TY - THES A1 - Molinengo, Giulia T1 - The micropolitics of collaborative governance T1 - Die Mikropolitik von „collaborative governance“ BT - a power-sensitive and process-oriented perspective BT - eine machtsensitive und prozessorientierte Perspektive N2 - Why do exercises in collaborative governance often witness more impasse than advantage? This cumulative dissertation undertakes a micro-level analysis of collaborative governance to tackle this research puzzle. It situates micropolitics at the very center of analysis: a wide range of activities, interventions, and tactics used by actors – be they conveners, facilitators, or participants – to shape the collaborative exercise. It is by focusing on these daily minutiae, and on the consequences that they bring along, the study argues, that we can better understand why and how collaboration can become stuck or unproductive. To do so, the foundational part of this dissertation (Article 1) uses power as a sensitizing concept to investigate the micro-dynamics that shape collaboration. It develops an analytical approach to advance the study of collaborative governance at the empirical level under a power-sensitive and process-oriented perspective. The subsequent articles follow the dissertation's red thread of investigating the micropolitics of collaborative governance by showing facilitation artefacts' interrelatedness and contribution to the potential success or failure of collaborative arrangements (Article 2); and by examining the specialized knowledge, skills and practices mobilized when designing a collaborative process (Article 3). The work is based on an abductive research approach, tacking back and forth between empirical data and theory, and offers a repertoire of concepts – from analytical terms (designed and emerging interaction orders, flows of power, arenas for power), to facilitation practices (scripting, situating, and supervising) and types of knowledge (process expertise) – to illustrate and study the detailed and constant work (and rework) that surrounds collaborative arrangements. These concepts sharpen the way researchers can look at, observe, and understand collaborative processes at a micro level. The thesis thereby elucidates the subtleties of power, which may be overlooked if we focus only on outcomes rather than the processes that engender them, and supports efforts to identify potential sources of impasse. N2 - Warum führen Prozesse der collaborative governance oft eher in die Sackgasse als zum Erfolg? Die vorliegende kumulative Dissertation geht dieses Problem an, indem sie die Mikroebene von collaborative governance analysiert. Untersuchungsgegenstand ist die Mikropolitik, verstanden als weites Spektrum an Aktivitäten, Interventionen und Taktiken, mit denen beteiligte Akteure – seien es VeranstalterInnen, ModeratorInnen oder TeilnehmerInnen – kollaborative Prozesse gestalten. Es ist dieser Fokus auf alltägliche Handlungen und ihre Auswirkungen, so argumentiert die Arbeit, der ein besseres Verständnis ermöglicht, wann und warum kollaborative Prozesse unproduktiv werden. Um dies zu erreichen, verwendet der grundlegende Teil der Dissertation (Artikel 1) Macht als sensibilisierenden Begriff, um die Mikrodynamiken zu untersuchen, welche collaborative governance prägen. Der Artikel entwickelt ein Analysemodell, um die empirische Untersuchung der collaborative governance aus einer machtsensiblen und prozessorientierten Perspektive zu ermöglichen. Die weiteren Artikel folgen dem roten Faden der Dissertation und untersuchen die Mikropolitik der collaborative governance, indem sie die Wechselwirkungen und den Beitrag von Moderationsgegenständen zum potenziellen Erfolg oder Misserfolg kollaborativer Prozesse aufzeigen (Artikel 2), sowie die speziellen Kenntnisse, Fähigkeiten und Praktiken untersuchen, die bei der Gestaltung eines Beteiligungsprozesses mobilisiert werden (Artikel 3). Die Arbeit basiert auf einem abduktiven Forschungsansatz, bewegt sich zwischen empirischen Daten und Theorie hin und her, und entwickelt ein Repertoire an Begriffen und Konzepten - von analytischen Begriffen (designed and emerging interaction orders, flows of power, arenas for power) bis hin zu Moderationspraktiken (scripting, situating, und supervising) und Wissensarten (Prozessexpertise) - um die minutiösen und kontinuierlichen Gestaltungen (und Umgestaltungen) von kollaborativen Prozessen zu veranschaulichen und untersuchen. Diese Begriffe und Konzepte erlauben ForscherInnen, ihren Blick auf die Mikroebene von kollaborativen Prozessen zu schärfen. Die Dissertation verdeutlicht damit die Feinheiten von Macht, welche bei einem Fokus auf Ergebnisse statt auf die ihnen vorgelagerten Prozesse oft übersehen werden, und unterstützt die Bemühungen, potenzielle Quellen von collaborative impasse zu identifizieren. KW - collaborative governance KW - micropolitics KW - facilitation KW - power KW - process design KW - artefacts KW - process expertise KW - Artefakte KW - Moderation KW - Mikropolitik KW - Macht KW - Prozessgestaltung KW - Prozessexpertise Y1 - 2022 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-577123 ER - TY - GEN A1 - Wegmann, Simone T1 - Policy-making power of opposition players BT - a comparative institutional perspective T2 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe N2 - The organisation of legislative chambers and the consequences of parliamentary procedures have been among the most prominent research questions in legislative studies. Even though democratic elections not only lead to the formation of a government but also result in an opposition, the literature has mostly neglected oppositions and their role in legislative chambers. This paper proposes to fill this gap by looking at the legislative organisation from the perspective of opposition players. The paper focuses on the potential influence of opposition players in the policy-making process and presents data on more than 50 legislative chambers. The paper shows considerable variance of the formal power granted to opposition players. Furthermore, the degree of institutionalisation of opposition rights is connected to electoral systems and not necessarily correlated with other institutional characteristics such as regime type or the size of legislative chambers. T3 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe - 187 KW - Legislative organisation KW - parliamentary opposition KW - power KW - policy-making Y1 - 2022 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-566516 SN - 1867-5808 IS - 1 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Wegmann, Simone T1 - Policy-making power of opposition players BT - a comparative institutional perspective JF - The Journal of Legislative Studies N2 - The organisation of legislative chambers and the consequences of parliamentary procedures have been among the most prominent research questions in legislative studies. Even though democratic elections not only lead to the formation of a government but also result in an opposition, the literature has mostly neglected oppositions and their role in legislative chambers. This paper proposes to fill this gap by looking at the legislative organisation from the perspective of opposition players. The paper focuses on the potential influence of opposition players in the policy-making process and presents data on more than 50 legislative chambers. The paper shows considerable variance of the formal power granted to opposition players. Furthermore, the degree of institutionalisation of opposition rights is connected to electoral systems and not necessarily correlated with other institutional characteristics such as regime type or the size of legislative chambers. KW - Legislative organisation KW - parliamentary opposition KW - power KW - policy-making Y1 - 2022 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/13572334.2020.1843233 SN - 1357-2334 SN - 1743-9337 VL - 28 IS - 1 SP - 1 EP - 25 PB - Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group CY - Abingdon ER -