Suchergebnisse

In the wake of disruption and disaster, cooperation among members of a collective is refocused on matters of status, membership and the formation of coalitions. In an important contribution to sociological theory, Hendrik Vollmer emphasizes the processes through which disruptions not only affect, but also transform social order. Drawing on Erving Goffman's understanding of framing and the interaction order, as well as from a range of insights from contemporary sociological theory and ethnographic, historical and organizational research, Vollmer addresses the dynamics of disaster and disaster response within the framework of a general theory of disruption and social order. It is proposed that the adjustment of cooperation in favour of coalition-forming strategies is robust in both informal and organized social settings and transcends the 'micro' and 'macro' approaches currently favoured by theorists. Offering a systematic sociological analysis of the impact of disruptiveness, this book investigates how punctuated cooperation precipitates social change

This paper discusses the compatibility of Thomas Schelling's concept of coordination games with microsociological analyses of everyday interaction offered, among others, by Erving Goffman and Harold Garfinkel. This compatibility is based on the mutual premise that participants of everyday interaction are continuously involved in the tacit coordination of expectations. Whereas game theory focuses on distinct patterns of interdependence between participants, microsociologists have been pointing to principles of affirmation adhered to by participants of everyday interaction in establishing and preserving coordination. Tacit coordination of expectations is complemented by signalling and by processes of framing, explored by Goffman in terms of keys and frames and by game theorists in terms of correlated equilibrium selection and signalling games. Implications for social theory are discussed, particularly with respect to welfare aspects of everyday interaction.

In seinem Aufsatz erläutert der Autor seine These, daß sich das Verwaltungshandeln auch in Risikokonflikten im Umweltbereich in erster Linie am Eigenrisiko orientiert. Dieses bezeichnet der Verfasser als Akzeptanzrisiko. Bei dieser Akzeptanzorientierung des Verwaltungshandelns rücken folgende Probleme in den Vordergrund: Probleme des Entscheidungshandelns in Risikokonflikten, die Suche nach alternativen Entscheidungsformen und Anforderungen an Verwaltungsorganisationen bei der Durchführung administrativer Risikoregulierung. Der Verfasser zeigt diese Problematik anhand eines Mediationsverfahrens (Verhandlungsverfahren) und der Rolle des Mediators auf. Er gelangt zu dem Schluß, daß die Akzeptanzorientierung es der öffentlichen Verwaltung ermöglicht, sich innerhalb "pluralisierter gesellschaftlicher Wirklichkeiten" Wissensmöglichkeiten aufrecht zu erhalten und Innovationspotentiale zu schützen. (ICC2)