Suchergebnisse

Marine spatial planning (MSP) is advanced by its champions as an impartial and rational process that can address complex management issues. We argue that MSP is not innately rational and that it problematises marine issues in specific ways, often reflecting hegemonic agendas. The illusion of impartial rationality in MSP is derived from governmentalities that appear progressive but serve elite interests. By understanding the creation of governmentalities, we can design more equitable planning processes. We conceptualise governmentalities as consisting of problematisations, rationalities and governance technologies, and assess England's first marine plans to understand how specific governmentalities de-radicalise MSP. We find that progressive framings of MSP outcomes, such as enhanced well-being, are deployed by the government to garner early support for MSP. These elements, however, become regressively problematised in later planning phases, where they are framed by the government as being difficult to achieve and are pushed into future iterations of the process. Eviscerating progressive elements from the planning process clears the way for the government to focus on implementing a neoliberal form of MSP. Efforts to foster radical MSP must pay attention to the emergence of governmentalities, how they travel through time/space and be cognisant of where difference can be inserted into planning processes. Achieving progressive MSP will require the creation of a political frontier early in the process, which cannot be passed until pathways for progressive socio-environmental outcomes have been established; advocacy for disenfranchised groups; broadening MSP evaluations to account for unintended impacts; and the monitoring of progressive objectives.

Foucault's concept of pastoral power is envisioned as a technique of power developed from the medieval period and carried through into modern political rationalities. As such, it is an old power technique – which originated in Christian institutions – in a new political shape, which he coined governmentality. This article uses Foucault's genealogy of pastoral power and governmentality to discuss the intersection of domination and technology of self in the Greenlandic colonial context and to bring out the central role of religion in Foucault's conceptualisation of governmentality.

This essay explores a series of sovereign 'machines' – slaves, puppets, automata – in political theory from Benjamin to Agamben. It is now well-documented that the philosophical question of 'the machine' – of whether a complex system requires a human operator or whether it can function autonomously – is also a crucial political question that haunts every discussion of sovereignty from Hobbes onwards. However, my wager in what follows is that this machine is not just a metaphor for a metaphysical situation – whether it be rationality (Hobbes), bureaucratization (Weber), neutralization (Schmitt), historicism (Benjamin) or governmentality (Foucault) – but a material phenomenon that carries transformative political promise and threat. To summarize the argument of this essay, I contend that 'sovereign machines' like slavery (Aristotle, Hegel, Kojève, Agamben), puppets, automata or clockwork (Descartes, Hobbes, Schmitt, Benjamin, Derrida), lens, optics and mirrors (Hobbes, Kantorowicz, Benjamin, Lacan, Foucault) and so on do not merely reflect but change our understanding of the causal relationship between sovereignty and governmentality, decision and norm, exception and rule. If the self-appointed task of the modern political theorist has so often been to obtain or regain sovereignty of, or over, the machine – to jam its gears – I seek to expose what the later Derrida calls the 'machine' of sovereignty itself. In conclusion, I argue that political theory's attempt to reveal or retroactively invent the sovereign person at the heart of the machine only ends up revealing the sovereign machine at the heart of the person. What – if anything – is really inside the machine of sovereignty?

The content of global free-trade rules and the number of nations beholden to them have expanded dramatically since the Uruguay round of multilateral negotiations; much of it through agreements to form preferential trade areas (PTAs). Drawing on Foucauldian governmentality studies, this paper explores how the spaces of 'free trade' are produced through neoliberal spatial and political imaginaries and material practices to construct 'barriers to trade' as objects of trade rules. These concepts are explored through a case study of rules of origin in PTAs, increasingly long technical footnotes to trade agreements that aim to sort hybrid flows of commodities and services into single nation-state categories. I argue that projects to create spaces of unimpeded trade reconfigure obstacles and barriers in new and sometimes unexpected ways.

