320 Politikwissenschaft
Refine
Year of publication
- 2016 (45) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (15)
- Doctoral Thesis (10)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (8)
- Part of a Book (5)
- Other (3)
- Postprint (3)
- Working Paper (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (45) (remove)
Keywords
What shapes peace, and how can peace be successfully built in those countries affected by armed conflict? This paper examines mpeacebuilding in the aftermath of civil wars in order to identify the conditions for post-conflict peace. The field of civil war research is
characterised by case studies, comparative analyses and quantitative research, which relate relatively little to each other. Furthermore, the complex dynamics of peacebuilding have hardly been investigated so far. Thus, the question remains of how best to enhance the prospects
of a stable peace in post-conflict societies. Therefore, it is necessary to capture the dynamics of post-conflict peace. This paper aims at helping to narrow these research gaps by 1) presenting the benefits of set theoretic methods for peace and conflict studies; 2) identifying remote conflict environment factors and proximate peacebuilding factors which have an influence on the peacebuilding process and 3) proposing a
set-theoretic multi-method research approach in order to identify the causal structures and mechanisms underlying the complex realm of post-conflict peacebuilding. By implementing this transparent and systematic comparative approach, it will become possible to discover
the dynamics of post-conflict peace.
Conclusion
(2016)
This chapter revisits the role of the new modes of governance in areas of limited statehood. First, it states that there is no linear relationship between degrees of statehood and the overall effectiveness of new modes of sustainability governance. Second, the chapter states that, in most of the cases, national governments are hesitant or even actively hamper the development of new modes of governance. Third, it shows that the absence of the shadow of hierarchy can indeed lead to ineffective new modes of governance. However, the shadow of hierarchy does not necessarily need to be cast by states. Finally, the author reviews the complexities involved in participatory practices, stressing the importance of institutional structures and knowledgeable brokers. The chapter concludes by outlining fields for future research.
Introduction
(2016)
The Paris Agreement for Climate Change or the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) rely on new modes of governance for implementation. Indeed, new modes of governance such as market-based instruments, public-private partnerships or multi-stakeholder initiatives have been praised for playing a pivotal role in effective and legitimate sustainability governance. Yet, do they also deliver in areas of limited statehood? States such as Malaysia or the Dominican Republic partly lack the ability to implement and enforce rules; their statehood is limited. This introduction provides the analytical framework of this volume and critically examines the performance of new modes of governance in areas of limited statehood, drawing on the book’s in-depth case studies on issues of climate change, biodiversity, and health.
This chapter investigates the trajectory of establishing the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) in the early 1990s as the first private transnational certification organization with an antagonistic stakeholder body. Its main contribution is a micro-analysis of the founding assembly in 1993. By investigating the role of brokers within the negotiation as one institutional scope condition for ‘arguing’ having occurred, the chapter adopts a dramaturgical approach. It contends that the authority of brokers is not necessarily institutionally given, but needs to be gained: brokers have to prove situationally that their knowledge is relevant and that they are speaking impartially in the interest of progress rather than their own. The chapter stresses the importance of procedural knowledge which brokers provide in contrast to policy knowledge.
In den 2000er-Jahren stiegen die Rohstoffpreise enorm an. Auslöser waren die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung der Schwellenländer, allen voran Chinas, sowie der gestiegene Rohstoffbedarf durch technologische Innovationen. Diese „Rohstoffkrise“ veränderte das Verhältnis der Rohstoff exportierenden und importierenden Staaten zueinander. Auch wird Rohstoffpolitik nicht mehr nur unter wirtschaftlichen, sondern ebenso unter ökologischen und sozialen Kriterien betrachtet. Der Beitrag erläutert die Ursachen und benennt Auswirkungen der Krise.
