Sozialwissenschaften
Refine
Year of publication
- 2013 (51) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (27)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (10)
- Doctoral Thesis (9)
- Review (3)
- Other (1)
- Postprint (1)
Keywords
- accountability (2)
- political equality (2)
- Affiliationsnetzwerke (1)
- Ausschüsse (1)
- Cambodia (1)
- Collective violence (1)
- Conceptions of social orders (1)
- Conflicts of social orders (1)
- Denmark (1)
- Dezentralisierung (1)
- Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (1)
- European Union (1)
- European Union research policy (1)
- Europäische Forschungspolitik (1)
- Europäische Union (1)
- Evaluationsnutzung (1)
- Evaluationsverwendung (1)
- Frauenrechte (1)
- Gerald Gaus (1)
- Germany (1)
- India (1)
- Indien (1)
- Informationsflüsse (1)
- Institutionalisierte Evaluationsverfahren (1)
- Kambodscha (1)
- Legitimization (1)
- Minderheiten (1)
- Multiple Modernities (1)
- Netzwerkanalyse (1)
- Norway (1)
- Politikevaluation (1)
- Relational sociology (1)
- Social order (1)
- Social relations (1)
- Vietnamese (1)
- Vietnamesen (1)
- accountability dynamics (1)
- accountability mechanism (1)
- administration (1)
- affiliation networks (1)
- asylum (1)
- civil service (1)
- coercion (1)
- committee governance (1)
- data protection (1)
- decentralization (1)
- democracy (1)
- development cooperation (1)
- discourse analysis (1)
- electoral systems (1)
- evaluation use (1)
- evaluation utilization (1)
- evidence-based policy (1)
- hospitals (1)
- immigration (1)
- indigene Völker (1)
- indigenous peoples (1)
- information flow (1)
- institutional design (1)
- labour market administration (1)
- local NGOs (1)
- lokale Nichtregierungsorganisationen (1)
- majority rule (1)
- minister responsibility (1)
- minorities (1)
- multiple modernities (1)
- network analysis (1)
- policy-evaluation (1)
- privacy (1)
- privatization (1)
- public administration (1)
- public employment service (1)
- public justification (1)
- public-reason liberalism (1)
- second chambers (1)
- smart CCTV (1)
- sociology of knowledge (1)
- video surveillance (1)
- welfare markets (1)
- welfare state reform (1)
- women's rights (1)
Institute
The Westminster system places great power upon the Executive with minimal accountabilities. Despite the dissolution of the British Empire, so many countries maintained the Westminster system whether it was transplanted or implanted to their soil. The Westminster system provides various actors with a great potential of increasing power autonomy over others due to the high levels of flexibility and manoeuvrability. Political actors, especially following independence, were able to operate generally unencumbered by fixed and formal institutional expectations. This allowed the countries and their executive, particularly the Prime Minister, the ability to mould and establish constitutional traditions, which in turn shaped the nascent polity that surrounded the real and constitutional independence. This article examines the Westminster systems critical legacy to accountability and its impact on executive power.
Political scientists regularly justify particular democratic institutions. This article explores two desiderata for such justifications. The first is a formal equality baseline which puts the burden of justification on those who favour more unequal institutions. This baseline is seen as an implication of the rule of law. The second desideratum, the comparison requirement, builds on the first: adequate justifications of particular institutions must compare them to the best alternative, and this comparison must consider the costs for political equality. The two desiderata are applied to political science debates about the proportionality of the electoral system and bicameral systems of legislative decision-making.
The project of public-reason liberalism faces a basic problem: publicly justified principles are typically too abstract and vague to be directly applied to practical political disputes, whereas applicable specifications of these principles are not uniquely publicly justified. One solution could be a legislative procedure that selects one member from the eligible set of inconclusively justified proposals. Yet if liberal principles are too vague to select sufficiently specific legislative proposals, can they, nevertheless, select specific legislative procedures? Based on the work of Gerald Gaus, this article argues that the only candidate for a conclusively justified decision procedure is a majoritarian or otherwise 'neutral' democracy. If the justification of democracy requires an equality baseline in the design of political regimes and if justifications for departure from this baseline are subject to reasonable disagreement, a majoritarian design is justified by default. Gaus's own preference for super-majoritarian procedures is based on disputable specifications of justified liberal principles. These procedures can only be defended as a sectarian preference if the equality baseline is rejected, but then it is not clear how the set of justifiable political regimes can be restricted to full democracies.
Disintegrating Democracy at Work: Labor Unions and the Future of Good Jobs in the Service Economy
(2013)
Challenging Khmer citizenship : minorities, the state, and the international community in Cambodia
(2013)
The idea of a distinctly ‘liberal’ form of multiculturalism has emerged in the theory and practice of Western democracies and the international community has become actively engaged in its global dissemination via international norms and organizations. This thesis investigates the internationalization of minority rights, by exploring state-minority relations in Cambodia, in light of Will Kymlicka’s theory of multicultural citizenship. Based on extensive empirical research, the analysis explores the situation and aspirations of Cambodia’s ethnic Vietnamese, highland peoples, Muslim Cham, ethnic Chinese and Lao and the relationships between these groups and the state. All Cambodian regimes since independence have defined citizenship with reference to the ethnicity of the Khmer majority and have - often violently - enforced this conception through the assimilation of highland peoples and the Cham and the exclusion of ethnic Vietnamese and Chinese. Cambodia’s current constitution, too, defines citizenship ethnically. State-sponsored Khmerization systematically privileges members of the majority culture and marginalizes minority members politically, economically and socially. The thesis investigates various international initiatives aimed at promoting application of minority rights norms in Cambodia. It demonstrates that these initiatives have largely failed to accomplish a greater degree of compliance with international norms in practice. This failure can be explained by a number of factors, among them Cambodia’s neo-patrimonial political system, the geo-political fears of a ‘minoritized’ Khmer majority, the absence of effective regional security institutions, the lack of minority access to political decision-making, the significant differences between international and Cambodian conceptions of modern statehood and citizenship and the emergence of China as Cambodia’s most important bilateral donor and investor. Based on this analysis, the dissertation develops recommendations for a sequenced approach to minority rights promotion, with pragmatic, less ambitious shorter-term measures that work progressively towards achievement of international norms in the longer-term.