Filtern
Volltext vorhanden
- nein (237)
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (237) (entfernen)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- ja (237)
Schlagworte
- governance (7)
- World Bank (5)
- decision-making (5)
- COVID-19 (4)
- Paris Agreement (4)
- Security Council (4)
- crisis (4)
- discourse (4)
- human rights (4)
- international organisations (4)
Institut
- Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft (237) (entfernen)
Economic crises as critical junctures for policy and structural changes towards decarbonization
(2024)
Crises may act as tipping points for decarbonization pathways by triggering structural economic change or offering windows of opportunity for policy change. We investigate both types of effects of the global financial and COVID-19 crises on decarbonization in Spain and Germany through a quantitative Kaya-decomposition analysis of CO2 emissions and through a qualitative review of climate and energy policy changes. We show that the global financial crisis resulted in a critical juncture for Spanish CO2 emissions due to the combined effects of the deep economic recession and crisis-induced structural change, resulting in reductions in carbon and energy intensities and shifts in the economic structure. However, the crisis also resulted in a rollback of renewable energy policy, halting progress in the transition to green electricity. The impacts were less pronounced in Germany, where pre-existing decarbonization and policy trends continued after the crisis. Recovery packages had modest effects, primarily due to their temporary nature and the limited share of climate-related spending. The direct short-term impacts of the COVID-19 crisis on CO2 emissions were more substantial in Spain than in Germany. The policy responses in both countries sought to align short-term economic recovery with the long-term climate change goals of decarbonization, but it is too soon to observe their lasting effects. Our findings show that crises can affect structural change and support decarbonization but suggest that such effects depend on pre-existing trends, the severity of the crisis and political manoeuvring during the crisis.
The past three decades of policy process studies have seen the emergence of a clear intellectual lineage with regard to complexity. Implicitly or explicitly, scholars have employed complexity theory to examine the intricate dynamics of collective action in political contexts. However, the methodological counterparts to complexity theory, such as computational methods, are rarely used and, even if they are, they are often detached from established policy process theory. Building on a critical review of the application of complexity theory to policy process studies, we present and implement a baseline model of policy processes using the logic of coevolving networks. Our model suggests that an actor's influence depends on their environment and on exogenous events facilitating dialogue and consensus-building. Our results validate previous opinion dynamics models and generate novel patterns. Our discussion provides ground for further research and outlines the path for the field to achieve a computational turn.
This cross-country comparison of administrative responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden is aimed at exploring how institutional contexts and administrative cultures have shaped strategies of problem-solving and governance modes during the pandemic, and to what extent the crisis has been used for opportunity management. The article shows that in France, the central government reacted determinedly and hierarchically, with tough containment measures. By contrast, the response in Germany was characterized by an initial bottom-up approach that gave way to remarkable federal unity in the further course of the crisis, followed again by a return to regional variance and local discretion. In Sweden, there was a continuation of 'normal governance' and a strategy of relying on voluntary compliance largely based on recommendations and less - as in Germany and France - on a strategy of imposing legally binding regulations. The comparative analysis also reveals that relevant stakeholders in all three countries have used the crisis as an opportunity for changes in the institutional settings and administrative procedures.
Points for practitioners
COVID-19 has shown that national political and administrative standard operating procedures in preparation for crises are, at best, partially helpful. Notwithstanding the fact that dealing with the unpredictable is a necessary part of crisis management, a need to further improve the institutional preparedness for pandemic crises in all three countries examined here has also become clear. This should be done particularly by way of shifting resources to the health and care sectors, strengthening the decentralized management of health emergencies, stocking and/or self-producing protection material, assessing the effects of crisis measures, and opening the scientific discourse to broader arenas of experts.
„Gender-Ideologie“ und „Gender-Wahn“– diese Begriffe entstammen einem antifeministischen Diskurs, der ohne Bedrohungsszenarien nicht funktioniert. Feministische Errungenschaften – wie die Ehe für alle – werden zur Ursache persönlicher Nachteile umgedeutet. Seine Vertreter*innen verbreiten ihre (oft gewaltvollen) Narrative sowohl auf der Straße als auch im Internet. Antifeministische Bewegungen weisen zudem vielfältige Querverbindungen mit konservativen, nationalistischen, fundamentalreligiösen und faschistischen Diskursen auf.
Gender at the crossroads
(2021)
Since the early 2000s, the United Nations (UN) global counterterrorism architecture has seen significant changes towards increased multilateralism, a focus on prevention, and inter-institutional coordination across the UN’s three pillars of work. Throughout this reform process, gender aspects have increasingly become presented as a “cross-cutting” theme. In this article, I investigate the role of gender in the UN’s counterterrorism reform process at the humanitarian-development-peace nexus, or “triple nexus”, from a feminist institutionalist perspective. I conduct a feminist discourse analysis of the counterterrorism discourses of three UN entities, which represent the different UN pillars of peace and security (DPO), development (UNDP), and humanitarianism and human rights (OHCHR). The article examines the role of gender in the inter-institutional reform process by focusing on the changes, overlaps and differences in the discursive production of gender in the entities’ counterterrorism agendas over time and in two recent UN counterterrorism conferences. I find that gendered dynamics of nested newness and institutional layering have played an essential role both as a justification for the involvement of individual entities in counterterrorism and as a vehicle for inter-institutional cooperation and struggle for discursive power.
