320 Politikwissenschaft
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (56) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (56) (remove)
Keywords
- Governance (3)
- governance (3)
- Demokratietheorie (2)
- Deutschland (2)
- European integration (2)
- Europäische Integration (2)
- Föderalismus (2)
- GIZ (2)
- Korruption (2)
- Partizipation (2)
Ghana ist ein Musterbeispiel dafür, dass ein Entwicklungsland den Weg zu Good Governance schaffen kann. In vielen Studien wird dem Land im afrikanischen Vergleich heute bescheinigt, hier ein Vorreiter zu sein. Dies ist Ausgangslage der vorliegenden Studie, die der Frage nachgeht „Welche Gründe, Muster und Bedingungen führen zur Entstehung von Good Governance?“. Im Zentrum der vorliegenden Studie steht, wie aus der erkenntnisleitenden Fragestellung hervorgeht, eine empirische Untersuchung zur Entstehung von Good Governance und damit ein Transformationsprozess. Dieser wird bewusst über einen sehr langen Zeitraum (über ein halbes Jahrhundert) untersucht, um auch langfristige Entwicklungen einbeziehen zu können. Die Studie wird mit Hilfe eines „Mixed-Methods-Ansatzes“ sowohl unter Rückgriff auf quantitative als auch auf qualitative Methoden durchgeführt, was sich im Rückblick als sehr ertragreich erwiesen hat. Zunächst wird die Qualität der Governance über den gesamten Zeitraum anhand von sechs Indikatoren gemessen. Danach werden qualitativ die Gründe für die Fort- und Rückschritte analysiert. Dabei lassen sich immer wieder Systematiken herausarbeiten, wie zum Beispiel zirkuläre Entwicklungen, die über viele Jahre den Weg hin zu Good Governance verhinderten, bis jeweils Ausbrüche aus den Kreisläufen geschafft werden konnten. Sowohl in der demokratischen und rechtsstaatlichen Entwicklung als auch bezogen auf die Versorgung der Bevölkerung mit öffentlichen Gütern und die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Auch wenn die verschiedenen Bereiche von Good Governance zunächst einzeln untersucht werden, so zeigen sich gleichzeitig deutlich die Wechselwirkungen der Komponenten. Zum Beispiel kristallisiert sich klar heraus, dass Rechtsstaatlichkeit sowohl auf die Stabilität politischer Systeme wirkt, als auch auf die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Ebenso beeinflussen diese wiederum die Korruption. Ähnliche Verknüpfungen lassen sich auch bei allen anderen Bereichen nachvollziehen. Die Entwicklung eines Landes kann also nur unter Berücksichtigung eines komplexen Governance-Systems verstanden und erklärt werden. Dabei können die Wechselwirkungen entweder konstruktiv oder destruktiv sein. Die Verflechtungen der einzelnen Bereiche werden in einem Negativ- und dann in einem Positiv-Szenario festgehalten. Diese Idealtypen-Bildung spitzt die Erkenntnisse der vorliegenden Arbeit zu und dient dem analytischen Verständnis der untersuchten Prozesse. Die Untersuchung zeigt, wie Good Governance über das Zusammenspiel verschiedener Faktoren entstehen kann und dass es wissenschaftlich sehr ertragreich ist, Transformationsforschung auf ein komplexes Governance-System auszuweiten. Hierbei werden die vielen empirisch erarbeiteten Ergebnisse zu den einzelnen Transformationen zu komplexen, in sich greifenden Gesamtszenarien zusammengeführt. Da es bisher keine explizite Good Governance-Transformationsforschung gab, wurde hiermit ein erster Schritt in diese Richtung getan. Es wird darüber hinaus deutlich, dass eine Transformation zu Good Governance nicht durch eine kurzfristige Veränderung der Rahmenbedingungen zu erreichen ist. Es geht um kulturelle Veränderungen, um Lernprozesse, um langfristige Entwicklungen, die in der Studie am Beispiel Ghana analysiert werden. In vielen vorangegangenen Transformationsstudien wurde diese zeitliche Komponente vernachlässigt. Ghana hat bereits viele Schritte getan, um einen Weg in die Zukunft und zu Good Governance zu finden. Die Untersuchung dieser Schritte ist Kern der vorliegenden Arbeit. Der Weg Ghanas ist jedoch noch nicht abgeschlossen.
