Suchergebnisse

"Governing by Design offers a unique perspective on twentieth-century architectural history. It disputes the primacy placed on individuals in the design and planning process and instead looks to the larger influences of politics, culture, economics, and globalization to uncover the roots of how our built environment evolves.In these chapters, historians offer their analysis on design as a vehicle for power and as a mediator of social currents. Power is defined through a variety of forms: modernization, obsolescence, technology, capital, ergonomics, biopolitics, and others. The chapters explore the diffusion of power through the establishment of norms and networks that frame human conduct, action, identity, and design. They follow design as it functions through the body, in the home, and at the state and international level.Overall, Aggregate views the intersection of architecture with the human need for what Foucault termed "governmentality"--societal rules, structures, repetition, and protocols--as a way to provide security and tame risk. Here, the conjunction of power and the power of design reinforces governmentality and infuses a sense of social permanence despite the exceedingly fluid nature of societies and the disintegration of cultural memory in the modern era"--

This article explores the emergence of new counter-terrorism programmes in the Britain and Norway through which intelligence and security agencies administer welfare. Support and resources are covertly allocated to persons identified as potential threats, through multi-agency structures led by intelligence and security agencies. Unlike Countering Violent Extremism programmes, this multi-agency management is not led by the local municipality; nor are its participants asked to consent to participation. These new programmes are covert. To conceptualize the significance of intelligence agencies entering the space of welfare administration, Mitchell Dean's work 'Liberal Government and Authoritarianism' is used to underline the traditional separation of agencies within liberal governmentality. Governing through freedom entails the ostensible separation of policing, education and care agencies – reflecting the categorization of the population into groups requiring varying levels of coercion to self-govern. To avoid governing too much, each category of population is allocated a specific agency. Traditionally, intelligence and security agencies have been positioned at the highest tier of repression. By entering the space of welfare administration (and thus social policy), intelligence and security agencies have disturbed the sectoral separation integral to liberal governmentality, leaving care and repression in an ever more ambiguous relationship.

This paper deals with data extraction and data circulation that are at stake in refugee governmentality with a focus on the Cash Assistance Programme in Greece. It focuses on the data extraction activities which are part of the cash Assistance Programme and on the ways in which data is shared and not shared among the actors involved. It starts by critically engaging with debates on techno-humanitarianism in refugee governmentality, and it moves on by drawing attention to the constitutive dynamics between data abundance and data disregard. Then, it analyses the extent to which different actors can access and act upon the data. The second part of the article centres on the peculiar modes of subjectivation that asylum seekers are shaped by, as cards beneficiaries and techno-users. It shows that asylum seekers are both passive surfaces of data extraction and, at the same time, are object of a request to speak and to produce data and feedback about their use of the card. The paper concludes with a section about the injunction imposed on asylum seekers to act as autonomous and responsible techno-users and, at the same time, to comply with multiple spatial restrictions.

Objective: To analyze Health Promotion (HP) practices in different settings worldwide, presented in studies that employed the Foucauldian framework. Data Source: Scoping review performed on LILACS, MEDLINE, IBECS, BDENF, SciELO, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: We included original articles, review articles, reflection articles, and case studies published in English, Portuguese, and Spanish, which addressed HP practices, analyzed using the Foucauldian framework. Data Synthesis: In the numerical synthesis, the characteristics of the included studies were described: number of studies, types of method, year of publication, characteristics of the study population, origin countries, and the HP practices addressed in the articles. The thematic synthesis was organized according to the nature of the HP practices presented and the Foucauldian analysis matrix used. Results: The review covered 34 studies, published between 2006 and 2019, whose analysis resulted in 2 thematic synthesis: 1) HP as a biopolitical strategy in the neoliberal context; 2) HP as an expression of resistance and counter-conduct, presenting tensions, struggles, and power games. Conclusion: The field of HP mostly consists of governmentality practices that reinforce the neoliberal health perspective. Some practices show resistance and counter-conduct in the face of governmentality practices, which explains the power relationships in the field of HP.

