@phdthesis{Andrews2011, author = {Andrews, Claudia}, title = {Fundraising interdisziplin{\"a}r : ein Beitrag zur Erneuerung der Kultur gemeinwohlbezogenen Gebens}, publisher = {Logos-Verl.}, address = {Berlin}, isbn = {978-3-8325-2978-9}, pages = {298 S.}, year = {2011}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Erstling2006, author = {Erstling, Tino}, title = {Versuch {\"u}ber den europ{\"a}ischen Totalitarismus : mit einem Seitenblick auf die SED-Herrschaft in der Honecker-{\"A}ra}, publisher = {Cuvillier}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, isbn = {3-86537-825-0}, pages = {201 S.}, year = {2006}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Gerhardt2006, author = {Gerhardt, Klaus-Uwe}, title = {Hartz plus : Lohnsubventionen und Mindesteinkommen im Niedriglohnsektor}, series = {Perspektiven der Sozialpolitik}, journal = {Perspektiven der Sozialpolitik}, publisher = {VS Verlag f{\"u}r Sozialwissenschaften | GWV Fachverlage GmbH Wiesbaden}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-531-14842-7}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-531-90300-2}, pages = {247 S. : graph. Darst., Kt.}, year = {2006}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Orlowski2006, author = {Orlowski, Manja}, title = {Das Unterrichtsfach "Politische Bildung" in Brandenburg : eine qualitative und quantitative Studie}, publisher = {Logos}, address = {Berlin}, isbn = {3-8325-1231-4}, pages = {424 S. : graph. Darst.}, year = {2006}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Kestermann2006, author = {Kestermann, Carsten}, title = {Die ESVP als Konkurrent zur NATO? : Entwicklungen, Analysen und Strategieaussichten einer europ{\"a}ischen Verteidigungsdimension}, address = {Potsdam}, year = {2006}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Borgnaes2016, author = {Borgn{\"a}s, Kajsa}, title = {Governing through 'governing images'}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, year = {2016}, abstract = {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 f{\"u}r 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.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Weimar2004, author = {Weimar, Anne-Marie}, title = {Die Arbeit und die Entscheidungsprozesse der Hartz-Kommission}, series = {Schriftenreihe interdisziplin{\"a}re Organisations- und Verwaltungsforschung}, volume = {13}, journal = {Schriftenreihe interdisziplin{\"a}re Organisations- und Verwaltungsforschung}, publisher = {VS Verlag f{\"u}r Sozialwissenschaften}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {3-531-14219-4}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-322-80558-4}, pages = {223 S. : graph. Darst.}, year = {2004}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Schmid2004, author = {Schmid, Christiane}, title = {Politisches Interesse von Jugendlichen : eine L{\"a}ngsschnittuntersuchung zum Einfluss von Eltern, Gleichaltrigen, Massenmedien und Schulunterricht}, publisher = {Deutscher Universit{\"a}tsverlag}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {3-8244-4574-3}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-322-81338-1}, pages = {XVIII, 206 S.}, year = {2004}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Scholz2004, author = {Scholz, Sylka}, title = {M{\"a}nnlichkeit erz{\"a}hlen : Lebensgeschichtliche Identit{\"a}tskonstruktionen ostdeutscher M{\"a}nner}, publisher = {Verl. Westf{\"a}lisches Dampfboot}, address = {M{\"u}nster, Westf.}, isbn = {3-89691-569-x}, pages = {311 S.}, year = {2004}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Fiegle2003, author = {Fiegle, Thomas}, title = {Von der Solidarite zur Solidarit{\"a}t : ein franz{\"o}sisch-deutscher Begriffstransfer}, series = {Region - Nation - Europa}, volume = {18}, journal = {Region - Nation - Europa}, publisher = {LIT-Verl.}, address = {M{\"u}nster}, isbn = {3-8258-6691-2}, pages = {314 S.}, year = {2003}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Armutat2003, author = {Armutat, Sascha}, title = {Kompetenzentwicklung im universit{\"a}ren Studienfach Personal f{\"u}r das Berufsfeld Personalmanagement}, volume = {35}, publisher = {Hampp}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, isbn = {3-87988-768-3}, pages = {330 S.