Der Untersuchungsgegenstand der vorliegenden Arbeit ist die Praxis der Europäischen Bürgerinitiative (EBI) nach Art. 11 Abs. 4 EUV, dem weltweit ersten und einzigen Instrument transnationaler, partizipativer und digitaler Demokratie. Im Mittelpunkt der Untersuchung steht die Frage, welchen Beitrag die EBI zur weiteren Demokratisierung der EU leisten kann und auf welche Art und Weise insoweit noch weitere Verbesserungen erzielt werden können. Nach zehnjähriger Anwendungspraxis von 2012 bis 2022 liegen inzwischen ausreichend empirische Daten vor, um den Forschungsgegenstand umfassend zu erforschen und das Instrument mit Blick auf seinen von den EU-Institutionen versprochenen Legitimations- und Demokratisierungsbeitrag bewerten zu können. Insbesondere wird das EBI-Verfahren in dieser Arbeit auf seine empirisch nachweisbare Nutzung, auf seine prozedurale Nutzerfreundlichkeit sowie auf seine politische wie rechtliche Wirkmächtigkeit untersucht. Zum Zwecke der korrekten Kategorisierung, Bewertung sowie der nutzerfreundlichen Ausgestaltung des EBI-Verfahrens werden Vergleiche mit Bürger- und Volksinitiativverfahren in den EU-Mitgliedstaaten sowie mit Bürgerbeteiligungsverfahren auf EU-Ebene vorgenommen. Den empirischen und komparativen Analysen werden eine historische Analyse über die Genese der EBI seit dem EU-Verfassungskonvent sowie theoretisch-normative Überlegungen und praktische Untersuchungen zu unterschiedlichen beteiligungszentrierten Demokratiemodellen vorangestellt, um die EBI einzuordnen und die Steigerungsmöglichkeiten ihres Demokratisierungsbeitrags zu erschließen. Letzteres zielt schließlich auf die Frage nach der prozeduralen Kombination und Kompatibilität der EBI mit demokratischen Innovationen aus dem Bereich der deliberativen und direkten Demokratie ab. Die Arbeit schließt mit einem Ausblick und unterbreitet umfassende EBI-Reformoptionen sowohl auf der primär- und sekundärrechtlichen als auch auf der informellen Ebene.
In the debate on how to govern sustainable development, a central question concerns the interaction between knowledge about sustainability and policy developments. The discourse on what constitutes sustainable development conflict on some of the most basic issues, including the proper definitions, instruments and indicators of what should be ‘developed’ or ‘sustained’. Whereas earlier research on the role of (scientific) knowledge in policy adopted a rationalist-positivist view of knowledge as the basis for ‘evidence-based policy making’, recent literature on knowledge creation and transfer processes has instead pointed towards aspects of knowledge-policy ‘co-production’ (Jasanoff 2004). It is highlighted that knowledge utilisation is not just a matter of the quality of the knowledge as such, but a question of which knowledge fits with the institutional context and dominant power structures. Just as knowledge supports and justifies certain policy, policy can produce and stabilise certain knowledge. Moreover, rather than viewing knowledge-policy interaction as a linear and uni-directional model, this conceptualization is based on an assumption of the policy process as being more anarchic and unpredictable, something Cohen, March and Olsen (1972) has famously termed the ‘garbage-can model’.
The present dissertation focuses on the interplay between knowledge and policy in sustainability governance. It takes stock with the practice of ‘Management by Objectives and Results’ (MBOR: Lundqvist 2004) whereby policy actors define sustainable development goals (based on certain knowledge) and are expected to let these definitions guide policy developments as well as evaluate whether sustainability improves or not. As such a knowledge-policy instrument, Sustainability Indicators (SI:s) help both (subjectively) construct ‘social meaning’ about sustainability and (objectively) influence policy and measure its success. The different articles in this cumulative dissertation analyse the development, implementation and policy support (personal and institutional) of Sustainability Indicators as an instrument for MBOR in a variety of settings. More specifically, the articles centre on the question of how sustainability definitions and measurement tools on the one hand (knowledge) and policy instruments and political power structures on the other, are co-produced.
A first article examines the normative foundations of popular international SI:s and country rankings. Combining theoretical (constructivist) analysis with factor analysis, it analyses how the input variable structure of SI:s are related to different sustainability paradigms, producing a different output in terms of which countries (developed versus developing) are most highly ranked. Such a theoretical input-output analysis points towards a potential problem of SI:s becoming a sort of ‘circular argumentation constructs’. The article thus, highlights on a quantitative basis what others have noted qualitatively – that different definitions and interpretations of sustainability influence indicator output to the point of contradiction. The normative aspects of SI:s does thereby not merely concern the question of which indicators to use for what purposes, but also the more fundamental question of how normative and political bias are intrinsically a part of the measurement instrument as such. The study argues that, although no indicator can be expected to tell the sustainability ‘truth-out-there’, a theoretical localization of indicators – and of the input variable structure – may help facilitate interpretation of SI output and the choice of which indicators to use for what (policy or academic) purpose.
A second article examines the co-production of knowledge and policy in German sustainability governance. It focuses on the German sustainability strategy ‘Perspektiven für Deutschland’ (2002), a strategy that stands out both in an international comparison of national sustainability strategies as well as among German government policy strategies because of its relative stability over five consecutive government constellations, its rather high status and increasingly coercive nature. The study analyses what impact the sustainability strategy has had on the policy process between 2002 and 2015, in terms of defining problems and shaping policy processes. Contrasting rationalist and constructivist perspectives on the role of knowledge in policy, two factors, namely the level of (scientific and political) consensus about policy goals and the ‘contextual fit’ of problem definitions, are found to be main factors explaining how different aspects of the strategy is used. Moreover, the study argues that SI:s are part of a continuous process of ‘structuring’ in which indicator, user and context factors together help structure the sustainability challenge in such a way that it becomes more manageable for government policy.