In recent years, there have been a growing number of online and offline attacks linked to a loosely connected network of misogynist and antifeminist online communities called ‘the manosphere’. Since 2016, the ideas spread among and by groups of the manosphere have also become more closely aligned with those of other Far-Right online networks. In this commentary, I explore the role of what I term ‘evidence-based misogyny’ for mobilization and radicalization into the antifeminist and misogynist subcultures of the manosphere. Evidence-based misogyny is a discursive strategy, whereby members of the manosphere refer to (and misinterpret) knowledge in the form of statistics, studies, news items and pop-culture and mimic accepted methods of knowledge presentation to support their essentializing, polarizing views about gender relations in society. Evidence-based misogyny is a core aspect for manosphere-related mobilization as it provides a false sense of authority and forges a collective identity, which is framed as a supposed ‘alternative’ to mainstream gender knowledge. Due to its core function to justify and confirm the misogynist sentiments of users, evidence-based misogyny serves as connector between the manosphere and both mainstream conservative as well as other Far-Right and conspiratorial discourses.
This study examines the institutionalization of information technologies for policy formulation by investigating the case of eNAP. The digital tool was introduced in the spring of 2018 with the aim of supporting and improving sustainability impact assessments (SIAs) within the German Federal Government. Applying a neo-institutional perspective, this study shows how a tool like eNAP is embedded into prevailing regulative, normative, and cultural–cognitive structures. Findings from 10 semi-structured interviews indicate that the application of eNAP varies according to intra-ministerial coordination practices and portfolio-specific information-processing schemata. Overall, the tool serves to translate the abstract regulation to conduct an SIA, as well as to translate the vague norm of “sustainability” into a concrete assessment requirement, thereby helping increase policy officials’ awareness of sustainability goals. However, consistent with previous studies, great importance is not attached to SIAs in policy formulation, and prevailing norms and routines make the implementation of eNAP to increase the use of evidence or in-depth considerations of policy alternatives and their consequences unlikely.
Public sector organizations at all levels of government increasingly rely on Big Data Algorithmic Systems (BDAS) to support decision-making along the entire policy cycle. But while our knowledge on the use of big data continues to grow for government agencies implementing and delivering public services, empirical research on applications for anticipatory policy design is still in its infancy. Based on the concept of policy analytical capacity (PAC), this case study examines the application of BDAS for early crisis detection within the German Federal Government—that is, the German Federal Foreign Office (FFO) and the Federal Ministry of Defence (FMoD). It uses the nested model of PAC to reflect on systemic, organizational, and individual capacity-building from a neoinstitutional perspective and allow for the consideration of embedded institutional contexts. Results from semi-structured interviews indicate that governments seeking to exploit BDAS in policymaking depend on their institutional environment (e.g., through research and data governance infrastructure). However, specific capacity-building strategies may differ according to the departments' institutional framework, with the FMoD relying heavily on subordinate agencies and the FFO creating network-like structures with external researchers. Government capacity-building at the individual and organizational level is similarly affected by long-established institutional structures, roles, and practices within the organization and beyond, making it important to analyze these three levels simultaneously instead of separately.
A room full of ‘views’
(2023)
Quantitative research into the effectiveness of the UN human rights treaty bodies (UNTBs) in eliciting remedial responses from states is impeded by a lack of usable data on how states respond to their decisions. The new Treaty Body Views Dataset (TBVD) aims to fill this gap. It comprises details on all published decisions in individual complaints cases issued by the UNTBs between 1979 and 2019 and matches these with information on their state of compliance. The TBVD can be used for research on the activities of the treaty bodies, the nature of the decisions themselves, or state behavior following a decision. An empirical application illustrates how the TBVD can advance knowledge about the factors that correlate with compliance with adverse UNTB decisions. Results show that the likelihood of implementation hinges critically on decision-level characteristics, and reveal differences and similarities between compliance with UNTB decisions and regional human rights court judgments.
Worldwide, companies are increasingly making claims about their current climate efforts and their future mitigation commitments. These claims tend to be underpinned by carbon credits issued in voluntary carbon markets to offset emissions. Corporate climate claims are largely unregulated which means that they are often (perceived to be) misleading and deceptive. As such, corporate climate claims risk undermining, rather than contributing to, global climate mitigation. This paper takes as its point of departure the proposition that a better understanding of corporate climate claims is needed to govern such claims in a manner that adequately addresses potential greenwashing risks. To that end, the paper reviews the nascent literature on corporate climate claims relying on the use of voluntary carbon credits. Drawing on the reviewed literature, three key dimensions of corporate climate claims as related to carbon credits are discussed: 1) the intended use of carbon credits: offsetting versus non-offsetting claims; 2) the framing and meaning of headline terms: net-zero versus carbon neutral claims; and 3) the status of the claim: future aspirational commitments versus stated achievements. The paper thereby offers a preliminary categorization of corporate climate claims and discusses risks associated with and governance implications for each of these categories.