Institutes
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (62)
- Book (28)
- Doctoral Thesis (26)
- Master's Thesis (8)
- Working Paper (7)
- Contribution to a Periodical (6)
- Preprint (5)
- Review (5)
- Bachelor Thesis (2)
- Part of Periodical (2)
Language
- English (77)
- German (74)
- Portuguese (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (152)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (152)
Keywords
- Globalisierung (5)
- Globalization (4)
- Pierre Bourdieu (4)
- climate change (4)
- gender (4)
- China (3)
- Finance (3)
- Global Financial Class (3)
- Globale Finanzklasse (3)
- Transnational Capitalist Class (3)
Institute
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (152)
- Präsidium (29)
- Exzellenzcluster Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen (5)
- Rechtswissenschaft (3)
- Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaften (2)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (2)
- Biochemie, Chemie und Pharmazie (1)
- Biowissenschaften (1)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (1)
- Foundation of Law and Finance (1)
Türkisch-russische Zentralasienpolitik : geopolitische Rivalität oder strategische Partnerschaft?
(2020)
Die türkisch-russische Geschichte ist eine Geschichte der Rivalitäten. Sie wird wegen 15 Kriege zwischen den beiden Staaten als konflikthaft bezeichnet. Ihren 1. Krieg führten die beiden Staaten wegen Zentralasien, um das Khanat Astrachan (1568–1570). Der Untersuchungszeitraum dieser Dissertation erstreckt sich von diesem Datum bis zum Ende 2019. In diesem Zeitraum rivalisierten die Türkei und Russland geopolitisch in Zentralasien. Diese Arbeit konzentriert sich auf die türkisch-russische Zentralasienpolitik, bzw. darauf, wie die Türkei und Russland auf ihre gegenseitige Zentralasienpolitik reagieren, warum sie in Zentralasien geopolitisch rivalisieren (1. Forschungsfrage) und ob in Zukunft eine türkisch-russische strategische Partnerschaft in Zentralasien möglich ist (2. Forschungsfrage). Politikwissenschaftlich sind diese Fragen von großer Relevanz, weil eine mögliche türkisch-russische strategische Partnerschaft die gesamten Machtverhältnisse der Welt verändern würde.
Laut C.S. Peirce ist der abduktive Schluss das einzige logische Verfahren, das in der Lage ist, neue Erkenntnisse einzuführen. Dieser funktioniert in etwa so, dass auf Basis eines bereits bestehenden, jedoch unbewusst verwendeten, Regel- bzw. Vorwissens etwas Neues, bislang Unbekanntes, generiert wird, indem eine Ähnlichkeitsrelation bzw. eine Differenz zwischen Alt und Neu erzeugt wird. Damit scheint bei der Abduktion das einsam handelnde und denkende Subjekt die zentrale Instanz der Entstehung des Neuen zu sein.
Aus soziologischer Sicht von Interesse ist dabei, welche, hier zu unterstellende, tragende Rolle der soziale Austausch bei dieser Erkenntnisgenese überhaupt spielt, wenn, dem abduktiven Schluss zufolge, das monologisch handelnde Individuen über quasi „eingelagerte“ Erkenntnis-Instinkte, wie Peirce sagt, verfügt. Die Rolle des anderen im sozialen Austausch würde dadurch jedoch hinfällig oder zumindest randständig.
Der logische Ausweg, um den anderen als konstitutiver Bestandteil der Erkenntnisgenese zu integrieren, besteht in der These, dass interagierende Individuen sich auf eine Art und Weise wechselseitig identisch sein müssen. Ähnlichkeitsbezüge herstellen zu können würde dadurch primär zu einem Produkt der Interindividualität und nicht zu jenem einzelner Individuen.
Um diese These zu prüfen, werden in einem ersten Schritt Peirce’ Theorien zur Abduktion untersucht. Im Weiteren sollen aber auch soziologische Erkenntnistheorien und interdisziplinäre Ansätze, wie die der (Social) Neuroscience, auf die Möglichkeit einer interindividuellen Verquickung im Sinne des wechselseitig Identisch-Seins untersucht.
