Suchergebnisse

Jan-Peter Voß, Introduction to the workshop Sensing Collectives: Aesthetic and Political Practices Interwined , ICI Berlin, 14–16 November 2018, video recording, mp4, 15:27

Instruments of governance are widely discussed in the policy and governance literature (see reviews in Lascoumes/Le Galès 2007; Howlett 2011). This research distinguishes between the various types of instruments, seeks to explain their effects, and is concerned with processes of choosing and implementing them. Articulating governance in terms of instruments has been a major concern of political science since World War II, following Harold Lasswell's call for a 'policy science' (Lerner/Lasswell 1951) and leading to the establishment of 'policy analysis' as a research orientation and professional practice.

The chapter provides a view of the ongoing innovation of 'citizen panels' as a method public participation. It shows how recourse to technoscientific modes of political ordering is met by reflexive engagements. Critical academic discourse, direct protest actions, and dedicated assessment exercises work together as a form of informal technology assessment. They counter the emergence of a transnational technocracy of political procedure. A closer look at an assessment exercise on the future development of 'citizen panels', carried out April 2014, reveals the potential and irony of reflexive engagements with technologies of participation. The conclusion extends this to other areas of social innovation. ; BMBF, 01UU0906, Innovation in Governance

The paper analyses the relations between policy studies and public policy. It traces how they are constitutively entangled. Conceptually, this builds on a notion of performativity that has been developed in science studies. The performativity of policy studies is explored in a case study of the innovation journey of "transition management" as a model for governing sociotechnical change. The paper shows how practices of knowledge production and policy-making take shape in interaction with the model and how a specialized research field coevolves with political alliances and policy programs. They interact in the process of realizing transition management, both by establishing the model as collective knowledge and by materially enacting it. In this interweaving with public policy, policy studies contribute to creating the reality that they describe. The conclusions discuss "realizing" as a mode of governance. ; BMBF, 01UU0906, Innovation in Governance

Verschiedene gesellschaftliche Gruppen haben unterschiedliche Möglichkeiten, ihr jeweiliges Verständnis von Nachhaltigkeit wissenschaftlich zu etablieren. Die Definition von Nachhaltigkeit hängt daher davon ab, wer Macht und Ressourcen hat, die entsprechende Ausrichtung von Wissenschaft zu stärken. Bisher ist völlig unklar, wie dieser Deutungskampf demokratisch reguliert werden könnte.

First published by Edward Elgar: Voß, Jan Peter: Innovation of governance : the case of emissions trading. - In: Arentsen, Maarten J.; van Rossum, Wouter; Stenge, Albert E.: Governance of innovation : firms, clusters and institutions in a changing setting. Cheltenham : Edward Elgar, 2010. - ISBN: 978-1-84720-738-8. - pp. 125–148.

Der Verfasser versteht Nachhaltigkeit als die langfristige Aufrechterhaltung der Entwicklungsfähigkeit gekoppelter gesellschaftlicher und ökologischer Systeme. Er entwickelt einen analytischen Rahmen zum Verständnis des Verhältnisses von gesellschaftlichem Handeln und übergreifenden sozialökologischen Entwicklungsdynamiken. Grundlegend hierfür ist ein Konzept sozialökologischer Ko-Evolution, in dem gesellschaftliche Erwartungen als Kopplung zwischen Variationsprozessen und Selektionsumfeld eine zentrale Steuerungswirkung besitzen. Grenzen der Steuerung werden in ambivalenten Zielen, unsicherem Wissen und verteilter Macht gesehen. Mit Hilfe reflexiver Gestaltungsansätze können gesellschaftliche Erwartungen aus differenzierten Institutionen und partikularen Rationalitäten herausgelöst und stärker in soziale und ökologische Kontexte eingebettet werden. Als Ansatzpunkt für nachhaltigen Wandel werden also Verfahren gesehen, mit denen die Qualität gesellschaftlicher Handlungsstrategien beeinflusst wird. Abschließend werden Einwände diskutiert, die sich auf die Wünschbarkeit sowie die praktische Umsetzbarkeit der vorgestellten Gestaltungsansätze beziehen. (ICE2)

