Suchergebnisse

Chapter 1. Bourdieu: From Epistemology to Ontology -- Chapter 2. Critical Realism: Ontology in an Era of Ontological Scepticism -- Chapter 3. Habitus: A Critical Realist Interpretation -- Chapter 4. Fields: Bourdieu and Beyond -- Chapter 5. A Bourdieusian Approach to Institutions -- Chapter 6. Habitus: From Theory to Method? A Six-point Heuristic -- Chapter 7. Taking Bourdieu into the World.

Political participation : the debate so far -- A brief history of agency -- Agency : the neglect of the unconscious -- Talking heads? : the internal political conversation -- Exploring internal political conversations -- Rioting : criminal, political or post-political act?

AbstractThis article explores the neglect of race and racism in the discipline of British politics. I outline why this has happened, the consequences of such neglect and how it might be remedied. The article proceeds in four stages: First, it makes the case that British politics has neglected race and racism. I do this by showing that race does not feature within the core concerns of the discipline, and that despite the fact that race may be noted in the relationship between demography and representation, its status as a social construct is not addressed. Second, the article explores the question of disciplinary reflexivity. Drawing on Emirbayer and Desmond's (2012) racial reflexivity framework, I delineate the disciplinary and scholastic unconscious of British politics, showing that the reliance on the Westminster Model obscures questions of race. Next, the article discusses the Sewell Report (2021), explicating its post-racism narrative, and draws parallels between the findings of the report and the study of British politics. The final section of the article outlines a framework for a British politics of race. The framework draws on critical race theory, and Britain's imperial history of colonialism and empire-building and thus puts the study of race at the centre of the discipline.

AbstractThis article considers the recent resignation of Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Cressida Dick, and places this event within the context of ongoing attempts to address institutional racism in the police. The article argues that successive police commissioners have publicly supported tackling institutional racism while maintaining serious reservations about the concept and, in the case of Dick, ultimately rejecting it. It goes on to show that Dick's record on tackling institutional racism has been partial and contradictory, focussing on recruitment of ethnic minorities whilst simultaneously increasing use of stop and search tactics. Institutional racism, I argue, is a useful, but frequently misunderstood concept. Institutional reform, however, is possible if we recognise that everyday individuals actively create and maintain institutions, which is to be contrasted with the conventional approach to institutional reform where it is the institution that moulds or reforms the individual. As such, reforming the police requires starting at the bottom as well as the top.

Representative bureaucracy theory explores the effects of representation on bureaucracies, but less attention has been paid to date as to how agents represent values or interests. Addressing this omission, this article highlights the unconscious dimension of active representation and, more specifically, the role of unconscious bias in representation. Unconscious bias has received limited attention to date in public administration, but has clear relevance for understanding how representation occurs at the individual level. This article proposes a framework for understanding unconscious bias. Drawing on Bourdieu's habitus, but making explicit its unconscious dimension, I argue that unconscious bias enhances our understanding of how active representation occurs in bureaucracies today. The article applies these insights to the case of unconscious gender bias as found in the Australian Public Service (APS) and concludes by exploring the methodological challenges involved in building a research agenda into tackling unconscious bias.

Wood and Flinders re-center political participation on the
idea of "nexus politics." The effort is laudable because it contributes to other
ongoing efforts at broadening our understanding of the nature of 'political'
participation. Unfortunately, in our view, the authors misspecify new forms
of political participation that have emerged by: (1) failing to take Henrik
Bang's work seriously; (2) focusing exclusively on motivation/intention, so
that an action is "political," only if the person acting sees it as "political"; (3)
seeing all political participation as necessarily oppositional.

Supporting increasing equality and diversity in the recruitment and retention of Early Career Researchers from the widest pool of talent available is high on the agenda of universities and policy makers. Notwithstanding this, the demanding nature of academic careers has a disproportionate effect on Early Career Researchers, who may face indirect obstacles in their career development particularly following a period of maternity or parental leave. Our research seeks to expose the nexus of challenges, from job insecurity to the pressures of raising new families that Early Career Researchers face during this critical juncture in their career trajectory. Focusing on Politics and International Studies Departments in the United Kingdom, we document the institutional mechanisms that exist to support Early Career Researchers returning from maternity and parental leave through a Heads of Department and an Early Career Researcher survey to gain an understanding of needs and the impact of institutional measures. Adopting a feminist institutionalist analysis, we map gendered outcomes in the university, through formal and informal rules, which mitigate against those Early Career Researchers taking maternity and parental leave. We end by identifying specific measures which would help to ensure that the university is more supportive of Early Career Researchers taking maternity and parental leave.

The power of business is a very important issue for understanding the operation of democracy, but establishing the nature and extent of its power is not easy. We acknowledge that this is, in large part, an empirical problem and requires a more sophisticated conceptual framework to address it. Attempting to address this, the recent literature on the power of business has increasingly focused on the role of structure, agents and ideas. However, too little attention has been paid to how these concepts are defined and conceptualized. We argue that it is crucial to: specify the structures (economic/political/social) which we see as affecting the role of business; identify the agents, collective and individual, involved and how they interact; and specify which ideas are playing a role, at what level of generality and how these different ideas at different levels of generality interact. This article explores these issues through a critical consideration of the extant literature in order to provide a more developed framework for future empirical analysis.