320 Politikwissenschaft
Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (35) (remove)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (35) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (35)
Keywords
- Demokratietheorie (2)
- Politik (2)
- Antisemitismus (1)
- Bergbau (1)
- Bildung (1)
- Bürgerbeteiligung (1)
- Decarbonisation (1)
- Dekarbonisierung (1)
- Deutschland (1)
- Development cooperation (1)
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.
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?
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«.
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.