability indicators N2 - In the debate on how to govern sustainable development, a central question concerns the interaction between knowledge about sustainability and policy developments. The discourse on what constitutes sustainable development conflict on some of the most basic issues, including the proper definitions, instruments and indicators of what should be ‘developed’ or ‘sustained’. Whereas earlier research on the role of (scientific) knowledge in policy adopted a rationalist-positivist view of knowledge as the basis for ‘evidence-based policy making’, recent literature on knowledge creation and transfer processes has instead pointed towards aspects of knowledge-policy ‘co-production’ (Jasanoff 2004). It is highlighted that knowledge utilisation is not just a matter of the quality of the knowledge as such, but a question of which knowledge fits with the institutional context and dominant power structures. Just as knowledge supports and justifies certain policy, policy can produce and stabilise certain knowledge. Moreover, rather than viewing knowledge-policy interaction as a linear and uni-directional model, this conceptualization is based on an assumption of the policy process as being more anarchic and unpredictable, something Cohen, March and Olsen (1972) has famously termed the ‘garbage-can model’. The present dissertation focuses on the interplay between knowledge and policy in sustainability governance. It takes stock with the practice of ‘Management by Objectives and Results’ (MBOR: Lundqvist 2004) whereby policy actors define sustainable development goals (based on certain knowledge) and are expected to let these definitions guide policy developments as well as evaluate whether sustainability improves or not. As such a knowledge-policy instrument, Sustainability Indicators (SI:s) help both (subjectively) construct ‘social meaning’ about sustainability and (objectively) influence policy and measure its success. The different articles in this cumulative dissertation analyse the development, implementation and policy support (personal and institutional) of Sustainability Indicators as an instrument for MBOR in a variety of settings. More specifically, the articles centre on the question of how sustainability definitions and measurement tools on the one hand (knowledge) and policy instruments and political power structures on the other, are co-produced. A first article examines the normative foundations of popular international SI:s and country rankings. Combining theoretical (constructivist) analysis with factor analysis, it analyses how the input variable structure of SI:s are related to different sustainability paradigms, producing a different output in terms of which countries (developed versus developing) are most highly ranked. Such a theoretical input-output analysis points towards a potential problem of SI:s becoming a sort of ‘circular argumentation constructs’. The article thus, highlights on a quantitative basis what others have noted qualitatively – that different definitions and interpretations of sustainability influence indicator output to the point of contradiction. The normative aspects of SI:s does thereby not merely concern the question of which indicators to use for what purposes, but also the more fundamental question of how normative and political bias are intrinsically a part of the measurement instrument as such. The study argues that, although no indicator can be expected to tell the sustainability ‘truth-out-there’, a theoretical localization of indicators – and of the input variable structure – may help facilitate interpretation of SI output and the choice of which indicators to use for what (policy or academic) purpose. A second article examines the co-production of knowledge and policy in German sustainability governance. It focuses on the German sustainability strategy ‘Perspektiven für Deutschland’ (2002), a strategy that stands out both in an international comparison of national sustainability strategies as well as among German government policy strategies because of its relative stability over five consecutive government constellations, its rather high status and increasingly coercive nature. The study analyses what impact the sustainability strategy has had on the policy process between 2002 and 2015, in terms of defining problems and shaping policy processes. Contrasting rationalist and constructivist perspectives on the role of knowledge in policy, two factors, namely the level of (scientific and political) consensus about policy goals and the ‘contextual fit’ of problem definitions, are found to be main factors explaining how different aspects of the strategy is used. Moreover, the study argues that SI:s are part of a continuous process of ‘structuring’ in which indicator, user and context factors together help structure the sustainability challenge