320 Politikwissenschaft
Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (66) (remove)
Year of publication
- 2023 (66) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (33)
- Article (16)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (6)
- Doctoral Thesis (4)
- Other (4)
- Working Paper (2)
- Review (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (66)
Keywords
- Integration (3)
- value change (3)
- Koordinierung (2)
- Migration (2)
- contestation (2)
- digitalization (2)
- international legal order (2)
- legal change (2)
- lokale Behörden (2)
- metamorphosis of international law (2)
Institute
- Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft (66) (remove)
Zwischen Modellierung und Stakeholderbeteiligung - Wissensproduktion in der Energiewendeforschung
(2023)
Die Dekarbonisierung des Energiesystems ist Teil der international im Rahmen des Pariser Klimaabkommens beschlossenen CO2-Minderungsstrategie zur Bekämpfung des Klimawandels. Nach den Verhandlungen und Beschlüssen der Klimaziele stehen politische Entscheider weltweit nun vor der Frage, wie sie diese erreichen können. Dies produziert eine hohe politische Nachfrage nach Wissen um die direkten und indirekten Effekte verschiedener Instrumente und potentiellen Entwicklungspfade einer Energiewende. Dieser gesellschaftliche Bedarf an wissenschaftlichen Antworten zu Lösungsoptionen wurde im Rahmen einer Klimafolgenforschung, genauer einer Klimapolitikfolgenforschung, aufgenommen. Der relativ neue Zweig einer Energiewendeforschung hat sich weltweit entwickelt, steht dabei allerdings vor der doppelten Herausforderung: Erstens befindet sich das Objekt der Forschung nicht im luftleeren Raum, sondern innerhalb ökonomischer, sozialer und politischer Zusammenhänge, hier gesellschaftliche Einbettung genannt. Denn die Frage, wie die Energiewende erreicht werden kann, wird auch außerhalb der Wissenschaft debattiert und stellt damit ein Aushandlungsfeld unterschiedlicher Interessen und Narrative dar. Zweitens befindet sich das zu untersuchende Objekt in der Zukunft, hier unter dem Terminus des strukturellen Nicht-Wissens zusammengefasst. Diese beiden Bedingungen führen dazu, dass konventionelle Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung nicht greifen und eine Öffnung und Transformation der Wissenschaft in Hinblick auf neue Methoden vonnöten ist (Nowotny 2001, Ravetz 2006, Schneidewind 2013). In dieser Arbeit untersuche ich zwei Möglichkeiten, wie mit der Herausforderung, Wissen unter der Bedingung des strukturellen Nicht-Wissens und der gesellschaftlichen Einbettung zu produzieren, in der Energiewendeforschung umgegangen wird. Einerseits wird dies durch die Einbeziehung von Stakeholdern, also nicht-wissenschaftlicher Akteure, in den Forschungsprozess getan. Andererseits ist die Nutzung von komplexen ökonometrischen Modellen zur Berechnung von Implikationen und energiewirtschaftlichen Entwicklungspfaden zu einem zentralen Mittel der Wissensgenerierung in der Energiewendeforschung avanciert. Damit wird der als Problem verstandenen strukturellen Bedingung des Nicht-Wissens insofern begegnet, als dass die Ergebnisse von Stakeholder-Involvement und von Modellierungsarbeiten zweifelsohne neues Wissen zur Verfügung stellen. Uneinigkeit besteht jedoch darin, worüber dieses Wissen etwas aussagt: Sind es Interessen oder legitime Perspektiven, die Stakeholder in den Forschungsprozess einbringen und sind Modelle vereinfachte Darstellungen der Welt oder sind sie Ausdruck der Vorstellung des Modellierers?
Sanctions are critical to the Security Council's efforts to fight terrorism. What is striking is that the Council's sanctions regimes are subject to detailed sets of rules and decision criteria. The scholarship on human rights in counterterrorism assumes that rights advocacy and court litigation have prompted this development. The article complements this literature by highlighting an unexplored internal driver of legal-regulatory decision-making and explores how mixed-motive interest constellations among Security Council members have affected the extent of committee regulations and the content of decisions taken by sanctions committees. Based on internal documents and diplomatic cables, a comparative analysis of the Iraq sanctions regime and the counterterrorism sanctions regime demonstrates that mixed-motive interest constellations among Security Council members provide incentives to elaborate rules to guide decision-making resulting in legal-regulatory sanctions governance, even if the human rights of targeted individuals are not at stake. For comparative leverage and to assess the limits of the proposed mechanism, the analysis is briefly extended to other sanctions regimes targeting individuals (Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sudan). The findings have implications for this essential tool of the Security Council to react to threats to peace as diverse as counterterrorism, nonproliferation, and internal armed conflict.
When are international organizations (IOs) responsive to the policy problems that motivated their establishment? While it is a conventional assumption that IOs exist to address transnational challenges, the question of whether and when IO policy-making is responsive to shifts in underlying problems has not been systematically explored. This study investigates the responsiveness of IOs from a large-n, comparative approach. Theoretically, we develop three alternative models of IO responsiveness, emphasizing severeness, dependence, and power differentials. Empirically, we focus on the domain of security, examining the responsiveness of eight multi-issue IOs to armed conflict between 1980 and 2015, using a novel and expansive dataset on IO policy decisions. Our findings suggest, first, that IOs are responsive to security problems and, second, that responsiveness is not primarily driven by dependence or power differentials but by problem severity. An in-depth study of the responsiveness of the UN Security Council using more granular data confirms these findings. As the first comparative study of whether and when IO policy adapts to problem severity, the article has implications for debates about IO responsiveness, performance, and legitimacy.
Weathering the storm?
(2023)
Democratization scholars are currently debating if we are indeed witnessing a third wave of autocratization. While this has led to an extensive debate about the future of the liberal international order, we still know relatively little about the consequences of autocratization for international organizations (IOs). In this article, we explore to what extent autocratization has led to changes in the composition of IO membership. We propose three different ways of conceptualizing autocratization of IO membership. We argue that we should move away from a dichotomous understanding of regime type and regime change, but rather focus on composition of subregime types to understand current developments. We build on updated membership data for 73 IOs through 2020 to map membership configurations based on the V-Dem Electoral Democracy Index. Contrary to current debates on the crisis of the liberal order, we find that many IOs are not (yet) affected by broad autocratization of their membership that would endanger democratic majorities or overall democratic densities. However, we also observe the disappearance of formerly homogenous democratic clubs due to democratic backsliding in a number of European and Latin American IO member states, as well as a return of autocratic clubs in Southeast Asia and Southern Africa. These findings have important implications for the broader research agenda on international democracy promotion and human right protection as well as the study of legitimacy and the effectiveness of international organizations.
Vorwort
(2023)
Der Beitrag widmet sich zwei überaus fruchtbaren theoretischen Ansätzen in der Policy-Forschung und darüber hinaus: der Vetospielertheorie und Vetopunkt-Ansätzen. Neben den Grundzügen beider Ansätze stellen wir grundlegende Entwicklungslinien und Probleme dieser Literaturen anhand beispielhafter Studien dar. Es zeigt sich, dass beide Ansätze teils kontroverse Annahmen treffen, zu denen es plausible Alternativen gibt. Zum Beispiel kann das Verhalten von Koalitionsparteien im Policy-Prozess anders als von der Vetospielertheorie angenommen modelliert werden. Die kausalen Effekte bestimmter Institutionen oder Vetopunkte können zudem je nach Kontext variieren. Diesem Kontext sollte größere Beachtung geschenkt werden.
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.