Abstract
The territorial disputes between Russian Federation and Ukraine over Crimea and Donbas have led to the forcible internal displacement of at least 1.6 million people. While Although the literature on forced migration and internal displacement have been framed predominantly in terms of trauma and disenfranchisement (IOM 2018; Dunn 2018), this article argues that a fuller range of Internally Displaced Person (IDP) subjectivities can be made intelligible by considering the rationalities organizing IDP survival. Based on a comparative analysis of 155 interviews with IDPs from Crimea and Donbas, the article demonstrates that forced displacement is more heterogenous than has previously been allowed. I theorize this diversity by using analytics of governmentality to examine the logics or 'rationalities' used to make sense of forced migration. The conceptual tools offered by studies of governmentality are ideal for this case because they overlap with themes that predominated in data collected during ethnographic fieldwork in Ukraine between 2015 and 2017: agency, responsibility, and freedom. The article contributes a framework for comparing IDP subjectivities that encompasses diversity and provides a new vocabulary for describing the strategic efforts forced migrants exert to mend their lives.

This article examines the historical, social and political legacies of the Information and Communication Technology Act (ICT Act) (2006–2018, amended in 2013) and the Digital Security Act (DSA) (2018–) in the Bangladeshi state's attempt to control the virtual 'streets' of Bangladesh. The application of ICT and DSA has become an increasingly visible and controversial means to provide the spectacle of a state that extends disciplinary power and governmentality into proliferating online spaces—akin to 'Firing cannons to kill mosquitoes'. We use the lens of Tim Mitchell's structural-effect (1991, The American Political Science Review 85(1), 77–96) to understand the state beyond the frameworks of its salience or elusiveness, arguing that the criminalisation of online speech has enabled the creation of 'digital vigilantes' who are predominantly the powerful, the sycophants, a multitude of attention seekers who are driven by their personal contestations and ambitions. The legal outcomes, however, have been more ambiguous and uncertain—but the effect is to produce fear as an 'environment' (Virilio 2012, The Administration of Fear. Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press) through frozen/suspended charges with the potential to be redeployed in different contexts. Keywords: Digital security, digital vigilantes, governmentality, structural-effect, surveillance

Drawing on recent multiple governmentality literature, this article analyses the REDD+ negotiations to interrogate who the scheme is likely to govern and how. Two arguments are advanced. First, REDD+ is likely to target local forest users at the expense of both corporate and international drivers of deforestation. This will reduce the effectiveness of the scheme and invite leakage issues. In elucidating the ultimately rejected strategies for addressing international drivers now hidden in neat negotiation outcomes, this article opens a space for considering how the scheme could move beyond a predominant focus on local forest users. Second, targeted forest users are likely to be governed by a combination of neoliberal and disciplinary technologies. REDD+ will seek to 'improve' their conduct through a three-staged process involving education, self-reflection and rewards for carbon sequestration. An alternative governmentality associated with local forest users' claims to decide on REDD+ implementation and governance, on the other hand, met with resistance and ultimately received no protection in the adopted REDD+ safeguards. Moreover, the formulation of the safeguards could undermine legitimacy and forest stewardship in REDD+ projects. By linking the possibility of such issues to the negotiation outcomes, this article demonstrates necessary changes to the scheme.