}, year = {2003}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Sailer2002, author = {Sailer, Michael}, title = {Evaluierung auf kommunaler Ebene : ein erweitertes Modell der Erfolgskontrolle in der Stadtsanierung}, series = {Region - Nation - Europa}, volume = {11}, journal = {Region - Nation - Europa}, publisher = {LIT}, address = {M{\"u}nster}, isbn = {3-8258-5847-2}, pages = {221 S.}, year = {2002}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Teichert2020, author = {Teichert, Conrad}, title = {Bildungssteuerung im System der Fahranf{\"a}ngervorbereitung}, publisher = {Degener}, address = {Hannover}, isbn = {978-3-936071-93-1}, pages = {254,XL}, year = {2020}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Muelling2019, author = {M{\"u}lling, Eric}, title = {Big Data und der digitale Ungehorsam}, publisher = {Springer VS}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-24158-2}, pages = {XV, 242}, year = {2019}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Karolewski2000, author = {Karolewski, Ireneusz Pawel}, title = {Die k{\"u}nftige Gestalt Europas: Funktionalismus oder F{\"o}rderalismus?}, series = {Region - Nation - Europa}, volume = {1}, journal = {Region - Nation - Europa}, editor = {Kleger, Heinz}, publisher = {LIT}, address = {M{\"u}nster}, isbn = {3-8258-4838-8}, pages = {406 S.}, year = {2000}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{vondenDriesch2020, author = {von den Driesch, Ellen}, title = {Unter Verschluss}, address = {Potsdam}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, year = {2020}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Lange2018, author = {Lange, Anne}, title = {On a small scale}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {337}, year = {2018}, abstract = {This study argues that micro relations matter in peacekeeping. Asking what makes the implementation of peacekeeping interventions complex and how complexity is resolved, I find that formal, contractual mechanisms only rarely effectively reduce complexity - and that micro relations fill this gap. Micro relations are personal relationships resulting from frequent face-to-face interaction in professional and - equally importantly - social contexts. This study offers an explanation as to why micro relations are important for coping with complexity, in the form of a causal mechanism. For this purpose, I bring together theoretical and empirical knowledge: I draw upon the current debate on 'institutional complexity' (Greenwood et al. 2011) in organizational institutionalism as well as original empirical evidence from a within-case study of the peacekeeping intervention in Haiti, gained in ten weeks of field research. In this study, scholarship on institutional complexity serves to identify theoretical causal channels which guide empirical analysis. An additional, secondary aim is pursued with this mechanism-centered approach: testing the utility of Beach and Pedersen's (2013) theory-testing process tracing. Regarding the first research question - what makes the implementation of peacekeeping interventions complex -, the central finding is that complexity manifests itself in the dual role of organizations as cooperation partners and competitors for (scarce) resources, turf and influence. UN organizations, donor agencies and international NGOs implementing peacekeeping activities in post-conflict environments have chronic difficulty mastering both roles because they entail contradictory demands: effective cooperation requires information exchange, resource and responsibility-sharing as well as external scrutiny, whereas prevailing over competitors demands that organizations conceal information, guard resources, increase relative turf and influence, as well as shield themselves from scrutiny. Competition fuels organizational distrust and friction - and impedes cooperation. How is this complexity resolved? The answer to this second research question is that deep-seated organizational competition is routinely mediated - and cooperation motivated - in micro relations and micro interaction. Regular, frequent face-to-face interaction between individual organizational members generates social resources that help to transcend organizational distrust and conflict, most importantly familiarity with each other, personal trust and belief in reciprocity. Furthermore, informal conflict mediation and control mechanisms - namely, open discussion, mutual monitoring in direct interaction and social exclusion - enhance solidarity and mutual support.