In einem letzten Schritt wird die berechtigte Frage gestellt, wie denn überhaupt Erkenntnis erzeugt werden kann, wenn Individuen sich differenzlos identisch gegenüberstehen. Dabei wird die These vorgeschlagen, dass Differenz dadurch eingespielt wird, indem Subjekte sich nie dieselbe Raumzeitstelle teilen. Die am Individuum gebundene Fähigkeit, Unterschiede bzw. Ähnlichkeitsbezüge erkennen zu können (Abduktion), wird somit erst durch Praxis selbst möglich.
Abschließend sollen durch forschungsübergreifende Überlegungen Konsequenzen aus diesen Thesen gezogen werden.
With the significant disconnect between the collective aim of limiting warming to well below 2°C and the current means proposed to achieve such an aim, the goal of this paper is to offer a moral assessment of prominent alternatives to current international climate policy. To do so, we’ll outline five different policy routes that could potentially bring the means and goal in line. Those five policy routes are: (1) exceed 2°C; (2) limit warming to less than 2°C by economic de-growth; (3) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation only; (4) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation and widespread deployment of Negative Emissions Technologies (NETs); and (5) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation, NETs, and Solar Radiation Management as a fallback. In assessing these five policy routes, we rely primarily upon two moral considerations: the avoidance of catastrophic climate change and the right to sustainable development. We’ll conclude that we should continue to aim at the two-degree target, and that to get there we should use aggressive mitigation, pursue the deployment of NETs, and continue to research SRM.
Psychotherapists in mental health institutions as a professional group are part of the medical system, and from this perspective, as representing an occupation that serves the public health interests, as well as those of the individual seeking help. Despite the different existing therapeutic approaches and diverse forms of therapy deriving from these approaches critical theories, however, consider psychotherapy as a profession with a specific jurisdictional claim and own highly specific interests. In contrast to most of the recent discussion around therapy culture, in this article, I argue that sociology and social theory could benefit from an understanding of psychotherapy as a profession with a separate logic and claim for jurisdiction for mental health. Moreover, I present some general trends showing that, regarding psychotherapy, we face a concurrence of a professionalisation, and simultaneously, an already ongoing deprofessionalisation. To develop my argument, I first discuss the perspectives of sociology of the psychotherapy professions. Second, I present the potential lack of professionalism in four dimensions. Third, I discuss possible tendencies of deprofessionalisation. Finally, I conclude by pointing out the importance of theorising the psychotherapy professions for medical sociology.
Parties should develop a consistent issue profile during an electoral campaign. Yet, manifestos, which form the baseline for a party’s programmatic goals in the upcoming legislative period, are usually published months before Election Day. We argue that parties must emphasize policy issues that are of key relevance to their likely voters in the last weeks of the election campaign, in which an increasing share of citizens make up their minds in terms of which party they will choose. To test this notion empirically, we draw on a novel data set that covers information on party representatives’ statements made during the final weeks of an election campaign in nine European countries. Focusing on the campaign messages of social democratic and socialist parties, we find that these parties indeed intensify their emphasis of unemployment policy, which is a salient issue for their core voter clienteles, particularly in times of economic hardship.
Objective: The study investigates the relationship between perceived loneliness and the individuals' attitude whether voting is a civic duty. With that, it is the first study to shed light on the mechanism linking perceived loneliness to voting behavior.
Methods: Two independent, cross-sectional, and representative datasets from Germany (n = 1641) and the Netherlands (n = 1431) are analyzed.
Results: The regression results and effect decomposition techniques show that loneliness is associated with reduced intention to vote as well as a lower sense of duty to vote. The effect of loneliness on voting behavior is partially mediated through a reduced sense of duty.
Conclusion: Loneliness is associated with political disengagement. The study provides empirical evidence that the relationship between loneliness and turnout is partially mediated through sense of duty. This showcases that lonely individuals tend to feel detached from society and are less likely to feel obligated to participate in the electoral process.