Se realiza un breve recorrido teórico sobre tensiones en la noción de familia como agente regulador de subjetividades en la modernidad tardía. En estas condiciones actuales se habrían desarrollado acciones orientadas a la sobre-judicialización de problemáticas individuales y familiares, reflexionando sobre Programas de Reparación al Maltrato de SENAME, como configuraciones neoliberales de las políticas de atención a la infancia y sus familias. Mediante nociones de gubernamentalidad y biopolítica se analizan funcionamientos generados por estas instituciones de atención a la infancia, tramitando la propia condición familiar mediante dispositivos jurídicos sancionadores. ***** Reflections on the notion of Family and Childhood: Psychoanalysis, Governmentality and National Service of Minors of Chile (SENAME) Abstract A brief theoretical journey is madea bout tensions in the notion of the family as a regulating agent of subjectivities in late modernity. Under these current conditions, actions aimed at the over judicialization of individual and family problems, reflecting on SENAME Abuse Repair Programs, as neoliberal configurations of childcare policies and their families, would have been developed. Through notions of governmentality and biopolitics, operations generated by these institutions for the care of children are analyzed, processing their own family condition through legal sanctioning devices. Keywords: Childhood, law, public-private, device, abuse.

AbstractDirect‐to‐consumer genetic tests (DTCGT) provide individualized risk profiles for common diseases through social web techniques. Academic debates have predominantly denounced them as a potentially harmful commercialization of genetics and focused on how laypeople might (mis)understand and (mis)use this information. DTCGT has also stimulated a heterogeneous set of methods and theoretical perspectives in the social sciences, which have drawn on but also complicated a purely medical understanding.DTCGT is unanimously deemed disruptive, albeit for a variety of reasons. The different underlying notions of disruptiveness correspond to an implicit sociology of information resonating with a main sociological framework, namely, rational actor theory, governmentality studies, and ecological approaches to digital practices and infrastructures. Accordingly, three corpora are identified. The first conceives of disruption in terms of medical impact on prospective patients. The second proposes a biopolitical interpretation by framing DTCGT as vectors of new governmentality based on making individuals responsible for disease prediction and prevention. The third scrutinizes users' engagements with data and infrastructures at the intersection of informatics and genomics and locates DTCGT within the broader process of blossoming health digitalization. Accordingly, the disruptive issues at stake mainly concern political and economic aspects related to data sharing and crowdsourcing.

This article seeks to further understandings of contemporary patterns of parental government. It explores the politicisation of family life by examining a pilot programme tasked with enhancing parental engagement in education amongst 'hard-to-reach' families within the white British community of a large inner-London borough. Focusing on the programme's signature device – the deployment of community-based 'link workers' to bridge home and school – 'governmentality' (Foucault, 2009) is used as a theoretical lens through which to foreground the link workers' role in governing parents. We draw on qualitative data collected from link workers, parents, and school leaders, to argue that link workers represent a mode of governmentality that privileges the instrumental use of trust to achieve strategic objectives, rather than coercive authority. The aim being to produce responsible, self-disciplined parents who act freely in accordance with normative expectations as to what constitutes 'good' parenting and effective parental support. As such, the article highlights the link workers' role in (re)producing the ideal, neoliberal parent. However, governing through trust comes at the cost of being unable to firmly secure desired outcomes. We thereby conclude that this gentle art of parental government affords parents some latitude in resisting institutional agendas. ; Camden City Council

This paper uses an autoethnography to recount my experiences with SportHelp, a UK youth sports charity. Using a layered account format, which jumps through time and space, I demonstrate the extent to which neoliberal values have influenced the continuity and change of SportHelp. This paper does not constitute an attack on the charity, its staff, nor the charity sector. The focus is on how the wider neoliberal context shapes how SportHelp operates. The findings are analysed in terms of Foucault's (2008, The birth of biopolitics. Lectures at the Collége de France, 1978–79. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan) notion of governmentality by examining SportHelp's monitoring and reporting practices, as well as the managers' use of New Public Management discourse. The conclusion reflects on the extent to which neoliberal governmentality, though in some instances beneficial for SportHelp, ultimately does more harm than good. This paper, by offering an 'insider's view', adds to the literature calling for a change in how policy makers and funders shape the current hypercompetitive socio-political landscape. Charities should be supported, not discouraged, to develop holistic programmes that move beyond 'economic rationales' and are capable of addressing the multifaceted needs of their service users.