This article seeks to identify the political and ideological dimensions of the contemporary presence of information technology or infotech. This presence is experienced as the progressive unfolding of technology as the logic of the social itself. Rather than approaching these dimensions through their reduction to a ground, a symbolic totality or a specific interest, and argument is constructed from Laclau and Mouffe's concept of `antagonism' in conjunction with Claude Lefort's notion of `invisible ideology'. This gives the argument the advantage of relating the constitution of ideology to a historically specific political formation, instead of positing a timeless relation to the constitution of an abstract subject as the ground of an explanation. The argument is that insofar as information technology appears as a substance that absorbs the dynamic of community, which I call autotechnopoiesis, then ideology constructs the identity of this space with itself. The political is understood as the failure of this self-presence. In conclusion, these issues are located in terms of the governmentality of the `performative state' which seeks the recruitment of subjects to the `promotion of the social' through an investment in the banality of communication.

Foucault introduced the concept "governmentality" to refer to the conduct of conduct, and the technologies that govern individuals. While he adopted the concept after his shift from archaeological to genealogical studies, commentators argue his work on governmentality and that of his followers appears to remain entangled with structuralist themes more redolent of his archaeologies. This paper thus offers a type of conceptual clarification. The paper provides a resolutely genealogical approach to govermentality that: echoes Foucault on genealogy, power/knowledge, and technologies of power; suggests ways of resolving problems in Foucault's work; introduces concepts that are clearly historicist, not structuralist; and opens new areas of empirical research.

In this text, my objective is to present and to problematize some of the possible connections between neoliberal governmentality and education, within the framework of links between displacements, overlap emphasis transformations, subsitutions, contituities and ruptures which can be observed in educational practices and policies. I also seek to sketch out a summary of publications in Brazil which deal with these connections. The first section of this text consists in a broad discussion about the concept of governmentality. In the second section, I tackle Michel Foucault's conceptions of liberalism and neoliberalism. In the third section, I discuss some ways in which Foucault's thinking in the political field resonates with the transformations currently being experienced by the contemporary world. In the fourth and final section, I make three comments of an educational nature about these transformations and connections. ; En este texto, mi objetivo es mostrar y problematizar algunas de las posibles articulaciones entre gubernamentalidad neoliberal y educación, en el marco del conjunto de desplazamientos,transformaciones de énfasis superposiciones, substituciones, continuidades y rupturas que se puede observar en las prácticas y en las políticas educativas, como también trazar un panorama sucinto de las publicaciones que en Brasil tratan de aquellas articulaciones.En la primera sección haré una discusión panorámica acerca del concepto de gubernamentalidad. En la segunda sección abordaré las concepciones de Michel Foucault sobre el liberalismo y el neoliberalismo. En la tercera parte, discutirá algunas resonancia entre el pensamiento de Foucault, en el campo de la política, y las transformaciones por las que pasa el mundo contemporáneo. En la cuarta y última sección, haré tres comentarios de orden educacional en la perspectiva de esas resonancias y transformaciones.

This study evaluates the role of two state regulatory regimes in shaping journalism education at a public university in Ghana. Focusing on the mandates of the National Council for Tertiary Education (NCTE) and the National Accreditation Board (NAB), the work demonstrates how these institutions monitor, evaluate and shape the curriculum of the undergraduate program in communication studies at the University of Cape Coast. Based on Foucault's concept of governmentality, the paper shows that the journalism program designed by both faculty and state regulatory regimes for the University of Cape Coast, as in many other universities in sub-Saharan Africa, is still primarily focused on media-centric, developmentalist and instrumentalist approaches, and pays little attention to critical theory and transcultural aesthetics. The fusion of these theoretical perspectives into the communication education curriculum is crucial for empowering students to unmask practices that perpetuate social inequality, dominance, power asymmetry and hegemony in society in order to transform it in positive ways.

Resilience refers to the ability of individuals, groups and societies to withstand and recover from external shocks. This pioneering book-length comparative study examines resilience as it is experienced across different countries, such as the UK, US, France, Germany and EU. Furthermore it considers cases from policy sectors including national security, counterterrorism, civil protection, disaster risk reduction, critical infrastructure protection and overseas interventions. In doing so, Joseph provides an account of why it is that resilience has become such a popular policy topic, looking at its focus on complexity, the human and the role of resilient individuals and communities. Arguing that resilience has risen to prominence because it fits with a particularly Anglo-Saxon and neoliberal form of governance, Joseph discovers differing results across policy domains and national contexts, fomenting variations and tensions in the international discourse of resilience in policy-making.