A third article examines how 31 European countries have built supportive institutions of MBOR between 1992 and 2012. In particular during the 1990s and early 2000s much hope was put into the institutionalisation of Environmental Policy Integration (EPI) as a way to overcome sectoral thinking in sustainability policy making and integrate issues of environmental sustainability into all government policy. However, despite high political backing (FN, EU, OECD), implementation of EPI seems to differ widely among countries. The study is a quantitative longitudinal cross-country comparison of how countries’ ‘EPI architectures’ have developed over time. Moreover, it asks which ‘EPI architectures’ seem to be more effective in producing more ‘stringent’ sustainability policy.
Enacted in 2009, the National Policy on Climate Change (PNMC) is a milestone in the institutionalisation of climate action in Brazil. It sets greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets and a set of principles and directives that are intended to lay the foundations for a cross-sectoral and multilevel climate policy in the country. However, after more than a decade since its establishment, the PNMC has experienced several obstacles related to its governance, such as coordination, planning and implementation issues. All of these issues pose threats to the effectiveness of GHG mitigation actions in the country.
By looking at the intragovernmental and intergovernmental relationships that have taken place during the lifetime of the PNMC and its sectoral plans on agriculture (the Sectoral Plan for Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change for the Consolidation of a Low-Carbon Economy in Agriculture [ABC Plan]), transport and urban mobility (the Sectoral Plan for Transportation and Urban Mobility for Mitigation and Adaption of Climate Change [PSTM]), this exploratory qualitative research investigates the Brazilian climate change governance guided by the following relevant questions: how are climate policy arrangements organised and coordinated among governmental actors to mitigate GHG emissions in Brazil? What might be the reasons behind how such arrangements are established? What are the predominant governance gaps of the different GHG mitigation actions examined? Why do these governance gaps occur?
Theoretically grounded in the literature on multilevel governance and coordination of public policies, this study employs a novel analytical framework that aims to identify and discuss the occurrence of four types of governance gaps (i.e. politics, institutions and processes, resources and information) in the three GHG mitigation actions (cases) examined (i.e. the PNMC, ABC Plan and PSTM). The research results are twofold. First, they reveal that Brazil has struggled to organise and coordinate governmental actors from different policy constituencies and different levels of government in the implementation of the GHG mitigation actions examined. Moreover, climate policymaking has mostly been influenced by the Ministry of Environment (MMA) overlooking the multilevel and cross-sectoral approaches required for a country’s climate policy to mitigate and adapt to climate change, especially if it is considered an economy-wide Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), as the Brazilian one is.
Second, the study identifies a greater manifestation of gaps in politics (e.g. lack of political will in supporting climate action), institutions and processes (e.g. failures in the design of institutions and policy instruments, coordination and monitoring flaws, and difficulties in building climate federalism) in all cases studied. It also identifies that there have been important advances in the production of data and information for decision-making and, to a lesser extent, in the allocation of technical and financial resources in the cases studied; however, it is necessary to highlight the limitation of these improvements due to turf wars, a low willingness to share information among federal government players, a reduced volume of financial resources and an unequal distribution of capacities among the federal ministries and among the three levels of government.
A relevant finding is that these gaps tend to be explained by a combination of general and sectoral set aspects. Regarding the general aspects, which are common to all cases examined, the following can be mentioned: i) unbalanced policy capabilities existing among the different levels of government, ii) a limited (bureaucratic) practice to produce a positive coordination mode within cross-sectoral policies, iii) the socioeconomic inequalities that affect the way different governments and economic sectors perceive the climate issue (selective perception) and iv) the reduced dialogue between national and subnational governments on the climate agenda (poor climate federalism). The following sectoral aspects can be mentioned: i) the presence of path dependencies that make the adoption of transformative actions harder and ii) the absence of perceived co-benefits that the climate agenda can bring to each economic sector (e.g. reputational gains, climate protection and access to climate financial markets).
By addressing the theoretical and practical implications of the results, this research provides key insights to tackle the governance gaps identified and to help Brazil pave the way to achieving its NDCs and net-zero targets. At the theoretical level, this research and the current country’s GHG emissions profile suggest that the Brazilian climate policy is embedded in a cross-sectoral and multilevel arena, which requires the effective involvement of different levels of political and bureaucratic powers and the consideration of the country’s socioeconomic differences. Thus, the research argues that future improvements of the Brazilian climate policy and its governance setting must frame climate policy as an economic development agenda, the ramifications of which go beyond the environmental sector. An initial consequence of this new perspective may be a shift in the political and technical leadership from the MMA to the institutions of the centre of government (Executive Office of the President of Brazil) and those in charge of the country’s economic policy (Ministry of Economy). This change could provide greater capacity for coordination, integration and enforcement as well as for addressing certain expected gaps (e.g. financial and technical resources). It could also lead to greater political prioritisation of the agenda at the highest levels of government. Moreover, this shift of the institutional locus could contribute to greater harmonisation between domestic development priorities and international climate politics. Finally, the research also suggests that this approach would reduce bureaucratic elitism currently in place due to climate policy being managed by Brazilian governmental institutions, which is still a theme of a few ministries and a reason for the occurrence of turf wars.