in such a way that it becomes more manageable for government policy. A third article examines how 31 European countries have built supportive institutions of MBOR between 1992 and 2012. In particular during the 1990s and early 2000s much hope was put into the institutionalisation of Environmental Policy Integration (EPI) as a way to overcome sectoral thinking in sustainability policy making and integrate issues of environmental sustainability into all government policy. However, despite high political backing (FN, EU, OECD), implementation of EPI seems to differ widely among countries. The study is a quantitative longitudinal cross-country comparison of how countries’ ‘EPI architectures’ have developed over time. Moreover, it asks which ‘EPI architectures’ seem to be more effective in producing more ‘stringent’ sustainability policy. Y1 - 2016 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Borgnäs, Kajsa T1 - The Policy Influence of Sustainability Indicators: Examining Use and Influence of Indicators in German Sustainability Policy Making JF - German politics N2 - In 2002 Germany adopted an ambitious national sustainability strategy, covering all three sustainability spheres and circling around 21 key indicators. The strategy stands out because of its relative stability over five consecutive government constellations, its high status and increasingly coercive nature. This article analyses the strategy's role in the policy process, focusing on the use and influence of indicators as a central steering tool. Contrasting rationalist and constructivist perspectives on the role of knowledge in policy, two factors, namely the level of consensus about policy goals and the institutional setting of the indicators, are found to explain differences in use and influence both across indicators and over time. Moreover, the study argues that the indicators have been part of a continuous process of ‘structuring’ in which conceptual and instrumental use together help structure the sustainability challenge in such a way that it becomes more manageable for government policy. Y1 - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/09644008.2016.1193160 SN - 0964-4008 SN - 1743-8993 VL - 25 SP - 480 EP - 499 PB - Elsevier CY - Abingdon ER - TY - THES A1 - Cornelius, Annekathrin T1 - Der Fall der Rachel Dolezal T1 - The Rachel Dolezal case BT - eine Diskursanalyse zu Doing Race BT - a discourse analysis about Doing Race N2 - Die Amerikanerin Rachel Dolezal war bis ins Jahr 2015 als Afroamerikanerin bekannt. Als Aktivistin der National Association for the Advancement of Colored People setzte sie sich für die Rechte der afroamerikanischen Bevölkerung ein, lebte in einem schwarzen Umfeld und lehrte an einer Universität Afroamerikanische Studien. „I identify as black“ antwortete sie auf die Frage eines amerikanischen Fernsehmoderators, ob sie Afroamerikanerin sei. Ihre Kollegen und ihr näheres Umfeld identifizierten sie ebenfalls als solche. Erst, als regionale Journalisten auf sie aufmerksam wurden und ihre Eltern sich zu Wort meldeten, wurde deutlich, dass Dolezal eigentlich eine weiße Frau ist. Dolezals Eltern bestätigten dies, indem sie Kindheitsfotos einer hellhäutigen, blonden Rachel veröffentlichten. Dolezals Verhalten entfachte daraufhin eine rege mediale Diskussion über ihre Person im Kontext von Ethnizität und »Rasse«. Die Verfasserin greift Dolezals Fall exemplarisch auf, um der Frage nachzugehen, ob ein Doing Race nach Belieben möglich ist. Darf sich Dolezal als schwarz identifizieren, obwohl sie keine afrikanischen Vorfahren hat? Welche gesellschaftliche Wissensvorräte schränken diese Wahl ein und welche Konsequenzen ergeben sich daraus? Anhand einer Diskursanalyse amerikanischer Zeitungsartikel geht die Verfasserin diesen Fragen nach. Hierbei werden »Rasse« und Ethnizität als soziale Konstruktionen, basierend auf dem Konzept von Stephen Cornell und Douglas Hartmann, betrachtet. N2 - The American Rachel Dolezal was known as an African American woman until 2015. As an activist of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, she spoke up for the right of the African American population, lived in a black community and taught African American Studies at university. “I identify as black” she gave answer to a TV moderator after she was asked if she is African American. Her coworkers and her closer environment also identified her like that. It was only when a regional journalist became aware of her and her parents made a statement, that Dolezal actually was a white woman. Dolezal' s parents reinforced that by publishing childhood photographs of a light-skinned, blond Rachel. Dolezal' s behavior then aroused a lively discussion at the media about her person in the context of ethnicity and race. The author picks Dolezal' s case up as an example, to investigate whether a Doing Race is a possible