@article{DapprichCockshott2023, author = {Dapprich, Jan Philipp and Cockshott, William Paul}, title = {Input-output planning and information}, series = {Journal of Economic Behavior \& Organization}, journal = {Journal of Economic Behavior \& Organization}, number = {205}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0167-2681}, doi = {10.1016/j.jebo.2022.10.043}, pages = {412 -- 422}, year = {2023}, abstract = {In this paper, we show how socialist planning can be based on input-output data. We argue that the information required for this can be obtained by a central planning agency and thus dismiss Hayek's information argument against socialism. We further show how economic planning can be made responsive to consumer demand through a feedback control mechanism. Output targets of products would be adjusted in response to observed consumer demand or based on predictions about future demand. Planners can use machine learning to make more accurate forecasts. The valuation of goods plays an important role in the feedback control mechanism. The values of goods can either be measured by the labour time necessary for their production (labour values) or through shadow prices based on linear programming.}, language = {en} } @article{LambertFegleyCandelaetal.2023, author = {Lambert, Karras and Fegley, Tate and Candela, Rosolino and Boettke, Peter and Phelan, Steven and Wenzel, Nikolai G. and Dapprich, Jan Philipp}, title = {Reply and Counter-Reply}, series = {Journal of economic behavior \& organization}, journal = {Journal of economic behavior \& organization}, number = {212}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0167-2681}, doi = {10.1016/j.jebo.2023.03.026}, pages = {300 -- 310}, year = {2023}, language = {en} } @article{Ganghof2023, author = {Ganghof, Steffen}, title = {Justifying types of representative democracy}, series = {Critical review of international social and political philosophy}, journal = {Critical review of international social and political philosophy}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {London}, issn = {1369-8230}, doi = {10.1080/13698230.2022.2159665}, pages = {1 -- 12}, year = {2023}, abstract = {This article responds to critical reflections on my Beyond Presidentialism and Parliamentarism by Sarah Birch, Kevin J. Elliott, Claudia Landwehr and James L. Wilson. It discusses how different types of representative democracy, especially different forms of government (presidential, parliamentary or hybrid), can be justified. It clarifies, among other things, the distinction between procedural and process equality, the strengths of semi-parliamentary government, the potential instability of constitutional designs, and the difference that theories can make in actual processes of constitutional reform.}, language = {en} } @article{TsebelisThiesCheibubetal.2023, author = {Tsebelis, George and Thies, Michael and Cheibub, Jos{\´e} Antonio and Dixon, Rosalind and Bog{\´e}a, Daniel and Ganghof, Steffen}, title = {Review symposium}, series = {European political science}, journal = {European political science}, publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan}, address = {Basingstoke}, issn = {1680-4333}, doi = {10.1057/s41304-023-00426-9}, pages = {20}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Steffen Ganghof's Beyond Presidentialism and Parliamentarism: Democratic Design and the Separation of Powers (Oxford University Press, 2021) posits that "in a democracy, a constitutional separation of powers between the executive and the assembly may be desirable, but the constitutional concentration of executive power in a single human being is not" (Ganghof, 2021). To consider, examine and theorise about this, Ganghof urges engagement with semi-parliamentarism. As explained by Ganghof, legislative power is shared between two democratically legitimate sections of parliament in a semi-parliamentary system, but only one of those sections selects the government and can remove it in a no-confidence vote. Consequently, power is dispersed and not concentrated in the hands of any one person, which, Ganghof argues, can lead to an enhanced form of parliamentary democracy. In this book review symposium, George Tsebelis, Michael Thies, Jos{\´e} Antonio Cheibub, Rosalind Dixon and Daniel Bog{\´e}a review Steffen Ganghof's book and engage with the author about aspects of research design, case selection and theoretical argument. This symposium arose from an engaging and constructive discussion of the book at a seminar hosted by Texas A\&M University in 2022. We thank Prof Jos{\´e} Cheibub (Texas A\&M) for organising that seminar and Dr Anna Fruhstorfer (University of Potsdam) for initiating this book review symposium.