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Zantke2017, author = {Zantke, Michael}, title = {Bewaffnete Intellektuelle}, series = {dis(s)kurs ; 2}, journal = {dis(s)kurs ; 2}, publisher = {WeltTrends}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-945878-47-7}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {361}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Auf der Suche nach der geheimen Herrschaftslehre der Nazis begibt sich Michael Zantke in eine tiefe und umfassende Auseinandersetzung mit den geistigen Wurzeln des Nationalsozialismus. Er beleuchtet die Diskussionen in Deutschland um Machiavelli und {\"u}berpr{\"u}ft die Texte auf ihren Bezug zur Gegenwart des Nationalsozialismus. Dabei gelingt es ihm, die politische Rolle der Intellektuellen im „Dritten Reich" und die Unterschiede zwischen Nationalsozialismus, Faschismus und Konservativer Revolution herauszuarbeiten. Diese Nuancen sind nicht nur historisch bedeutungsvoll, sie sind auch f{\"u}r die heutige Diskussion {\"u}ber Rechtsnationalismus, Rechtsradikalismus und die Neue Rechte von Nutzen.}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Elad2017, author = {Elad, Kizito Logan}, title = {European Union Democracy Promotion in North Africa from 1990 to 2010}, series = {Schriftenreihe Demokratie und Demokratisierungsprozesse ; 12}, journal = {Schriftenreihe Demokratie und Demokratisierungsprozesse ; 12}, publisher = {Kovac}, address = {Hamburg}, isbn = {978-3-8300-9586-6}, pages = {436}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Bisherige Studien zur Demokratief{\"o}rderung analysierten „erfolgreiche" Beispiele. Das ist teilweise eine Reflektion der politischen {\"O}konomie von Demokratief{\"o}rderung, in der sie Beispielen im Inland erzeugter demokratischer Durchbr{\"u}che folgt. Dennoch kann eine wissenschaftliche Analyse externer Einfl{\"u}sse auf interne Ver{\"a}nderungen sich nicht nur auf F{\"a}lle erfolgreicher Demokratieentwicklung beziehen, sondern muss Beispiele von Regimever{\"a}nderungen, die nicht in einer Demokratie resultierten, ber{\"u}cksichtigen, um Selektionsvorurteile zu vermeiden und die kausalen Mechanismen zu isolieren, die f{\"u}r einen demokratischen Wandel notwendig sind, neben dem Zusammenbruch eines autorit{\"a}ren Regimes und einer Liberalisierung. In dieser Studie dienen Marokko und Tunesien als Fallbeispiele, L{\"a}nder, die nach langj{\"a}hriger Diktaturerfahrung versuchen demokratische Strukturen aufzubauen und sich anderen Herausforderungen stellen m{\"u}ssen als sich demokratisierende Regime, die {\"u}ber einen relativ effektiven Staat verf{\"u}gen. Da es wenig Austausch zwischen Analysten von demokratischen {\"U}berg{\"a}ngen, Konsolidierung und Post-Konflikt Staatenbildung gab, {\"u}berrascht, dass diese radikal unterschiedliche Situation von demokratischem Wandel und variierenden Rollen externer Akteure in jeder Kategorie bisher nicht differenziert wurde. Die Studie widmet sich den hieraus resultierenden Kernfragen: „Wie, Warum und durch Was wird Demokratief{\"o}rderung durch externe Akteure funktionieren?" Die Frage nach dem „Wie" ist hier die schwierigste, es ist eine Frage nach den Methoden und Strategien des Demokratisierungsprozesses sowie der Unterst{\"u}tzung, die sorgf{\"a}ltig durchdachte Techniken und ihre breite Akzeptanz durch eine Vielzahl von Partner erfordert. Antwort auf die Frage nach dem „Was" und „Warum" hingegen findet sich in der Grundlage schlechter Regierungsarbeit und schlechter Wirtschaftsleistung, die zu Aufst{\"a}nden der Bev{\"o}lkerung f{\"u}hren. Die Resultate der Studie tragen zum Fortschritt in der Demokratief{\"o}rderung bei.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Proll2017, author = {Proll, Eva-Charlotte}, title = {Transnationale Gerechtigkeit in der EU}, series = {Region - Nation - Europa ; 82}, journal = {Region - Nation - Europa ; 82}, publisher = {Lit}, address = {M{\"u}nster}, isbn = {978-3-643-13776-0}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {392}, year = {2017}, language = {de} }