Gesellschaftswissenschaften
Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (12)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (12)
Keywords
- democracy (3)
- representation (3)
- populism (2)
- representative claim (2)
- Arbeit (1)
- Arbeits- und Industriesoziologie (1)
- Arbeitssoziologie (1)
- Bewegungen (1)
- Brazil (1)
- Forschung (1)
The international system of states displays an inherent drive to territorialize the global commons. But territorialization is not a continuous process—it occurs in episodes. In this article, I use one case from ocean governance, the expansion of territory into near‐shore areas of the seas, to advance a twofold argument about the nature of these episodes. First, I argue that the root causes of this drive to territorialize “empty space” are located in global politics, norms, and economics. Second, a territorializing episode occurs when there are impelling economic incentives, and when great powers are unable or unwilling to oppose territorialization. However, this can lead to different outcomes: sovereign territories, functional territories, or internationalized territories. Oceanic space has seen a series of these territorializing episodes since the end of the Second World War and functional territorialization has become more prevalent over time.
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.
Representation is a process of making, accepting, or rejecting representative claims (Disch, 2015; Saward, 2014). This groundbreaking insight challenged the standard assumption that representative democracy can be reduced to elections and activities of elected representatives (Pitkin, 1967). It broadened the scope of representative democracy to encompass representation activities beyond those authorized by elections, transformed our thinking and provided a new perspective, putting claims and their reception into the center. This paradigm shift erased the distinction between elected and non-elected representatives and disclosed the potential of non-elected actors’ claims to represent (Andeweg, 2003; Kuyper, 2016; Rosanvallon & Goldhammer, 2008; Saward, 2006, 2009; Van Biezen & Saward, 2008). In spite of this lively debate, we identify an important gap in the literature: while this paradigmatic shift inspired many authors, conceptual frameworks that can be applied for systematic empirical analysis of real-life cases are missing. In this article, we fill this gap and propose frameworks for assessing and validating a variety of real-life claims. Our study provides empirical substance to the ongoing theoretical debates, helping to translate the mainly theoretical ‘claim approach’ into empirical research tools. It helps to transform the conventional wisdom about what representation can (not) be and shines a new light on the potential future of (claims on) representation.
The system of representative democracy is under considerable strain. Its institutions are struggling to maintain legitimacy, and its elected representatives are failing to keep their monopoly on (formal) political representation. An emerging multitude of (new) claim makers contests the authority of elected representatives as well as the functioning of the existing system of representative democracy by alleging misrepresentation. In this article, we identify a significant shortcoming in Saward’s claims-making approach; specifically, we argue that it offers little direction in addressing misrepresentation. We distinguish between claims of representation and claims of misrepresentation, and show how the latter can fulfill one, two or all three of the following functions: (1) they appeal to an enemy/antagonist (strategy), (2) identify causes of misrepresentation related to policies, politics, and polity (persuasion), and (3) claim to create a new linkage to "the people", sometimes present themselves as new representatives (reframing). To test this proposed framework, we compare claims of misrepresentation in Brazil made by civil society groups (before and during the presidential impeachment between 2014 and 2016) and in Germany (focusing on the parliamentarians of the Alternative for Germany during the first six months of mandate). Our results suggest that claims of misrepresentation are not intrinsically democratic or undemocratic, but are instead ambiguous, have different manifestations and disparate impacts on the representative system. Our article contributes to the conceptual development of the claims approach and to further understanding several critical and current challenges to representative democracy.
Browsing the web for school: social inequality in adolescents’ school-related use of the internet
(2019)
This article examines whether social inequality exists in European adolescents’ school-related Internet use regarding consuming (browsing) and productive (uploading/sharing) activities. These school-related activities are contrasted with adolescents’ Internet activities for entertainment purposes. Data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2012 is used for the empirical analyses. Results of partial proportional odds models show that students with higher educated parents and more books at home tend to use the Internet more often for school-related tasks than their less privileged counterparts. This pattern is similar for school-related browsing and sharing Internet activities. In contrast to these findings on school-related Internet activities, a negative association between parental education and books at home is found with adolescents’ frequency of using the Internet for entertainment purposes. The implications of digital inequalities for educational inequalities are discussed.