}, language = {en} } @incollection{GanghofSchulze2023, author = {Ganghof, Steffen and Schulze, Kai}, title = {Vetospieler und Institutionen}, series = {Handbuch Policy-Forschung}, booktitle = {Handbuch Policy-Forschung}, editor = {Wenzelburger, Georg and Zohlnh{\"o}fer, Reimut}, edition = {2., aktualisierte und erweiterte}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-34559-4}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-658-34560-0_4}, pages = {101 -- 125}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Der Beitrag widmet sich zwei {\"u}beraus fruchtbaren theoretischen Ans{\"a}tzen in der Policy-Forschung und dar{\"u}ber hinaus: der Vetospielertheorie und Vetopunkt-Ans{\"a}tzen. Neben den Grundz{\"u}gen beider Ans{\"a}tze stellen wir grundlegende Entwicklungslinien und Probleme dieser Literaturen anhand beispielhafter Studien dar. Es zeigt sich, dass beide Ans{\"a}tze teils kontroverse Annahmen treffen, zu denen es plausible Alternativen gibt. Zum Beispiel kann das Verhalten von Koalitionsparteien im Policy-Prozess anders als von der Vetospielertheorie angenommen modelliert werden. Die kausalen Effekte bestimmter Institutionen oder Vetopunkte k{\"o}nnen zudem je nach Kontext variieren. Diesem Kontext sollte gr{\"o}ßere Beachtung geschenkt werden.}, language = {de} } @article{FleischerPruin2023, author = {Fleischer, Julia and Pruin, Andree}, title = {Organizational reputation in executive politics}, series = {International review of administrative sciences}, journal = {International review of administrative sciences}, publisher = {Sage}, address = {Los Angeles, Calif.}, issn = {0020-8523}, doi = {10.1177/00208523221132228}, pages = {16}, year = {2023}, abstract = {In recent years, governments have increased their efforts to strengthen the citizen-orientation in policy design. They have established temporary arenas as well as permanent units inside the machinery of government to integrate citizens into policy formulation, leading to a "laboratorization" of central government organizations. We argue that the evolution and role of these units herald new dynamics in the importance of organizational reputation for executive politics. These actors deviate from the classic palette of organizational units inside the machinery of government and thus require their own reputation vis-{\`a}-vis various audiences within and outside their parent organization. Based on a comparative case study of two of these units inside the German federal bureaucracy, we show how ambiguous expectations of their audiences challenge their organizational reputation. Both units resolve these tensions by balancing their weaker professional and procedural reputation with a stronger performative and moral reputation. We conclude that government units aiming to improve citizen orientation in policy design may benefit from engaging with citizens as their external audience to compensate for a weaker reputation in the eyes of their audiences inside the government organization. Points for practitioners: many governments have introduced novel means to strengthen citizen-centered policy design, which has led to an emergence of novel units inside central government that differ from traditional bureaucratic structures and procedures ; this study analyzes how these new units may build their organizational reputation vis-{\`a}-vis internal and external actors in government policymaking. ; we show that such units assert themselves primarily based on their performative and moral reputation.}, language = {en} } @article{FleischerWanckel2023, author = {Fleischer, Julia and Wanckel, Camilla}, title = {Job satisfaction and the digital transformation of the public sector}, series = {Review of Public Personnel Administration}, journal = {Review of Public Personnel Administration}, publisher = {Sage}, address = {London}, issn = {0734-371X}, doi = {10.1177/0734371X221148403}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Worldwide, governments have introduced novel information and communication technologies (ICTs) for policy formulation and service delivery, radically changing the working environment of government employees. Following the debate on work stress and particularly on technostress, we argue that the use of ICTs triggers "digital overload" that decreases government employees' job satisfaction via inhibiting their job autonomy. Contrary to prior research, we consider job autonomy as a consequence rather than a determinant of digital overload, because ICT-use accelerates work routines and interruptions and eventually diminishes employees' freedom to decide how to work. Based on novel survey data from government employees in Germany, Italy, and Norway, our structural equation modeling (SEM) confirms a significant negative effect of digital overload on job autonomy. More importantly, job autonomy partially mediates the negative relationship between digital overload and job satisfaction, pointing to the importance of studying the micro-foundations of ICT-use in the public sector.