The thesis focuses on the inter-departmental coordination of adaptation and mitigation of demographic change in East Germany. All Eastern German States (Länder) have set up inter-departmental committees (IDCs) that are expected to deliver joint strategies to tackle demographic change. IDCs provide an organizational setting for potential positive coordination, i.e. a joint approach to problem solving that pools and utilizes the expertise of many departments in a constructive manner from the very beginning. Whether they actually achieve positive coordination is contested within the academic debate. This motivates the first research question of this thesis: Do IDCs achieve positive coordination?
Interdepartmental committees and their role in horizontal coordination within the core executive triggered interest among scholars already more than fifty years ago. However, we don’t know much about their actual importance for the inter-departmental preparation of cross-cutting policies. Until now, few studies can be found that analyzes inter-departmental committees in a comparative way trying to identify whether they achieve positive coordination and what factors shape the coordination process and output of IDCs.
Each IDC has a chair organization that is responsible for managing the interactions within the IDCs. The chair organization is important, because it organizes and structures the overall process of coordination in the IDC. Consequently, the chair of an IDC serves as the main boundary-spanner and therefore has remarkable influence by arranging meetings and the work schedule or by distributing internal roles. Interestingly, in the German context we find two organizational approaches: while some states decided to put a line department (e.g. Department of Infrastructure) in charge of managing the IDC, others rely on the State Chancelleries, i.e. the center of government.
This situation allows for comparative research design that can address the role of the State Chancellery in inter-departmental coordination of cross-cutting policies. This is relevant, because the role of the center is crucial when studying coordination within central government. The academic debate on the center of government in the German politico-administrative system is essentially divided into two camps. One camp claims that the center can improve horizontal coordination and steer cross-cutting policy-making more effectively, while the other camp points to limits to central coordination due to departmental autonomy. This debate motivates the second research question of this thesis: Does the State Chancellery as chair organization achieve positive coordination in IDCs?
The center of government and its role in the German politic-administrative system has attracted academic attention already in the 1960s and 1970s. There is a research desiderate regarding the center’s role during the inter-departmental coordination process. There are only few studies that explicitly analyze centers of government and their role in coordination of cross-cutting policies, although some single case studies have been published. This gap in the academic debate will be addressed by the answer to the second research question.
The dependent variable of this study is the chair organization of IDCs. The value of this variable is dichotomous: either an IDC is chaired by a Line department or by a State Chancellery. We are interested whether this variable has an effect on two dependent variables. First, we will analyze the coordination process, i.e. interaction among bureaucrats within the IDC. Second, the focus of this thesis will be on the coordination result, i.e. the demography strategies that are produced by the respective IDCs.
In terms of the methodological approach, this thesis applies a comparative case study design based on a most-similar-systems logic. The German Federalism is quite suitable for such designs. Since the institutional framework largely is the same across all states, individual variables and their effect can be isolated and plausibly analyzed. To further control for potential intervening variables, we will limit our case selection to states located in East Germany, because the demographic situation is most problematic in the Eastern part of Germany, i.e. there is a equal problem pressure. Consequently, we will analyze five cases: Thuringia, Saxony-Anhalt (line department) and Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Saxony (State Chancellery).
There is no grand coordination theory that is ready to be applied to our case studies. Therefore, we need to tailor our own approach. Our assumption is that the individual chair organization has an effect on the coordination process and output of IDCs, although all cases are embedded in the same institutional setting, i.e. the German politico-administrative system. Therefore, we need an analytical approach than incorporates institutionalist and agency-based arguments. Therefore, this thesis will utilize Actor-Centered Institutionalism (ACI). Broadly speaking, ACI conceptualizes actors’ behavior as influenced - but not fully determined - by institutions. Since ACI is rather abstract we need to adapt it for the purpose of this thesis. Line Departments and State Chancelleries will be modeled as distinct actors with different action orientations and capabilities to steer the coordination process. However, their action is embedded within the institutional context of governments, which we will conceptualize as being comprised of regulative (formal rules) and normative (social norms) elements.
Translating innovation
(2017)
This doctoral thesis studies the process of innovation adoption in public administrations, addressing the research question of how an innovation is translated to a local context. The study empirically explores Design Thinking as a new problem-solving approach introduced by a federal government organisation in Singapore. With a focus on user-centeredness, collaboration and iteration Design Thinking seems to offer a new way to engage recipients and other stakeholders of public services as well as to re-think the policy design process from a user’s point of view. Pioneered in the private sector, early adopters of the methodology include civil services in Australia, Denmark, the United Kingdom, the United States as well as Singapore. Hitherto, there is not much evidence on how and for which purposes Design Thinking is used in the public sector.
For the purpose of this study, innovation adoption is framed in an institutionalist perspective addressing how concepts are translated to local contexts. The study rejects simplistic views of the innovation adoption process, in which an idea diffuses to another setting without adaptation. The translation perspective is fruitful because it captures the multidimensionality and ‘messiness’ of innovation adoption. More specifically, the overall research question addressed in this study is: How has Design Thinking been translated to the local context of the public sector organisation under investigation? And from a theoretical point of view: What can we learn from translation theory about innovation adoption processes?
