Suchergebnisse

The setting of urban agendas is analyzed with the aim of interpreting the depoliticization dynamics of issues, actors and actions of urban policies that are caused by economic interests and actors when they use cognitive and normative resources. The main hypothesis is that the initiatives carried out by economic firms and private producers and retailers of knowledge to deal with urban problems have the effect of weakening the political connotation of public actors and actions, if not to replace them. The conclusion – based on the analysis of case-studies concerning different scales of public action – is that the forms of depoliticization analyzed make visible processes that will probably expand and get more structured.

Résumé Cet article présente une comparaison des pratiques par lesquelles les acteurs non-institutionnels sont intégrés dans les processus de gouvernement à Londres, Madrid, Paris et Rome. Des concepts bien connus comme ceux de gouvernance ou de participation sont utilisés de manière singulière pour former un continuum idéal-type des différentes formes d'inclusion. Dans chaque ville, le degré de consistance et de complémentarité entre les pratiques de gouvernance et/ou d'inclusion peut-être le résultat d'une politique d'inclusion explicite et complète concernant l'ensemble de la ville, fondée sur une stratégie cohérente, ou bien est expliquée par d'autres facteurs. Les convergences et les différences entre les quatre métropoles européennes sont expliquées en analysant le rôle joué dans chaque ville par des variables comme l'orientation de l'agenda politique, la nature du système politique urbain et les changements qui l'affectent, l'organisation institutionnelle des collectivités locales, la force du leadership politique et ses stratégies pour chercher un consensus avec les intérêts économiques et la société civile ainsi que les pressions exogènes exercées par des acteurs nationaux et transnationaux qui fournissent aux acteurs locaux des cadres cognitifs et normatifs.

Obiettivo dell'articolo è capire comela crisi COVID-19 in corso sta influenzando i processi politici e di regolazione in Italia. A questo fine sono messe a fuoco alcune caratteristiche e conseguenze politiche dell'iniziativa governativa finalizzata a supportare, attraverso la tecnologia di intelligenza artificiale (AI) "Immuni" per il contact tracing della popolazione, la transizione a una fase di maggiore mobilità dopo quella di lockdown. Le azioni di policy e la discussione nella sfera pubblica durante la crisi sono messe a confronto con il modo in cui opportunità e rischi dell'AI erano stati trattati in Italia fino a pochi giorni prima, per iniziativa del Governo e di attori economici, sullo sfondo del confronto e delle azioni sviluppati dall'Unione europea e nel mondo all'interno di un'embrionale policy community dell'AI, costituita da attori politici, economici e delle conoscenze. A fini interpretativi sono utilizzati i concetti di regolazione, governance e metagovernance, la coppia concettuale politicizzazione/depoliticizzazione e il Multiple Stream Approach per l'analisi dei processi di formazione dell'agenda.Osservate da questa prospettiva, le modalità di ingresso di "Immuni" nell'agenda istituzionale in un contesto di emergenza e le poste in gioco politiche ad essa collegate, introdotte dall'ampliamento della policy community, spiegano la (ri)politicizzazione della governance e della metagovernance dell'AI in Italia che è stato sinora possibile osservare. ; The aim of the article is to understand how the ongoing COVID-19 crisis is influencing the political and regulatory processes in Italy. To this end, we focus on some features and political consequences of the government initiative "Immuni", an artificial intelligence (AI) technology for contact tracing of the population purposed to support the transition to a phase of greater mobility after lockdown. Policy actions and discussion in the public sphere during the crisis are compared with the way in which AI opportunities and risks had been debated in Italy by governmental, economic and knowledge actors until a few days before. This happened in the meanwhile an embryonic stage AI policy community was developing discussions and actions within the European Union and on a global scale. The concepts of regulation, governance and metagovernance, as well as the conceptual pair politicization/depoliticization and the Multiple Stream Approach are used to understand this agenda setting process. Observed from this perspective, the emergency context and the related political stakes brought by the enlargement of the policy community explain the (re)politicization of AI governance and metagovernance in Italy that has been observed so far.

This introduction presents the aim of a collective effort of a book on depoliticisation and repoliticisation. The meaning of the concepts use by the authors is explained referring to two generations of academic debate in political science and sociology, and even through examples concerning the field of education policies. Depoliticisation is a key to understanding the transformations occurring in the relationships between political and non-political actors who take part in the policy processes. Nevertheless, the theoretical debate has some limitations, regarding the limited importance given to the actors of depoliticization strategies and the related processes of politicization of supposedly non-political actors and practices in the context of neoliberalism. Moreover, the Introduction presents the chapters that follow. For each of them the themes focused on and the specific meaning of depoliticization and repoliticisation are sketched.

This chapter deals with the relationships between the depoliticization and repoliticisation dynamics concerning public actions and the framing of the collective issues and the most important phenomenon of change affecting contemporary politics and political systems, populism. Contemporary populisms can be interpreted as a consequence of the depoliticisation processes triggered by the advent of post-democracy and neoliberalism, as well as of the connected processes of globalization and Europeanization of public policies. Later, the global economic and financial crisis and the austerity-driven policies added new strength to the populist reactions. Analyzing the Italian case the authors try to understand whether the agendas and policies carried out by populists leading governments or heavily influencing policy making induce forms of re-politicization of both public actions and the related issues. The chapter provides evidence on the potential effects of re-politicization caused by populism.

We are apparently living in an age of "hyperdepoliticisation". But what is meant today by de-politicization and how does this phenomenon impact upon the forms taken by political functions in con-temporary complex societies? The aim of this article is that of answering these questions through a re-search-based analysis of the specific role played in depoliticization processes by the use of the concept of resilience and resilience thinking, analyzing the "Resilient Communities" (Comunità Resilienti) program of the Cariplo Foundation. We argue that an intertwined and complementary movement between the depo-liticization of public action and politicization of collective action carried out by non-political actors exists, which does not extirpate the political from social processes, but alters its qualities, characteristics and borders. Such dual movement is composed of pro-active and reactive forms of both depoliticization and politicization, which are defined and investigated in the article, putting empirical evidence against the background of theoretical discussion.

Le città costituiscono uno spazio ideale in cui osservare le trasformazioni sociali generate da un evento inatteso come la crisi pandemica del 2020-2021. Il saggio mette a fuoco le conseguenze esercitate dalla crisi Covid-19 sulla componente transnazionale e multiscalare del policy making urbano. In particolare, sono osservabili cambiamenti e/o continuità nei paradigmi di policy, negli immaginari e nei modelli di azione pubblica ad essi collegati? E perché? Per rispondere è stato analizzato un caso di azione multiscalare per lo sviluppo urbano sostenibile, il programma International Urban Cooperation dell'Unione Europea, comparando la fase precedente alla pandemia e quella successiva. Il programma si è rivelato uno strumento di cooperazione anche nel corso di una crisi inattesa, socialmente ed economicamente devastante per le aree urbane. Il frame della sostenibilità continua a offrire un riferimento valoriale e cognitivo di facile condivisione, che favorisce la convergenza e fornisce agli attori della governance locale categorie utili a concettualizzare i problemi urbani riscontrati nelle proprie città, definire le risposte di policy necessarie, anche per affrontare le nuove sfide poste dalla crisi, senza il bisogno di ricercare ulteriori strumenti. Questo effetto dipende: dalla razionalità degli attori destinatari del programma; dalle relazioni fra la dimensione cognitiva (semiotica) e quella materiale dei processi di variazione, selezione, e ritenzione di immaginari.