Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft
Refine
Year of publication
- 2023 (46) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (24)
- Part of a Book (10)
- Doctoral Thesis (4)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (3)
- Working Paper (2)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Other (1)
- Review (1)
Language
- English (46) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (46)
Keywords
- value change (3)
- climate policy (2)
- contestation (2)
- digitalization (2)
- international legal order (2)
- international relations (2)
- legal change (2)
- metamorphosis of international law (2)
- new public management (2)
- norm change (2)
Institute
Recent debates in international relations increasingly focus on bureaucratic apparatuses of international organizations and highlight their role, influence, and autonomy in global public policy. In this contribution we follow the recent call made by Moloney and Rosenbloom in this journal to make use of “public administrative theory and empirically based knowledge in analyzing the behavior of international and regional organizations” and offer a systematic analysis of the inner structures of these administrative bodies. Changes in these structures can reflect both the (re-)assignment of responsibilities, competencies, and expertise, but also the (re)allocation of resources, staff, and corresponding signalling of priorities. Based on organizational charts, we study structural changes within 46 international bureaucracies in the UN system. Tracing formal changes to all internal units over two decades, this contribution provides the first longitudinal assessment of structural change at the international level. We demonstrate that the inner structures of international bureaucracies in the UN system became more fragmented over time but also experienced considerable volatility with periods of structural growth and retrenchment. The analysis also suggests that IO's political features yield stronger explanatory power for explaining these structural changes than bureaucratic determinants. We conclude that the politics of structural change in international bureaucracies is a missing piece in the current debate on international public administrations that complements existing research perspectives by reiterating the importance of the political context of international bureaucracies as actors in global governance.
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-à-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-à-vis internal and external actors in government policymaking. ; we show that such units assert themselves primarily based on their performative and moral reputation.
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.
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.
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.
International institutions are an essential driving force of contemporary policies to combat gender-based violence but remain toothless if political actors do not implement them in domestic policies. How can scholars conceptualise the transposition of international gender-based violence norms into domestic policies? I argue that discourse network analysis provides a powerful conceptual and methodological extension of critical frame analysis to understand how frames shape the meaning of gender-based violence norms in multi-level institutional contexts. Frames’ normative and cognitive network structure invites combining discourse network and frame analysis techniques that locate frames’ power in their ability to connect different institutional spheres temporally and spatially. I outline a multi-level research agenda that traces the framing processes of international norms and their domestic implementation through gender-based violence policies in the Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention. This agenda includes avenues to study how complex transnational policy frameworks like the Istanbul Convention play out in domestic policy implementation.
Analyzing social wrongs
(2023)
This research investigated the relationship between frequent engagement in industrial action (also known as ‘employee strikes’) and the internal attractiveness of government employment. It focused on a special group of public employees: public university lecturers and public-school teachers in Uganda who frequently engaged in industrial action. At the very basic level, the research explored whether public employees frequently engaged in industrial action because they considered public service employment to be unattractive or whether frequent engagement in industrial action was in fact part of the attractiveness of government employment. Beyond exploring these relationships, it also explained why (or why not) such relationships existed.
Methodologically, the research was conducted using an exploratory sequential design – a mixed methods study design that starts with a qualitative followed by a quantitative phase. It is the results of the initial qualitative phase that determined the direction of the subsequent quantitative phase. The qualitative phase started with an exploration of the relationship between industrial action and internal public service attractiveness, resulting into two specific research questions:
1) Why do public employees engage in industrial action and what role does frequent engagement in industrial action play in their perception of public service attractiveness?
2) Why and how is organizational justice related to public employees’ perception of public service attractiveness?
The above questions were answered both qualitatively and quantitatively. The theoretical postulations of the Social Movements Theories, Social Exchange Theory, and the Signaling Theory were used to structure the research assumptions and hypotheses.
The results showed that public employees engaged in industrial action mostly because of relative, rather than absolute deprivation. An established culture of workplace militancy was also found to be key in actualizing industrial action as was the (perceived) absence of alternatives to achieve workplace justice. Importantly, there was a clear dichotomy between absolute working conditions and frequent engagement in industrial action. Frequent engagement in industrial action was itself found to have both positive and negative effects on internal public service attractiveness. It was also found that public service attractiveness from the perspective of current public employees might be different from what it is from the perspective of prospective employees. This is because current public employees do not assume what it feels like to work for government, but mostly use their day-to-day lived experiences to judge the attractiveness of their employer. The existing literature is particularly deficient on analyzing public service attractiveness from an internal perspective, which is surprising given the public sector’s high reliance on internal recruitment.
The research results underlined key implications for theory, practice, and research. At theory level, the results suggested that public employee ratings of internal public service attractiveness were heavily affected by halo effects and should therefore not be taken at face value. The complex workplace social exchanges which are deeply rooted in organizational justice and the ‘personification metaphor’ were also emphasized. From an empirical perspective, the results underlined the need to prioritize internal public service attractiveness as recent research has confirmed the value of family socialization and internal recommendations in making public sector employment attractive, even to external applicants. This research argues that the centrality of organizational justice in public sector employee relations requires public sector organizations to be intentional in their bid to create fair, just, and attractive workplaces. Beyond assessing the fairness of personnel policies, procedures, and interactional relationships, it is also important to prepare and equip public managers with the right skills to promote and practice justice in their day-to-day interactions with public employees, and to encourage, improve, and facilitate alternative public employee feedback mechanisms.
Public opinion polls have become vital and increasingly visible parts of election campaigns. Previous research has frequently demonstrated that polls can influence both citizens' voting intentions and political parties' campaign strategies. However, they are also fraught with uncertainty. Margins of error can reflect (parts of) this uncertainty. This paper investigates how citizens' voting intentions change due to whether polling estimates are presented with or without margins of error.
Using a vignette experiment (N=3224), we examine this question based on a real-world example in which different election polls were shown to nationally representative respondents ahead of the 2021 federal election in Germany. We manipulated the display of the margins of error, the interpretation of polls and the closeness of the electoral race.
The results indicate that margins of error can influence citizens' voting intentions. This effect is dependent on the actual closeness of the race and additional interpretative guidance provided to voters. More concretely, the results consistently show that margins of error increase citizens' inclination to vote for one of the two largest contesting parties if the polling gap between these parties is small, and an interpretation underlines this closeness.
The findings of this study are important for three reasons. First, they help to determine whether margins of error can assist citizens in making more informed (strategic) vote decisions. They shed light on whether depicting opinion-poll uncertainty affects the key features of representative democracy, such as democratic accountability. Second, the results stress the responsibility of the media. The way polls are interpreted and contextualized influences the effect of margins of error on voting behaviour. Third, the findings of this paper underscore the significance of including methodological details when communicating scientific research findings to the broader public.