In the recent decades, privacy scholarship has made significant progress. Most of it was achieved in monodisciplinary works. However, privacy has a deeply interdisciplinary nature. Most importantly, societies as well as individuals experience privacy as being influenced by legal, technical, and social norms and structures. In this article, we hence attempt to connect insights of different academic disciplines into a joint model, an Interdisciplinary Privacy and Communication Model. The model differentiates four different elements: communication context, protection needs, threat and risk analysis, as well as protection enforcement. On the one hand, with this model, we aim to describe how privacy unfolds. On the other hand, the model also prescribes how privacy can be furnished and regulated. As such, the model contributes to a general understanding of privacy as a theoretical guide and offers a practical basis to address new challenges of the digital age.
Stuttgart 21 – eine Rekonstruktion der Proteste : Soziale Bewegungen in Zeiten der Postdemokratie
(2020)
Die Konflikte um das Großprojekt »Stuttgart 21« verdeutlichen exemplarisch, wie Protestbewegungen das postdemokratische Zusammenspiel von Staat und Wirtschaft herausfordern. Bürgerbeteiligung und Kostentransparenz sind seither nahezu obligatorisch, dabei hat die Bewegung gegen »S21« ihr eigentliches Ziel, das Bahn- und Immobilienprojekt zu stoppen, verfehlt, trotz scheinbar positiver Ausgangslage. Anhand von Schlüsselereignissen im Konflikt um das Großprojekt rekonstruiert Julia von Staden die Dynamiken und Diskurse einer sozialen Bewegung, die in ihrer Art eine Neuheit in der Protest- und Bewegungsforschung darstellt und gleichzeitig ein Lehrstück für andere soziale Bewegungen wurde.
In contrast to Japan and the “dragon economies,” the Philippines has not been able to partake in the “Asian Economic Miracle.” In short, the Philippines does not classify as a developmental state which exercises strategic industrial policies as traced in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore. In fact, even its Southeast Asian neighbors Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia had economically outdone the Philippines by the 1980s even though their prospects were much worse than those of the Philippines in the 1950s. And while the Philippine economy has been experiencing an upsurge in recent years, it is still significantly lagging behind regional standards—especially with regard to industrial development. From a political economy perspective, it is of key interest in how far the Philippine state has been contributing to this subpar development. In order to explore the ongoing Philippine development dilemma, the study thus offers a comprehensive analysis of the Philippines’ industrial policies, based on distinct government–business relations and patterns of social embeddedness. In addition to assessing the Philippines’ industrial policies and their embeddedness in general, two of the Philippines’ main export industry sectors—textile/garments and electronics—are examined. In this manner, the study contributes to the analysis of the political economy of economic development in the Philippines and provides insights on the prospects and limits of industrial policy in the Southeast Asian context.
This dissertation explores the breadth and variation of authoritarian counter-terrorism strategies and their legitimacy-related origins to challenge prevailing assumptions in Terrorism Studies. Research and analysis are conducted in the form of a Structured Focused Comparison of domestic counter-terrorism strategies in two electoral autocracies. The first case is Russia’s domestic engagement against a mix of ethno-separatist and Islamist terrorism emanating from its North Caucasus republics between 1999 and 2018. The second case is China’s engagement vis-à-vis a similar type of terrorism in its Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region between 1990 and 2018.
The comparison shows that, contrary to prevailing assumptions, the two strategies differ immensely from one another while containing significant if not predominant non-coercive elements. It further shows that the two strategies are closely related to the two states’ sources and resources of legitimacy, both in their original motivation to tackle the terrorist threat and in the design of counter-terrorism strategies. Drawing on David Beetham’s theory of The Legitimation of Power and on the Comparative Politics, Terrorism Studies and Civil War literatures, the dissertation explores the influence of five sources and (re)sources of legitimacy on the two counter-terrorism strategies: responsiveness, performance legitimacy, ideology, discursive power and co-optation. While governmental discursive power is discarded as a source of variation, findings are significant with respect to the influence of ideology and performance legitimacy. Reliance on ideology or related patterns for legitimation raise vulnerability to terrorism and constrain or facilitate the adoption of communicative and preventive measures that accommodate the grievances of potentially defective or even violently terrorist groups. Performance legitimacy is a key motivator in counter-terrorism and an influence on certain types of counter-terrorism policies. Responsiveness and co-optation are identified as potential sources of variation, based on idiosyncratic concurrence with policy choices.