}, language = {en} } @article{FleischerWanckel2023, author = {Fleischer, Julia and Wanckel, Camilla}, title = {Creativity in policy capacity}, series = {Public administration review}, journal = {Public administration review}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0033-3352}, doi = {10.1111/puar.13676}, pages = {15}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Creativity is a crucial part of policy capacity in governments. Existing studies on creative behavior in the public sector assess employees' openness to new ideas and creative solutions, and they confirm the relevance of organizational and individual determinants for pro-creativity attitudes. Yet we lack systemic evidence on the explicit level of work-related creativity among policy officials in government organizations. At the same time, novel technologies and particularly social networking services change the working environment of policy officials radically, alter organizational features, and may also yield crucial individual effects. Our study analyses "policy creativity" of policy officials in three European governments. We demonstrate the importance of organizational and individual features, including the stress triggered by using social networking services. Our study captures officials' creativity explicitly and adds to debates on creativity and innovation in the public sector as well as the micro-level foundations of the digital transformation in the public sector.}, language = {en} } @article{FleischerBezesYesilkagit2023, author = {Fleischer, Julia and Bezes, Philippe and Yesilkagit, Kutsal}, title = {Political time in public bureaucracies}, series = {Public administration review}, volume = {83}, journal = {Public administration review}, number = {6}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0033-3352}, doi = {10.1111/puar.13740}, pages = {1813 -- 1832}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Structural duration conveys stability but also resilience in central government and is therefore a key issue in the debate on the structure and organization of government. This paper discusses three core variants of structural duration to study the explanatory relevance of politics. We compare these durations across ministerialunits in four European democracies (Germany, France, The Netherlands, and Norway) from 1980 to 2013, totaling over 17,000 units. Our empirical analyses show that cabinets' ideological turnover and extremism are the most significant predictors of all variants of duration, whereas polarization in parliament as well as new prime ministers without office experience yield the predicted significant negative effects for most models. We discuss these findings and avenues for futureresearch that acknowledge the definition and measures for structural change as well as temporal aspects of the empirical phenomenon more explicitly.}, language = {en} } @article{LundgrenSquatritoSommereretal.2023, author = {Lundgren, Magnus and Squatrito, Theresa and Sommerer, Thomas and Tallberg, Jonas}, title = {Introducing the Intergovernmental Policy Output Dataset (IPOD)}, series = {The review of international organizations}, volume = {19}, journal = {The review of international organizations}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Boston}, issn = {1559-7431}, doi = {10.1007/s11558-023-09492-6}, pages = {117 -- 146}, year = {2023}, abstract = {There is a growing recognition that international organizations (IOs) formulate and adopt policy in a wide range of areas. IOs have emerged as key venues for states seeking joint solutions to contemporary challenges such as climate change or COVID-19, and to establish frameworks to bolster trade, development, security, and more. In this capacity, IOs produce both extraordinary and routine policy output with a multitude of purposes, ranging from policies of historic significance like admitting new members to the more mundane tasks of administering IO staff. This article introduces the Intergovernmental Policy Output Dataset (IPOD), which covers close to 37,000 individual policy acts of 13 multi-issue IOs in the 1980-2015 period. The dataset fills a gap in the growing body of literature on the comparative study of IOs, providing researchers with a fine-grained perspective on the structure of IO policy output and data for comparisons across time, policy areas, and organizations. This article describes the construction and coverage of the dataset and identifies key temporal and cross-sectional patterns revealed by the data. In a concise illustration of the dataset's utility, we apply models of punctuated equilibria in a comparative study of the relationship between institutional features and broad policy agenda dynamics. Overall, the Intergovernmental Policy Output Dataset offers a unique resource for researchers to analyze IO policy output in a granular manner and to explore questions of responsiveness, performance, and legitimacy of IOs.}, language = {en} }