Amerikaner in Berlin
(2016)
An keinem anderen Ort wird die besondere Bedeutung der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika für Deutschland so deutlich wie in Berlin. In rund 80 Einträgen versammelt der Band eine Vielzahl US-amerikanischer Persönlichkeiten und stellt Orte vor, an denen sie in Berlin gelebt und gewirkt haben oder noch wirken. Die Berliner Erlebnisse von Diplomaten, Intellektuellen, Wissenschaftlern, Sportlern oder berühmten Künstlerinnen aller Sparten machen die Geschichte der deutsch-amerikanischen Beziehungen von den Anfängen 1776 bis heute anschaulich und lebendig. Ausklappbare Karten, Infokästen, ein farbiges Orientierungssystem und zahlreiche historische sowie aktuelle Fotos eröffnen die Möglichkeit, den Spuren von Mildred Harnack, Martin Luther King, Angela Davis, Iggy Pop, Georg Bush, Daniel Liebeskind, Jonathan Franzen und vielen anderen in der deutschen Hauptstadt zu folgen.
Grenzen sind immanenter Bestandteil der internationalen Beziehungen. Deren Kern besteht ja darin, dass Akteure über (nationalstaatliche) Grenzen hinweg handeln. Die Grenze und deren Überschreitung sind somit eine conditio sine qua non von internationalen Beziehungen. Das stellt sich in Europa, Amerika und Afrika sehr verschieden dar und wird auch unterschiedlich diskutiert. Der vorliegende Band bildet dies ab: die theoretische Debatte und die empirische Verschiedenheit in den Regionen, wobei die Europäische Union den regionalen Schwerpunkt bildet.
Ivo Lormes zeigt, dass der Kommunalisierungstrend in der
Energieversorgung als Indikator eines zukunftsgerichteten Zeitalterskommunal(-energie-)wirtschaftlicher Betätigung gedeutet werden kann.
Die sich dabei manifestierende neue Qualität institutioneller Arrangements interpretiert er als Indiz für eine ‚Gewährleistungskommune 2.0‘. Neben einer Analyse der seit 2005 in Deutschland erfolgten Stadtwerke-Gründungen werden in seinem Buch erstmals die im Rahmen dieser Kommunalisierungen ablaufenden politischen Prozesse fallstudienvergleichend untersucht. Dadurch wird eine systematische Ermittlung der Einflussfaktoren zu der Frage ermöglicht, warum manche Kommunen ihre Energieversorgung kommunalisieren und andere nicht.
This cumulative dissertation contains four self-contained articles which are related to EU regional policy and its structural funds as the overall research topic. In particular, the thesis addresses the question if EU regional policy interventions can at all be scientifically justified and legitimated on theoretical and empirical grounds from an economics point of view. The first two articles of the thesis (“The EU structural funds as a means to hamper migration” and “Internal migration and EU regional policy transfer payments: a panel data analysis for 28 EU member countries”) enter into one particular aspect of the debate regarding the justification and legitimisation of EU regional policy. They theoretically and empirically analyse as to whether regional policy or the market force of the free flow of labour (migration) in the internal European market is the better instrument to improve and harmonise the living and working conditions of EU citizens. Based on neoclassical market failure theory, the first paper argues that the structural funds of the EU are inhibiting internal migration, which is one of the key measures in achieving convergence among the nations in the single European market. It becomes clear that European regional policy aiming at economic growth and cohesion among the member states cannot be justified and legitimated if the structural funds hamper instead of promote migration. The second paper, however, shows that the empirical evidence on the migration and regional policy nexus is not unambiguous, i.e. different empirical investigations show that EU structural funds hamper and promote EU internal migration. Hence, the question of the scientific justification and legitimisation of EU regional policy cannot be readily and unambiguously answered on empirical grounds. This finding is unsatisfying but is in line with previous theoretical and empirical literature. That is why, I take a step back and reconsider the theoretical beginnings of the thesis, which took for granted neoclassical market failure theory as the starting point for the positive explanation as well as the normative justification and legitimisation of EU regional policy. The third article of the thesis (“EU regional policy: theoretical foundations and policy conclusions revisited”) deals with the theoretical explanation and legitimisation of EU regional policy as well as the policy recommendations given to EU regional policymakers deduced from neoclassical market failure theory. The article elucidates