This article seeks to build a bridge between the empirical scholarship rooted in the traditional theory of political representation and constructivist theory on representation by focusing on the authorization of claims. It seeks to answer how claims can be authorized beyond elections - selecting three democratic innovations and tracing claims through the claim-making process. Different participatory democratic innovations are selected - providing various claims and taking place in different institutional contexts, i.e., (elected) members of the Council of Foreigners Frankfurt; individual citizens in participatory budgeting procedures in Münster; and citizen’s associations elected politicians in the referendum campaign in Hamburg. We first analyze the claims raised by the different claim-makers to identify their claimed constituency eligible to authorize claims. In the second step, we focus on the authorization by the claimed constituency and the relevant decision-making authority. The article finds that claim-making in democratic innovations is fractured and incomplete. Nevertheless, this is not the reason to dismiss democratic innovations as possible loci of representation; on the contrary, seen through the prism of claim-making, all representation – electoral and nonelectoral – is partial. Focusing on the authorization of claims in democratic innovations provides novel inferences about the potential and limits of democratic innovations for broadening democratic representation.
The notion that democracy is a system is ever present in democratic theory. However, what it means to think systemically about democracy (as opposed to what it means for a political system to be democratic) is under-elaborated. This article sets out a meta-level framework for thinking systemically about democracy, built upon seven conceptual building blocks, which we term (1) functions, (2) norms, (3) practices, (4) actors, (5) arenas, (6) levels, and (7) interactions. This enables us to systematically structure the debate on democratic systems, highlighting the commonalities and differences between systems approaches, their omissions, and the key questions that remain to be answered. It also enables us to push the debate forward both by demonstrating how a full consideration of all seven building blocks would address issues with existing approaches and by introducing new conceptual clarifications within those building blocks.
What does it mean to design democratic innovation from a deliberative systems perspective? The demand of the deliberative systems approach that we turn from the single forum towards the broader system has largely been embraced by those interested in designing institutions for citizen participation. Nevertheless, there has been no analysis of the practical implications for democratic innovation. Is it possible to design differentiated but interconnected participatory and deliberative settings? Does this better connect democratic innovations to mass politics? Does it promote greater legitimacy? This article analyses one such attempt to design a systems-oriented democratic innovation: the ambitious NHS Citizen initiative. Our analysis demonstrates, while NHS Citizen pioneered some cutting-edge participatory design, it ultimately failed to resolve (and in some cases exacerbated) well-known obstacles to institutionalisation as well as generating new challenges. To effectively realise democratic renewal and reform, systems-oriented democratic innovation must evolve strategies to meet these challenges.
Participatory policy making is a contested concept that can be understood in multiple ways. So how do those involved with participatory initiatives make sense of contrasting ideas of participation? What purposes and values do they associate with participatory governance? This paper reflects on a Q‐method study with a range of actors, from citizen activists to senior civil servants, involved with participatory initiatives in U.K. social policy. Using principal components analysis, supplemented with data from qualitative interviews, it identifies three shared participation preferences: participation as collective decision making, participation as knowledge transfer, and participation as agonism. These preferences demonstrate significant disagreements between the key informants, particularly concerning the objectives of participation, how much power should be afforded to the public, and what motivates people to participate. Their contrasting normative orientations are used to highlight how participatory governance theory and practice frequently fails to take seriously legitimate diversity in procedural preferences. Moreover, it is argued that, despite the diversity of preferences, there is a lack of imagination about how participation can function when social relations are conflictual.