Moreover, there are only few empirical studies of organisations adopting Design Thinking and most of them focus on private organisations. We know very little about how Design Thinking is embedded in public sector organisations. This study therefore provides further empirical evidence of how Design Thinking is used in a public sector organisation, especially with regards to its application to policy work which has so far been under-researched.
An exploratory single case study approach was chosen to provide an in-depth analysis of the innovation adoption process. Based on a purposive, theory-driven sampling approach, a Singaporean Ministry was selected because it represented an organisational setting in which Design Thinking had been embedded for several years, making it a relevant case with regard to the research question. Following a qualitative research design, 28 semi-structured interviews (45-100 minutes) with employees and managers were conducted. The interview data was triangulated with observations and documents, collected during a field research research stay in Singapore.
The empirical study of innovation adoption in a single organisation focused on the intra-organisational perspective, with the aim to capture the variations of translation that occur during the adoption process. In so doing, this study opened the black box often assumed in implementation studies. Second, this research advances translation studies not only by showing variance, but also by deriving explanatory factors. The main differences in the translation of Design Thinking occurred between service delivery and policy divisions, as well as between the first adopter and the rest of the organisation. For the intra-organisational translation of Design Thinking in the Singaporean Ministry the following five factors played a role: task type, mode of adoption, type of expertise, sequence of adoption, and the adoption of similar practices.
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.
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?
Within the context of United Nations (UN) environmental institutions, it has become apparent that intergovernmental responses alone have been insufficient for dealing with pressing transboundary environmental problems. Diverging economic and political interests, as well as broader changes in power dynamics and norms within global (environmental) governance, have resulted in negotiation and implementation efforts by UN member states becoming stuck in institutional gridlock and inertia. These developments have sparked a renewed debate among scholars and practitioners about an imminent crisis of multilateralism, accompanied by calls for reforming UN environmental institutions. However, with the rise of transnational actors and institutions, states are not the only relevant actors in global environmental governance. In fact, the fragmented architectures of different policy domains are populated by a hybrid mix of state and non-state actors, as well as intergovernmental and transnational institutions. Therefore, coping with the complex challenges posed by severe and ecologically interdependent transboundary environmental problems requires global cooperation and careful management from actors beyond national governments.
This thesis investigates the interactions of three intergovernmental UN treaty secretariats in global environmental governance. These are the secretariats of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. While previous research has acknowledged the increasing autonomy and influence of treaty secretariats in global policy-making, little attention has been paid to their strategic interactions with non-state actors, such as non-governmental organizations, civil society actors, businesses, and transnational institutions and networks, or their coordination with other UN agencies. Through qualitative case-study research, this thesis explores the means and mechanisms of these interactions and investigates their consequences for enhancing the effectiveness and coherence of institutional responses to underlying and interdependent environmental issues.
Following a new institutionalist ontology, the conceptual and theoretical framework of this study draws on global governance research, regime theory, and scholarship on international bureaucracies. From an actor-centered perspective on institutional interplay, the thesis employs concepts such as orchestration and interplay management to assess the interactions of and among treaty secretariats. The research methodology involves structured, focused comparison, and process-tracing techniques to analyze empirical data from diverse sources, including official documents, various secondary materials, semi-structured interviews with secretariat staff and policymakers, and observations at intergovernmental conferences.
The main findings of this research demonstrate that secretariats employ tailored orchestration styles to manage or bypass national governments, thereby raising global ambition levels for addressing transboundary environmental problems. Additionally, they engage in joint interplay management to facilitate information sharing, strategize activities, and mobilize relevant actors, thereby improving coherence across UN environmental institutions. Treaty secretariats play a substantial role in influencing discourses and knowledge exchange with a wide range of actors. However, they face barriers, such as limited resources, mandates, varying leadership priorities, and degrees of politicization within institutional processes, which may hinder their impact. Nevertheless, the secretariats, together with non-state actors, have made progress in advancing norm-building processes, integrated policy-making, capacity building, and implementation efforts within and across framework conventions. Moreover, they utilize innovative means of coordination with actors beyond national governments, such as data-driven governance, to provide policy-relevant information for achieving overarching governance targets.
Importantly, this research highlights the growing interactions between treaty secretariats and non-state actors, which not only shape policy outcomes but also have broader implications for the polity and politics of international institutions. The findings offer opportunities for rethinking collective agency and actor dynamics within UN entities, addressing gaps in institutionalist theory concerning the interaction of actors in inter-institutional spaces. Furthermore, the study addresses emerging challenges and trends in global environmental governance that are pertinent to future policy-making. These include reflections for the debate on reforming international institutions, the role of emerging powers in a changing international world order, and the convergence of public and private authority through new alliance-building and a division of labor between international bureaucracies and non-state actors in global environmental governance.
