Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (1040) (remove)
Keywords
- Police (9)
- Polizei (9)
- Polizeisoziologie (9)
- Sociology (9)
- Germany (7)
- international organizations (6)
- European Union (5)
- accountability (4)
- bicameralism (4)
- climate policy (4)
Institute
- Sozialwissenschaften (1040) (remove)
Zur Jahreswende 1959/60 sorgten Hakenkreuzschmierereien an jüdischen Einrichtungen in Köln und anderswo für Entsetzen und Empörung. Diese Vorkommnisse machten bewusst, was im Verlauf der 1960er Jahre zu einem Politikum für die jüngere Generation werden sollte: Die mangelnde Aufarbeitung der nationalsozialistischen Vergangenheit. Diese Thematik sowie der von den USA in Vietnam geführte Krieg stellten mobilisierende Faktoren für die Herausbildung einer außerparlamentarischen Opposition (APO) in der Bundesrepublik dar, die sich in der zweiten Hälfte der 1960er Jahre verbreitert. Prof. Ingo Juchler beschreibt den Weg der Politischen Bildung durch die 60er Jahre und die Entwicklung hin zur sog. „didaktischen Wende“.
Real options are widely applied in strategic and operational decision-making, allowing for managerial flexibility in uncertain contexts. Increased scholarly interest has led to an extensive but fragmented research landscape. We aim to measure and systematize the research field quantitatively. To achieve this goal, we conduct bibliometric performance analyses and bibliographic coupling analyses with an in-depth content review. The results of the performance analyses show an increasing interest in real options since the beginning of the 2000s and identity the most influential journals and authors. The science mappings reveal six and seven research clusters over the last two decades. Based on an in-depth analysis of their themes, we develop a research framework comprising antecedents, application areas, internal and external contingencies, and uncertainty resolution through real option valuation or reasoning. We identify several gaps in that framework, which we propose to tackle in future research.
Mit narrativen Medien lernen
(2022)
Aporien des Rechts
(2021)
Reply and Counter-Reply
(2023)
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.
Review symposium
(2023)
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, José Antonio Cheibub, Rosalind Dixon and Daniel Bogéa 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 José Cheibub (Texas A&M) for organising that seminar and Dr Anna Fruhstorfer (University of Potsdam) for initiating this book review symposium.
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.
In this article, we examine the effects of political change on name changes of units within central government ministries. We expect that changes regarding the policy position of a government will cause changes in the names of ministerial units. To this end we formulate hypotheses combining the politics of structural choice and theories of portfolio allocation to examine the effects of political changes at the cabinet level on the names of intra-ministerial units. We constructed a dataset containing more than 17,000 observations on name changes of ministerial units between 1980 and 2013 from the central governments of Germany, the Netherlands, and France. We regress a series of generalized estimating equations (GEE) with population averaging models for binary outcomes. Finding variations across the three political-bureaucratic systems, we overall report positive effects of governmental change and ideological positions on name changes within ministries.