Die Arbeit widmet sich der bisher wenig beachteten Demokratietheorie des neoliberalen Ökonomen und Sozialphilosophen Friedrich Hayeks. In seiner Ablehnung des Prinzips der Volkssouveränität scheint es Hayek nicht in erster Linie um die Kritik des demokratischen Elements zu gehen, sondern vielmehr um die moderne Idee staatlicher Souveränität schlechthin. Es ist folglich die Idee der Rechtssouveränität, so die grundlegende These, auf der Hayek seine doppelte Kritik von Naturrecht und Rechtspositivismus gründet. Entprechend ist der Staat in der von Hayek gezeichneten Utopie nicht länger Souverän, Ausdruck, Grund oder Herrscher (in) der Gesellschaft, sondern bloßes Mittel, um die "spontanen Ordnungen" der Gesellschaft (und der Märkte) zu schützen, ohne durch Gesetzgebung planen, gestalten oder intervenieren zu wollen. Allein solches, an den "Nomos" gebundenes, staatliches Handeln könne (und muss!) der "Meinung" der Menschen entsprechen. Die Klärung dieses sehr speziellen und auf David Hume zurückgehenden Verständnisses von "Meinung" erlaubt schließlich, das Denken Hayeks nicht nur hinsichtlich seines Souveränitätsbegriffs, sondern auch hinsichtlich seines Demokratiebegriffs vom Denken Carl Schmitts abzugrenzen. Entgegen dem prägenden Diskurs nach Cristi und Scheuerman, der die Kritik der hayekschen Theorie über die Problematisierung ihres schmittschen Gehalt unternimmt, soll die Arbeit den Blick dafür schärfen, dass der in Hayeks Theorie angelegte Autoritarismus auf eigenen philosophischen Füßen steht und sich nicht erschöpfend aus einem bewusst oder unbewusst übernommenen schmittschen Erbe erklären lässt.
Within the last decades, western democracies have experienced a rise of inequality, with the gap between lower and upper class citizens steadily increasing and a widespread sentiment of growing inequalities also in the political sphere. Against this background, and in the context of the current “crisis of democracy”, democratic innovations such as direct democratic instruments are discussed as a very popular means to bring citizens back in. However, research on direct democracy has produced rather inconsistent results with regard to the question of which effects referenda and initiatives have on equality. Studies in this field are often limited to single countries and certain aspects of equality. Moreover, most existing studies look at the mere availability of direct democratic instruments instead of actual bills that are put to a vote. This paper aims to take a first step to fill these gaps by giving an explorative overview of the outputs of direct democratic bills on multiple equality dimensions, analyzing all national referenda and initiatives in European democracies between 1990 and 2015. How many pro- and contra-equality bills have been put to a vote, how many of those succeeded at the ballot, and are there differences between country groups? Our findings show that a majority of direct democratic bills was not related to equality at all. Regarding the successful bills, we detect some regional differences along with the general tendency that there are more pro- than contra-equality bills. Our paper sheds new light on the question if direct democracy can serve as an appropriate means to complement representative democracy and to shape democratic institutions in the future. The potential of direct democracy in fostering or impeding equality should be an important criterion for the assessment of claims to extend decision-making by citizens.
Jürgen Habermas und Talal Asad zählen zu den bedeutendsten Protagonisten des Diskurses um die postsäkulare Gesellschaft. In der vorliegenden Arbeit unternehme ich eine vergleichende Lektüre zentraler Schriften beider Autoren. Dabei versuche ich, möglichst präzise zu beschreiben, wie Habermas und Asad einen neuen Blickwinkel auf die Verhältnisbestimmung von Religion und Gesellschaft in der Gegenwart freigeben und plausibilisieren.
Einen zentralen Stellenwert schreibe ich der Tatsache zu, dass hierfür von beiden der Begriff der ‚Übersetzung‘ herangezogen wird. Ziel der Untersuchung ist es folglich, erste systematisierende Vorstöße bezüglich des Begriffspaars ‚Religion übersetzen‘ zu leisten. Dabei gilt es ein Bündel an Forschungsfragen zu beantworten: Wie wird der Begriff der Übersetzung verstanden? In welcher Art und Weise kommt Religion im Werk der Autoren zur Sprache? Auf welche Aspekte der Religion soll sich die Übersetzungsleistung beziehen? Wer sind die Subjekte dieser Übersetzung? Und schließlich, welche Chancen und Probleme bringen die beiden Ansätze für eine politiktheoretische Perspektive auf religiös-gesellschaftliche Fragestellungen mit sich?