Each year, donor countries spend billions of Euros on development cooperation. Not surprisingly, a large strand of research has emerged which examines the impact of development cooperation. A sub-discipline within this strand of the literature deals with the question of whether the impact or effectiveness of development cooperation depends on the quality of the recipient country's policy and institutional environment. Over hundreds of studies have assessed this question at the macro level. In so doing, most of these studies test whether a potential effect of aid on the growth of a recipient country’s gross domestic product (GDP) is conditional on the country's policy and institutional environment. However, even after decades of research and hundreds of studies, no conclusive result has been found. One of the main reasons for the inconclusive state of the literature is that most macro-level studies have to deal with a high risk of endogeneity, treat aid as nothing but a pure income transfer, and rely on low-quality GDP data. To solve these three methodical issues, some authors have started to change the analytical focus from the macro to the micro level. Thus, these authors assess the determinants for the performance of individual development projects instead of the determinants for an effect of aid on GDP. Yet, even though the number of studies focusing on the micro level has increased steadily over the last few years, the state of the literature on the determinants for the performance of development projects still contains multiple highly relevant research gaps. The present thesis seeks to address three of these research gaps. The first research gap addressed by this thesis is related to the specific type of development cooperation. So far, nearly all existing studies focus on projects by Multilateral Development Banks. Research on the determinants for the performance of bilateral development projects is still rare. Thus, even though donors pledge to implement effective development projects, there are hardly any micro-level studies on bilateral projects. So far, only three studies use a sample which includes bilateral projects. Yet, none of the three studies assess the determinants for the performance of bilateral technical development projects. The first paper in the present thesis (GIZ paper) seeks to address this research gap by assessing the determinants for the performance of projects by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), a bilateral state-owned aid agency active in the area of technical cooperation. The results of the paper indicate that some but not all of the existing theoretical arguments can be extended to bilateral technical projects as well.. For example, the level of market interventions in the recipient county only affects the performance of financial development projects, while the recipient country’s government capacity affects both technical and financial development projects. The paper also indicates that effects of determinants may vary among project sectors. The paper also highlights a dilemma of technical development cooperation. The countries with low government capacity are usually the ones most in need of technical cooperation projects. But, at the same time, they are also the countries in which these projects have the poorest performance The second research gap addressed by this thesis is related to one specific factor in the policy and institutional environment of recipient countries, namely corruption. This determinant is often cited as essential for project performance but has gained surprisingly little coverage in empirical studies. The few existing studies on the effect of corruption on project performance are inconclusive. Some find a statistically significant correlation, while others do not. Furthermore, so far, all existing studies use corruption perception indices as a measurement for corruption, despite the fact that these indices have well-known deficits when it comes to this research topic. One of these deficits is that such indices do not distinguish between different forms of corruption, even though it is likely that the effect of corruption will vary depending on the type of development project and form of corruption. The second paper in this thesis (Corruption paper) seeks to address this inconclusive state of the research while focusing on one specific form of corruption, namely bribery between private firms and public officials. The paper finds a small but statistically significant correlation between the corruption level and the performance of World Bank projects. The systematic effect of corruption on project performance confirms the need to consider the risk of corruption in the design and during the implementation of projects. Nonetheless, the relatively small effect of corruption and the low pseudo R-squareds advise not to overestimate the relevance of corruption for project performance. At least for the project level, the paper finds no indication that corruption is a primary obstacle to aid effectiveness. The third research gap addressed by this thesis is related to one specific sample, namely recipient countries of the International Development Association (IDA). The question of whether the policy and institutional environment affects project performance is of particular relevance for these countries, given that the World Bank's ratings on a country's policy and institutional environment decide how much IDA resources it receives. One core justification of such an allocation system is that it helps to steer more resources to places where they are most effective. However, so far, there is no conclusive empirical evidence for this statement. The only study specifically focusing on this topic, a study by the Independent Evaluation Group of the World Bank from 2010, has essential methodological limitations. The third paper of this thesis (CPR paper) seeks to address this research gap by testing whether a more refined analysis confirms the assumption of previous studies that the policy and institutional environment of IDA-recipient countries, measured by the Country Policy and Institutional Assessment ratings, has an effect on the performance of World Bank projects. Overall, neither the main regression models nor any of the robustness tests indicate a substantial correlation between the policy and institutional environment and project performance. Only for Investments Loans is the coefficient large enough to assume some effect. The overall results not only contradict the results of previous studies, but also raise strong doubts around one of the core justifications for the allocation system of the IDA. All three papers rely on a statistical large-N analysis of the performance ratings of individual development projects. These ratings are usually assigned based on the final evaluation of a project and indicate the merit or worth of an activity. The merit or worth of an activity itself is measured by criteria like relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency. In the case of the two papers on World Bank projects, the needed data stem from different databases of the World Bank. The relevant data for the GIZ paper are gathered from internal evaluation reports of the GIZ. Logistic regressions are applied as the main analytical tool. Overall, the three papers show that the policy and institutional environment of recipient countries matters for project performance, but only to a small degree and under certain circumstances. This result highlights that many researchers and practitioners tend to overestimate the role that the policy and institutional environment of recipient countries plays in project performance. Furthermore, the thesis shows that authors of future studies should consider possible interactions between project- and country-level determinants whenever possible, both in their theoretical arguments and statistical models. Otherwise, the debate on the determinants for project performance is at risk of degenerating into a statistics tournament without any connection to reality.