Der Fokus unserer Forschung zum Populismus sollte nicht auf dem harten Kern rechter Parteien liegen, sondern auf jenen, die diese Parteien nur aus Protest wählen oder gar nicht mehr wählen. Wir sollten auch nicht den Fehler machen, die Unterstützung rechter Parteien als irrational und postfaktisch darzustellen. Kern unserer Forschung sollten jene ungleichen wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Strukturen sein, die zum Aufstieg rechter Parteien führen.
In this article, we explore civil society mobilisation and the impact of organised interests on the energy policies of two post-communist countries—Hungary and Czechia—and specifically nuclear energy. Drawing on numerous hypotheses from the literature on organised interests, we explore how open both political systems are for civil society input and what interest group-specific and socio-economic factors mediate the influence of organised interests. Based on the preference attainment method, our case studies focus on the extent to which organised interests have succeeded bringing nuclear energy legislation in line with their preferences. We find that while both democracies are open to civil society input, policy-making is generally conducted in state-industrial circles, whereby anti-nuclear and renewable energy advocates are at best able to make minor corrections to already pre-determined policies.
Privilegierte männliche, hochmobile Finanzmanager sind nicht nur Teil abstrakter ortsübergreifender Netzwerke, sondern sie arbeiten an konkreten Arbeitsorten. Am Beispiel deutscher Finanzmanager in London und Singapur arbeite ich die Relevanz des lokalen Arbeitsortes für die Identitätsaufführungen der globalen Elite mit einer intersektionalen Perspektive heraus. Da die Performanz dieser Identitätsdimension als dynamischer Prozess verstanden wird – also als eine Dynamik, in der diese im Handeln alltäglich erzeugt und aufgeführt wird – werden die alltäglichen Aufführungen der Globalen Elite in ihrer Beziehung zu dem Arbeitsort, an dem die Aufführungen stattfinden, analysiert. Es wird deutlich, dass mit dem Ansatz der Intersektionalität auch privilegierte Identitätsdimensionen in den Blick genommen werden können. In Abhängigkeit vom Ort der Performanz differenziert sich die Identitätsdimension globale Elite und überschneidet sich in spezifischer Weise mit der Identitätsdimension des Weißseins.
Der Umbau der Krankenhäuser zu Unternehmen wird immer wieder als in sich konsistente Rationalisierungsstrategie verhandelt. Aus soziologischer Perspektive wird hingegen deutlich: Die viel diskutierte "Ökonomisierung" der Krankenhäuser ist ein in sich widersprüchlicher Prozess.
Robin Mohan zeichnet die Geschichte des Krankenhauses mithilfe einer an Marx, Weber und Bourdieu orientierten Gesellschaftstheorie der Ökonomisierung nach, die den Widerspruch von Gebrauchswert und Tauschwert zum verbindenden Leitmotiv erhebt. Ergänzt wird die Analyse durch eine arbeitssoziologische Studie, die rekonstruiert, wie sich die Ökonomisierungsprozesse aus der Sicht der Pflegekräfte darstellen.
The theory and practice of urban governance in recent years has undergone both a collaborative and participatory turn. The strong connection between collaboration and participation has meant that citizen participation in urban governance has been conceived in a very particular way: as varying levels of partnership between state actors and citizens. This over-focus on collaboration has led to: 1) a dearth of proposals in theory and practice for citizens to engage oppositionally with institutions; 2) the miscasting of agonistic opportunities for participation as forms of collaboration; 3) an inability to recognise the irruption of agonistic practices into participatory procedures. This article attempts to expand the conception of participatory urban governance by adapting Rosanvallon’s (2008) three democratic counter-powers—prevention, oversight and judgement—to consider options for institutionalising agonistic participatory practices. It argues that these counter-governance processes would more fully realise the inclusion agenda that underpins the participatory governance project.
