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)
Institute
- Sozialwissenschaften (51) (remove)
Die vorliegende Arbeit beschäftigt sich mit einer klassischen aber noch immer zentralen und aktuellen Frage der Evaluationsforschung, der Hinterfragung der Verwendung bzw. Wirksamkeit von Evaluationsverfahren. Vor dem Hintergrund der seit Ende der 1990er Jahre vor allem in Europa starken Zunahme von institutionalisierten Politik-Evaluationsverfahren sowie der zugleich zunehmenden Kritik dieser Verfahren in Wissenschaft und Praxis, untersucht die Arbeit diese Wirksamkeit am Fallbeispiel der Forschungspolitik der Europäischen Union. Aufbauend auf einer Aufarbeitung des Forschungsstandes zur Evaluationsverwendungsforschung und einer Vorstellung des gewählten Politikfeldes sowie der spezifischen Evaluationspraxis, erfolgt dazu eine systematische Gegenüberstellung der zentralen Evaluationsempfehlungen und der Entwicklung im Politikfeld über die vergangenen 15 Jahre. Im Ergebnis kommt die Arbeit zu der Feststellung eines (überraschend) hohen Ausmaßes an Entsprechung der Evaluationsempfehlungen mit der Politikentwicklung im untersuchten Fallbeispiel. Auf der Basis der Untersuchung des Fallbeispiels aber auch unter Heranziehung weiterer empirischer Beiträge in der Literatur ist damit der Behauptung der fehlenden Wirksamkeit der institutionalisierten Evaluation auf die Politikgestaltung klar zu widersprechen. Eine weitergehende Diskussion des Ergebnisses der Fallstudie legt darüber hinaus nahe, dass einige spezifische Faktoren und Bedingungen die Wirksamkeit der Evaluationsverfahren im untersuchten Fallbeispiel positiv zu beeinflussen scheinen. Im Einzelnen sind dies: der Charakter und die Ausprägung der Evaluationsempfehlungen, das spezifische institutionelle Umfeld der Evaluation sowie das spezifische 'politische Klima'. Aus dem Ergebnis lässt sich andererseits aber auch folgern, dass insbesondere im Hinblick auf die Akzeptanzproblematik eine Verstärkung der Bemühungen zur Wahrnehmung der Evaluations-wirksamkeit auf Seiten aller Beteiligten geboten scheint. Die Arbeit stellt hierzu abschließend einige Vorschläge und Ideen zusammen, die diese Wahrnehmung verbessern können.
Benefit duration, unemployment duration and job match quality aregression-discontinuity approach
(2013)
We use a sharp discontinuity in the maximum duration of benefit entitlement to identify the effect of extended benefit duration on unemployment duration and post-unemployment outcomes (employment stability and re-employment wages). We address dynamic selection, which may arise even under an initially random assignment to treatment, estimating a bivariate discrete-time hazard model jointly with a wage equation and correlated unobservables. Owing to the non-stationarity of job search behavior, we find heterogeneous effects of extended benefit duration on the re-employment hazard and on job match quality. Our results suggest that the unemployed who find a job close to and after benefit exhaustion experience less stable employment patterns and receive lower re-employment wages compared to their counterparts who receive extended benefits and exit unemployment in the same period. These results are found to be significant for men but not for women.
Indira Gandhi : ein Porträt
(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.
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.