that neoclassical market failure is a normative concept, which justifies and legitimates EU regional policy based on a political and thus subjective goal or value-judgement. It can neither be used, therefore, to give a scientifically positive explanation of the structural funds nor to obtain objective and practically applicable policy instruments. Given this critique of neoclassical market failure theory, the third paper consequently calls into question the widely prevalent explanation and justification of EU regional policy given in static neoclassical equilibrium economics. It argues that an evolutionary non-equilibrium economics perspective on EU regional policy is much more appropriate to provide a realistic understanding of one of the largest policies conducted by the EU. However, this does neither mean that evolutionary economic theory can be unreservedly seen as the panacea to positively explain EU regional policy nor to derive objective policy instruments for EU regional policymakers. This issue is discussed in the fourth article of the thesis (“Market failure vs. system failure as a rationale for economic policy? A critique from an evolutionary perspective”). This article reconsiders the explanation of economic policy from an evolutionary economics perspective. It contrasts the neoclassical equilibrium notions of market and government failure with the dominant evolutionary neo-Schumpeterian and Austrian-Hayekian perceptions. Based on this comparison, the paper criticises the fact that neoclassical failure reasoning still prevails in non-equilibrium evolutionary economics when economic policy issues are examined. This is surprising, since proponents of evolutionary economics usually view their approach as incompatible with its neoclassical counterpart. The paper therefore argues that in order to prevent the otherwise fruitful and more realistic evolutionary approach from undermining its own criticism of neoclassical economics and to create a consistent as well as objective evolutionary policy framework, it is necessary to eliminate the equilibrium spirit. Taken together, the main finding of this thesis is that European regional policy and its structural funds can neither theoretically nor empirically be justified and legitimated from an economics point of view. Moreover, the thesis finds that the prevalent positive and instrumental explanation of EU regional policy given in the literature needs to be reconsidered, because these theories can neither scientifically explain the emergence and development of this policy nor are they appropriate to derive objective and scientific policy instruments for EU regional policymakers.
Heute sind die Themen Frauen und Frieden auf der Ebene der Sicherheitspolitik der Vereinten Nationen als Resultat von Resolution 1325 (2000) eng miteinander verbunden. Welche rechtlichen und tatsächlichen Konsequenzen haben sich aus dieser Entwicklung einerseits für die Arbeit der Vereinten Nationen selbst, andererseits für die Mitgliedstaaten ergeben und wie steht es um ihre Umsetzung? Die Studie zeichnet die WPS-Agenda nach und diskutiert die diesbezüglichen Aktivitäten der Vereinten Nationen. Die Umsetzungsmaßnahmen Deutschlands werden im Anschluss untersucht und bewertet.
In 2002 Germany adopted an ambitious national sustainability strategy, covering all three sustainability spheres and circling around 21 key indicators. The strategy stands out because of its relative stability over five consecutive government constellations, its high status and increasingly coercive nature. This article analyses the strategy's role in the policy process, focusing on the use and influence of indicators as a central steering tool. Contrasting rationalist and constructivist perspectives on the role of knowledge in policy, two factors, namely the level of consensus about policy goals and the institutional setting of the indicators, are found to explain differences in use and influence both across indicators and over time. Moreover, the study argues that the indicators have been part of a continuous process of ‘structuring’ in which conceptual and instrumental use together help structure the sustainability challenge in such a way that it becomes more manageable for government policy.
Deutsche Außenpolitik zu Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts und die Linke im Spannungsfeld zwischen Nation und Internationalismus: Für Erhard Crome geht es um nicht weniger als die Frage, wie deutsche Außenpolitik von links gedacht und konzipiert werden sollte. In der vorliegenden Festschrift gehen Kolleginnen und Kollegen dieser Frage gemeinsam mit dem Jubilar nach. Ein Plädoyer für eine nicht-hegemoniale Verantwortung Deutschlands.