East and South
(2022)
"What is 'Europe' in academic discourse? While Europe tends to be used as shorthand, often interchangeable with the 'West', neither the 'West' nor 'Europe' are homogeneous spaces. Though postcolonial studies have long been debunking Eurocentrism in its multiple guises, there is still work to do in fully comprehending how its imaginations and discursive legacies conceive the figure of Europe, as not all who live on European soil are understood as equally 'European'. This volume explores this immediate need to rethink the axis of postcolonial cultural productions, to disarticulate Eurocentrism, to recognise Europe as a more diverse, plural and fluid space, to draw forward cultural exchanges and dialogues within the Global South. Through analyses of literary texts from East-Central Europe and beyond, this volume sheds light on alternative literary cartographies - the multiplicity of Europes and being European which exist both as they are viewed from the different geographies of the global South, and within the continent itself. Covering a wide spatial and temporal terrain in postcolonial and European cultural productions, this volume will be of great interest to scholars and researchers of literature and literary criticism, cultural studies, post-colonial studies, Global South studies and European studies"
Der Verteidigungsausschuss des Deutschen Bundestags steht seit seiner Gründung in rationaler und emotionaler Auseinandersetzung mit Parlament und Öffentlichkeit. Wolfgang Geist untersucht in seiner Langzeitanalyse die wechselnde Stellung des Ausschusses im Bundestag und gegenüber dessen Fraktionen unter den sich wandelnden politischen und gesellschaftlichen Gegebenheiten. So wird deutlich, welche Rolle der Ausschuss – auch in seiner besonderen Tätigkeit als Untersuchungsausschuss – in der Sicherheitspolitik der Bundesrepublik spielte sowie welcher Bedeutung der personellen Zusammensetzung und einzelnen politischen Akteuren zukam. Gleichzeitig hinterfragt er das Schlagwort »Parlamentsarmee«.
This paper examines the function that cross-cultural competence (3C) has for NATO in a military context while focusing on two member states and their armed forces: the United States and Germany. Three dimensions were established to analyze 3C internally and externally: dimension A, dealing with 3C within the military organization; dimension B, focusing on 3C in a coalition environment/multicultural NATO contingent, for example while on a mission/training exercise abroad; and dimension C, covering 3C and NATO missions abroad with regard to interaction with the local population.
When developing the research design, the cultural studies-based theory of hegemony constructed by Antonio Gramsci was applied to a comprehensive document analysis of 3C coursework and regulations as well as official documents in order to establish a typification for cross-cultural competence.
As the result, 3C could be categorized as Type I – Ethical 3C, Type II – Hegemonic 3C, and Type III – Dominant 3C. Attributes were assigned according to each type. To validate the established typification, qualitative surveys were conducted with NATO (ACT), the U.S. Armed Forces (USCENTCOM), and the German Armed Forces (BMVg). These interviews validated the typification and revealed a varied approach to 3C in the established dimensions. It became evident that dimensions A and B indicated a prevalence of Type III, which greatly impacts the work atmosphere and effectiveness for NATO (ACT). In contrast, dimension C revealed the use of postcolonial mechanisms by NATO forces, such as applying one’s value systems to other cultures and having the appearance of an occupying force when 3C is not applied (Type I-II). In general, the function of each 3C type in the various dimensions could be determined.
In addition, a comparative study of the document analysis and the qualitative surveys resulted in a canon for culture-general skills. Regarding the determined lack of coherence in 3C correlating with a demonstrably negative impact on effectiveness and efficiency as well as interoperability, a NATO standard in the form of a standardization agreement (STANAG) was suggested based on the aforementioned findings, with a focus on: empathy, cross-cultural awareness, communication skills (including active listening), flexibility and adaptability, and interest. Moreover, tolerance of ambiguity and teachability, patience, observation skills, and perspective-taking could be considered significant. Suspending judgment and respect are also relevant skills here.
At the same time, the document analysis also revealed a lack of coherency and consistency in 3C education and interorganizational alignment. In particular, the documents examined for the U.S. Forces indicated divergent approaches. Furthermore, the interview analysis disclosed a large discrepancy in part between doctrine and actual implementation with regard to the NATO Forces.
Das Buch bietet eine systematische Erklärung der bisher wenig beachteten Phänomene von Wandel und Stabilität legislativer Vetopunkte (VP) in parlamentarischen Demokratien.
Theoretisch ermöglichen die gemeinsame Betrachtung der Akteursstrategien auf Gesetzgebungs- und Reformebene und deren gegenseitige Beeinflussung die Identifikation institutioneller Gleichgewichte. Die Erklärung der Autorin betont die Bedeutung der Mehrheiten beschränkenden Wirkung von Vetoinstitutionen für die Reformpräferenzen der Akteure. Im Reformprozess wird die Legitimität der Vetopunkte als wesentlicher Faktor angenommen. Sie beeinflusst Kosten und Nutzen der Akteure durch eine potenzielle elektorale Bestrafung von Versuchen, legitime Vetopunkte zu schwächen bzw. illegitime Vetopunkte zu bewahren.
Empirisch wird die Erklärung mittels einer QCA–Analyse für 38 etablierte parlamentarische Demokratien sowie anhand vertiefender Fallstudien zur Entwicklung der Vetoinstitutionen in fünf Ländern überprüft.