The thesis analyses the role of policy instruments for dynamics of governance, using case studies on 'emissisons trading' and 'network access regulation in the utilities'. It opens by observing a paradox: Policy instruments are criticised for misrepresenting the complex and contested reality of public policy-making by portraying it as technical problem-solving, yet, policy instruments play an increasingly central role in policy analysis, design and public debate. The first part of the thesis develops a conception of policy instruments as 'designs on governance'. This implies a double life: as models of governance and as configurations that work in real world governance contexts. Understanding the role of policy instruments requires to study the development of trajectories in governance patterns that result from the interaction of models and configurations. Concepts from innovation studies are mobilised and the notion of an 'innovation journey' is adopted as a heuristic framework. The second part of the thesis presents two case studies examplifying different innovation patterns: design push (case of emissions trading) and dynamics pull (case of network access regulation). For each pattern typical phases and transitions as well as ironies that undermine the instrumentality of designs on governance are discussed. Conclusions of the thesis address the co-evolution of policy instruments with broader governance dynamics and specify conditions under which momentum of instruments may dominate over dynamics of problem formulation and political authority, or vice versa. Key insights are formulated with respect to the division of design labour between local and global in the context of emerging cosmopolitan governance regimes, the social life of policy instruments and the ambivalent role of technical models of governance for effectiveness as well as democratic legimitacy of public policy.

I Einleitung -- Fabrikation von Demokratie. Rundgang über einige Baustellen der performativen Repräsentation des 'will of the people' -- Performative politische Repräsentation. Die 'konstruktivistische Wende' in der politischen Theorie -- II Verwissenschaftlichung und Technisierung -- Innovation der Demokratie. Die epistemische Konstruktion politischer Repräsentation am Beispiel "deliberative Bürgerräte" -- Demos ex Machina. Zur Produktion eines vernünftigen Kollektivwillens in "Deliberative Polls" -- Modelle des Demos. Hybride Repräsentation und die Politik der Inferenzen -- III Kulturelle Voraussetzungen -- Repräsentation im Spannungsfeld von Symbolizität, Performativität und politischem Imaginären -- Repräsentationspraxis in Bewegung(en). Kritische kulturtheoretische Forschung mit und zu Repräsentation -- Politische Repräsentation neu entdecken: Über Latours performative Arbeit an kommenden demokratischen Kollektiven -- IV Nebenfolgen und Alternativen -- Demokratie, soziologisch beobachtet. Zwei Desiderate in Zeiten wankender politischer Gewissheiten -- Experiment Demokratie. Erfahrungsdifferenzen und praxeologische Übersetzungskompetenz als Voraussetzungen für sozialen Zusammenhalt.

Knowing Governance sets out to understand governance through the design and making of its models and instruments. What kinds of knowledge do they require and reproduce? How are new understandings of governance produced in practice, by scientists and policy makers and by the publics with whom they engage?

Existing discussions of food democracy focus on people's freedom to choose healthy, sustainable, or otherwise 'good' foods. Such foods are supposed to be unrestrained by oligopolistic structures of food supply, economic inequality, misinformation, or the misleading lobbying campaigns of the food industry. Our article aims to broaden the discussion about food democracy: focusing on people's freedom to choose the food they want, but also on people's freedom to engage with what they eat and how they want to eat it. This thematizes collective orders of sensing and, more specifically, taste. Based on pragmatist and praxeological studies we pose that tasting food is a matter of historically grown collective practices. In a second step, we assert that the reflexive shaping of such practices is currently dominated by the food industry and related forms of sensory science. Democratizing taste is a matter of people's capacity to self-govern how they experience and enjoy food. To this end, we suggest the approach of 'experimental eating' as a way to question and reflexively engage with embodied forms of tasting. We report on the development of methods that, in a next step, are to be combined for a participatory exhibition inviting people to experimentally reconfigure their habitual tasting practices and experience agency in matters of shaping taste. The exhibition makes taste public by demonstrating the construction of sensory experience in eating practices. It positions taste as a collective issue which every human being can experiment with—and thus to contest the governance of taste as currently exercised by industrial corporations and scientific experts.

Existing discussions of food democracy focus on people's freedom to choose healthy, sustainable, or otherwise 'good' foods. Such foods are supposed to be unrestrained by oligopolistic structures of food supply, economic inequality, misinformation, or the misleading lobbying campaigns of the food industry. Our article aims to broaden the discussion about food democracy: focusing on people's freedom to choose the food they want, but also on people's freedom to engage with what they eat and how they want to eat it. This thematizes collective orders of sensing and, more specifically, taste. Based on pragmatist and praxeological studies we pose that tasting food is a matter of historically grown collective practices. In a second step, we assert that the reflexive shaping of such practices is currently dominated by the food industry and related forms of sensory science. Democratizing taste is a matter of people's capacity to self-govern how they experience and enjoy food. To this end, we suggest the approach of 'experimental eating' as a way to question and reflexively engage with embodied forms of tasting. We report on the development of methods that, in a next step, are to be combined for a participatory exhibition inviting people to experimentally reconfigure their habitual tasting practices and experience agency in matters of shaping taste. The exhibition makes taste public by demonstrating the construction of sensory experience in eating practices. It positions taste as a collective issue which every human being can experiment with—and thus to contest the governance of taste as currently exercised by industrial corporations and scientific experts.