Produktivität als Antwort
(2016)
Die Empirie des beginnenden 21. Jahrhunderts weist mehr autoritäre Regime aus als am Ende des 20. Jahrhunderts angenommen. Die gegenwärtige Autoritarismusforschung versucht die Fortdauer dieses Regimetyps in Hinblick auf die politischen Institutionen zu erklären – dabei bleiben politische Akteure, die nicht zum Herrschaftszentrum gehören, außen vor.
Das vorliegende Projekt untersucht die Rolle und Funktion politischer Opposition in autoritären Regimen. Es wird davon ausgegangen, dass sich an der Opposition eine signifikante Charakteristik autoritärer Regime manifestiert. Das akteurszentrierte Projekt ist der qualitativ orientierten Politikwissenschaft zuzurechnen und verknüpft das Autoritarismuskonzept von Juan Linz mit klassischen Ansätzen der Oppositionsforschung und macht diese Theorien für die gegenwärtige Autoritarismusforschung nutzbar.
Die eigens entwickelte elitenorientierte Oppositionstypologie wird am Beispiel Kenias im Zeitraum 1990-2005 angewendet. Die Oppositionsgruppen werden im Institutionengefüge autoritärer Regime verortet und ihr politisches Agieren in den Dimensionen Handlungsstatus, Handlungsüberzeugung und Handlungsstrategie analysiert. Unter Beachtung der historisch gewachsenen regionalen und kulturellen Spezifika wird angenommen, dass generelle, Regionen übergreifende Aussagen zur Opposition in autoritären Regimen getroffen werden können: Kein Oppositionstyp kann allein einen Herrschaftswechsel bewirken. Der Wechsel bzw. die Fortdauer der Herrschaft hängt von der Dominanz bestimmter Oppositionstypen im Oppositionsgeflecht sowie der gleichzeitigen Schwäche anderer Oppositionstypen ab.
Durch die konzeptionelle Beschäftigung mit Opposition sowie deren empirische Erschließung soll ein substantieller Beitrag für die notwendige Debatte um autoritäre Regime im 21. Jahrhundert geleistet werden.
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.
This chapter takes stock with the research on the authority of international organizations (IOs) and international public administrations (IPAs) in the fields of International Relations (IR) and Public Administration (PA). It combines arguments from conceptual and theoretical debates with empirical findings to explore under which conditions IPAs are likely to enjoy authority. Based on a review of the literature and on conceptual clarifications, we define authority as a social relationship between holders and granters of authority. We distinguish two types of authority, namely, political and expert authority, and two forms of recognition, namely, in practice (de facto) and by formal delegation (de jure). Given that the de facto expert authority of IPAs has received least attention in the literature, while the PA literature reminds us that knowledge lies at the heart of bureaucratic power, we develop propositions on how de facto expert authority could be measured and how the anticipated variation of expert authority among IPAs could be explained. We illustrate our argument with reference to empirical findings in the IR and PA literature. We conclude by highlighting the implications of our discussion for future research on the authority of national and IPAs.
Since the economic crisis in 2008, European youth unemployment rates have been persistently high at around 20% on average. The majority of European countries spends significant resources each year on active labor market programs (ALMP) with the aim of improving the integration prospects of struggling youths. Among the most common programs used are training courses, job search assistance and monitoring, subsidized employment, and public work programs. For policy makers, it is of upmost importance to know which of these programs work and which are able to achieve the intended goals – may it be the integration into the first labor market or further education. Based on a detailed assessment of the particularities of the youth labor market situation, we discuss the pros and cons of different ALMP types. We then provide a comprehensive survey of the recent evidence on the effectiveness of these ALMP for youth in Europe, highlighting factors that seem to promote or impede their effectiveness in practice. Overall, the findings with respect to employment outcomes are only partly promising. While job search assistance (with and without monitoring) results in overwhelmingly positive effects, we find more mixed effects for training and wage subsidies, whereas the effects for public work programs are clearly negative. The evidence on the impact of ALMP on furthering education participation as well as employment quality is scarce, requiring additional research and allowing only limited conclusions so far.