This study assesses and explains international bureaucracies’ performance and role as policy advisors and as expert authorities from the perspective of domestic stakeholders. International bureaucracies are the secretariats of international organizations that carry out their work including generating knowledge, providing policy advice and implementing policy programs and projects. Scholars increasingly regard them as governance actors that are able to influence global and domestic policy making. In order to explain this influence, research has mainly focused on international bureaucracies’ formal features and/or staff characteristics. The way in which they are actually perceived by their domestic stakeholders, in particular by national bureaucrats, has not been systematically studied. Yet, this is equally important, given that they represent international bureaucracies’ addressees and are actors that (potentially) make use of international bureaucracies’ policy advice, which can be seen as an indicator for international bureaucracies’ influence. Accordingly, I argue that domestic stakeholders’ assessments can likewise contribute to explaining international bureaucracies’ influence.
The overarching research questions the study addresses are what are national stakeholders’ perspectives on international bureaucracies and under which conditions do they consider international bureaucracies’ policy advice? In answering these questions, I focus on three specific organizational features that the literature has considered important for international bureaucracies’ independent influence, namely international bureaucracies’ performance and their role as policy advisors and as expert authorities. These three features are studied separately in three independent articles, which are presented in Part II of this article-based dissertation.
To answer the research questions, I draw on novel data from a global survey among ministry officials of 121 countries. The survey captures ministry officials’ assessments of international bureaucracies’ features and their behavior with respect to international bureaucracies’ policy advice. The overall sample comprises the bureaucracies of nine global and nine regional international organizations in eight thematic areas in the policy fields of agriculture and finance.
The overall finding of this study is that international bureaucracies’ performance and their role as policy advisors and expert authorities as perceived by ministry officials are highly context-specific and relational. These features vary not only across international bureaucracies but much more intra-organizationally across the different thematic areas that an international bureaucracy addresses, i.e. across different thematic contexts. As far as to the relational nature of international bureaucracies’ features, the study generally finds strong variation across the assessments by ministry officials from different countries and across thematic areas. Hence, the findings highlight that it is likewise important to study international bureaucracies via the perspective of their stakeholders and to take account of the different thematic areas and contexts in which international bureaucracies operate.
The study contributes to current research on international bureaucracies in various ways. First, it directly surveys one important type of domestic stakeholders, namely national ministry officials, as to how they evaluate certain aspects of international bureaucracies instead of deriving them from their structural features, policy documents or assessments by their staff. Furthermore, the study empirically tests a range of theoretical hypotheses derived from the literature on international bureaucracies’ influence, as well as related literature. Second, the study advances methods of assessing international bureaucracies through a large-N, cross-national expert survey among ministry officials. A survey of this type of stakeholder and of this scope is – to my knowledge – unprecedented. Yet, as argued above, their perspectives are equally important for assessing and explaining international bureaucracies’ influence. Third, the study adapts common theories of international bureaucracies’ policy influence and expert authority to the assessments by ministry officials. In so doing, it tests hypotheses that are rooted in both rationalist and constructivist accounts and combines perspectives on international bureaucracies from both International Relations and Public Administration. Empirically supporting and challenging these hypotheses further complements the theoretical understanding of the determinants of international bureaucracies’ influence among national bureaucracies from both rationalist and constructivist perspectives.
Overall, this study advances our understanding of international bureaucracies by systematically taking into account ministry officials’ perspectives in order to determine under which conditions international bureaucracies are perceived to perform well and are able to have an effect as policy advisors and expert authorities among national bureaucracies. Thereby, the study helps to specify to what extent international bureaucracies – as global governance actors – are able to permeate domestic governance via ministry officials and, thus, contribute to the question of why some international bureaucracies play a greater role and are ultimately able to have more influence than others.
This thesis is analyzing multiple coordination challenges which arise with the digital transformation of public administration in federal systems, illustrated by four case studies in Germany. I make various observations within a multi-level system and provide an in-depth analysis. Theoretical explanations from both federalism research and neo-institutionalism are utilized to explain the findings of the empirical driven work. The four articles evince a holistic picture of the German case and elucidate its role as a digital government laggard. Their foci range from macro, over meso to micro level of public administration, differentiating between the governance and the tool dimension of digital government.
The first article shows how multi-level negotiations lead to expensive but eventually satisfying solutions for the involved actors, creating a subtle balance between centralization and decentralization. The second article identifies legal, technical, and organizational barriers for cross-organizational service provision, highlighting the importance of inter-organizational and inter-disciplinary exchange and both a common language and trust. Institutional change and its effects on the micro level, on citizens and the employees in local one-stop shops, mark the focus of the third article, bridging the gap between reforms and the administrative reality on the local level. The fourth article looks at the citizens’ perspective on digital government reforms, their expectations, use and satisfaction. In this vein, this thesis provides a detailed account of the importance of understanding the digital divide and therefore the necessity of reaching out to different recipients of digital government reforms. I draw conclusions from the factors identified as causes for Germany’s shortcomings for other federal systems where feasible and derive reform potential therefrom. This allows to gain a new perspective on digital government and its coordination challenges in federal contexts.