alternative. Is Dolezal allowed to identify as black, even though she has no African ancestry? Which kind of social knowledge restricts this choice and which consequences evolve? On the basis of a discourse analysis of American newspaper articles the authors examine these questions. Race and ethnicity are defined as social constructions, based on the concept of Stephen Cornell and Douglas Hartmann. T3 - Soziologische Theorie und Organization Studies - 4 KW - Ethnizität KW - discourse analysis KW - Doing Race KW - Diskursanalyse KW - ethnicity KW - race relations KW - Doing Race KW - Wissenssoziologie KW - sociology of knowledge KW - Identität KW - identity KW - Rassendiskriminierung KW - racial discrimintion Y1 - 2016 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-99399 SN - 978-3-86956-388-6 SN - 2363-8168 SN - 2363-8176 PB - Universitätsverlag Potsdam CY - Potsdam ER - TY - JOUR A1 - de Guevara, Berit Bliesemann T1 - visits in zones of conflict and intervention JF - Journal of intervention and statebuilding N2 - This article explores the practice and political significance of politicians’ journeys to conflict zones. It focuses on the German example, looking at field trips to theatres of international intervention as a way of first-hand knowledge in policymaking. Paying tribute to Lisa Smirl and her work on humanitarian spaces, objects and imaginaries and on liminality in aid worker biographies, two connected arguments are developed. First, through the exploration of the routinized practices of politicians’ field trips the article shows how these journeys not only remain confined to the ‘auxiliary space’ of aid/intervention, but that it is furthermore a staged reality of this auxiliary space that most politicians experience on their journeys. The question is then asked, second, what politicians actually experience on their journeys and how their experiences relate to their policy knowledge about conflict and intervention. It is shown that political field trips enable sensory/affectual, liminoid and liminal experiences, which have functions such as authority accumulation, agenda setting, community building, and civilizing domestic politics, while at the same time reinforcing, in most cases, pre-existing conflict and intervention imaginaries. KW - field trips KW - on-site visits KW - battlefield tourism KW - sensory experience KW - affect KW - conflict knowledge KW - spaces of aid KW - liminality KW - German Bundestag KW - parliamentarians KW - German foreign policy KW - Lisa Smirl Y1 - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2015.1137394 SN - 1750-2977 SN - 1750-2985 VL - 10 SP - 56 EP - 76 PB - Soil Science Society of America CY - Abingdon ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Ebinger, Falk A1 - Richter, Philipp T1 - Decentralizing for performance? A quantitative assessment of functional reforms in the German Lander JF - International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration N2 - In the last 10 years, the governments of most of the German Länder initiated administrative reforms. All of these ventures included the municipalization of substantial sets of tasks. As elsewhere, governments argue that service delivery by communes is more cost-efficient, effective and responsive. Empirical evidence to back these claims is inconsistent at best: a considerable number of case studies cast doubt on unconditionally positive appraisals. Decentralization effects seem to vary depending on the performance dimension and task considered. However, questions of generalizability arise as these findings have not yet been backed by more ‘objective’ archival data. We provide empirical evidence on decentralization effects for two different policy fields based on two studies. Thereby, the article presents alternative avenues for research on decentralization effects and matches the theoretical expectations on decentralization effects with more robust results. The analysis confirms that overly positive assertions concerning decentralization effects are only partially warranted. As previous case studies suggested, effects have to be looked at in a much more differentiated way, including starting conditions and distinguishing between the various relevant performance dimensions and policy fields. KW - decentralization KW - de-concentration KW - federalism KW - local government KW - performance measurement KW - public service delivery KW - social and environmental administration Y1 - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852315586916 SN - 0020-8523 SN - 1461-7226 VL - 82 SP - 291 EP - 314 PB - Sage Publ. CY - London ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Franzke, Jochen T1 - After the Strategic Partnership BT - Germany in Search for a New Strategy towards Russia T2 - The European Union and Russia Y1 - 2016 SP - 9 EP - 25 PB - WeltTrends CY - Potsdam ER -