The notion of humanitarian government has been increasingly employed to describe the simultaneous and conflicting deployment of humanitarianism and security in the government of 'precarious lives' such as refugees. This article argues that humanitarian government should also be understood as the biopolitical government of host populations through the humanitarian government of refugees. In particular, it explores how the biopolitical governmentality of the UK decision to suspend search-and-rescue operations in the Mediterranean in 2014, and the British rejection and German welcoming of Syrian refugees primarily concern the biological and emotional care of the British and German populations. To this end, the article analyses how dynamics of inclusion/exclusion of refugees have been informed by a biopolitical racism that redraws the boundary between 'valuable' (to be included) and 'not valuable' (to be excluded) lives according to the refugees' capacity to enhance the biological and emotional well-being of host populations. This discussion aims to contribute to three interrelated fields of research – namely, humanitarian government, biopolitical governmentality, and responses to the European refugee crisis – by exploring how biopolitics has shaped the British and German responses to the crisis and how it encompasses more meanings and rationalities than currently recognised by existing scholarship on humanitarian government.

Environmental policy in Western countries is marked by extensive reliance on voluntary self-regulation, designed to influence market behavior. In many instances, these policy tools fail to deliver on their promise, while nonetheless influencing professional and user behavior. This paper draws on Foucault's theory of governmentality and the Sociology of Standards to explore the effect of voluntary policy tools. Whereas most research focuses on the effect of tools on either intended outcomes or formal policies, this paper considers their effect on the people who directly engage with them. The paper uses the case of the Building Research Establishments Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) to consider the embeddedness and reach of policy tools across communities of practice. The contribution of the paper lies in its focus on the way in which organizational features of BREEAM contribute to its effect on the definition of green building and peoples' engagement with them. Theoretically, the focus on organizational aspects of governing techniques draws attention local variations in the power/knowledge effect of techniques, thereby contributing to a relatively neglected aspect of governmentality. The paper concludes with reflection on the relevance of this approach for research into other types of policy tools and technical standards.

The notion of humanitarian government has been increasingly employed to describe the simultaneous and conflicting deployment of humanitarianism and security in the government of 'precarious lives' such as refugees. This article argues that humanitarian government should also be understood as the biopolitical government of host populations through the humanitarian government of refugees. In particular, it explores how the biopolitical governmentality of the UK decision to suspend search-and-rescue operations in the Mediterranean in 2014, and the British rejection and German welcoming of Syrian refugees primarily concern the biological and emotional care of the British and German populations. To this end, the article analyzes how dynamics of inclusion/exclusion of refugees have been informed by a biopolitical racism that redraws the boundary between 'valuable' (to be included) and 'not valuable' (to be excluded) lives according to the refugees' capacity to enhance the biological and emotional well-being of host populations. This discussion aims to contribute to three interrelated fields of research – namely, humanitarian government, biopolitical governmentality, and responses to the European refugee crisis – by exploring how biopolitics has shaped the British and German responses to the crisis and how it encompasses more meanings and rationalities than currently recognized by existing scholarship on humanitarian government.

Michel Foucault's last published monograph, The Care of the Self, may be considered from the vantage point of how the question of ethics and aesthetics have been separated, or more precisely, how a self becomes a manifold and divided response to its milieu.1 Its genealogy opens a space of thinking the question of care and selfhood in practices that are historiographical though pre-eminently concerned with a 'history of the present.' In broader terms, and in the context of lectures Foucault was then giving at the Collège de France, we understand the question of self, ethics and aesthetics in terms of governmentality, itself understood as the application of techniques of discipline and apparatuses of security in the management of territories, populations, individuated subjects and things.2 The disciplines of design history and theory have yet to engage fully with a Foucauldian understanding of the emergence of modernity as a crisis of governmentality. This paper aims to address a possible Foucauldian legacy for design history and theory in its understanding of design history other than as a history of things and their originators, in its understanding of ethics other than as constituted on individuated sovereign right and aesthetics on the basis of something other than inalienable freedom.