Suchergebnisse

Abstract
The treatment of knowledge—most notably commodified knowledge—as a source and vector of power potentially is a key blind spot in our understanding of the global political economy. This article offers a theoretical framework, based on the work of Susan Strange, for considering the relationship between what she called the "knowledge structure" and the other key sources of political and economic power—security, production, and finance. This framework is applied to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, demonstrating how a direct focus on knowledge governance reveals power relations and economic effects that are otherwise obscured.

Abstract
Somewhat paradoxically, the implications of knowledge governance's changing role for the exercise of power in the Information Age remains underappreciated outside those scholars and policymakers directly engaged with these specific areas. This special issue brings together political scientists and communication scholars to consider the issue of knowledge governance through the theoretical framework of Susan Strange. This introduction examines the treatment of knowledge-governance issues within the mainstream of International Political Economy scholarship and briefly contextualizes the contribution of each article in this special issue.

Abstract
The treatment of knowledge—most notably commodified knowledge—as a source and vector of power potentially is a key blind spot in our understanding of the global political economy. This article offers a theoretical framework, based on the work of Susan Strange, for considering the relationship between what she called the "knowledge structure" and the other key sources of political and economic power—security, production, and finance. This framework is applied to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, demonstrating how a direct focus on knowledge governance reveals power relations and economic effects that are otherwise obscured.

AbstractSomewhat paradoxically, the implications of knowledge governance's changing role for the exercise of power in the Information Age remains underappreciated outside those scholars and policymakers directly engaged with these specific areas. This special issue brings together political scientists and communication scholars to consider the issue of knowledge governance through the theoretical framework of Susan Strange. This introduction examines the treatment of knowledge-governance issues within the mainstream of International Political Economy scholarship and briefly contextualizes the contribution of each article in this special issue.

Abstract.Despite the growing importance of social media, their political effectiveness remains understudied. Drawing on and updating resource mobilization theory and political process theory, this article considers how social media make "political engagement more probable" and determine the success of online social movements. It does so by examining the mainstreaming of the Canadian "user rights" copyright movement, focusing on the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook page, created in December 2007. This decentralized, grassroots, social media-focused action—the first successful campaign of its kind in Canada and one of the first in the world—changed the terms of the Canadian copyright debate and legitimized Canadian user rights. As this case demonstrates, social media have changed the type and quantity of resources needed to create and sustain social movements, creating openings for new groups and interests. Their success, however, remains dependent on the political context within which they operate.Résumé.Malgré l'importance croissante des médias sociaux, leur efficacité politique est encore peu étudiée. En s'appuyant sur et en mettant á jour la théorie de la mobilisation des ressources et la théorie du processus politique, cet article examine comment les médias sociaux rendent « l'engagement politique plus probable » (Jensen et al., 2012 : 16) et détermine la réussite des mouvements sociaux en ligne. Il le fait en examinant l'intégration du mouvement canadien de « droits d'utilisateur » dans le débat sur les droits d'auteur et en se concentrant sur la page FacebookFair Copyright for Canada, créée en décembre 2007. Cet action décentralisée populaire, axée sur les médias sociaux—la première campagne réussie de son genre au Canada et l'une des premières du monde—a changé les termes du débat sur les droits d'auteur canadiens et a légitimé les droits d'utilisateur canadiens. Cette affaire montre que les médias sociaux ont changé le type et la quantité des ressources nécessaires pour créer et maintenir les mouvements sociaux, et qu'ils ont crée, par la suite, des ouvertures pour des nouveaux groupes et intérêts. Leur succès reste cependant dépendant du contexte politique dans lequel elles opèrent.

The goal of this paper is to propose a democratic legitimacy framework for evaluating platform-goverance proposals, and in doing so clarify terms of debate in this area, allowing for more nuanced policy assessments. It applies a democratic legitimacy framework originally created to assess the European Union's democratic bona fides – Vivian Schmidt's (2013) modification of Scharpf's (1999) well-known taxonomy of forms of democratic legitimacy – to various representative platform governance proposals and policies. The first section discusses briefly the issue of legitimacy in internet and platform governance, while the second outlines our analytical framework. The second section describes the three forms of legitimacy that, according to this framework, are necessary for democratic legitimation: input, throughput and output legitimacy. The third section demonstrates our framework's utility by applying it to four paradigmatic proposals/regimes: Facebook's Oversight Board (self-governance regimes); adjudication-focused proposals such as the Manila Principles for Intermediary Liability (rule-of-law-focused regimes); the human-rights-focused framework proposed by then-UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression; and the United Kingdom's Online Harms White Paper (domestic regime). Section four describes our four main findings regarding the case studies: non-state proposals seem to focus on throughput legitimacy; input legitimacy requirements are frequently under examined; state regulation is usually side-lined as a policy option; and output legitimacy is a limited standard to be adopted in supranational contexts. We conclude that only by considering legitimacy as a multifaceted phenomenon based in democratic accountability will it be possible to design platform-governance models that will not only stand the test of time, but will also be accepted by the people whose lives they affect.

Intro -- Acknowledgements: Let's Put on a Show! -- Contents -- Notes on Contributors -- List of Figures -- Introduction -- 1 Creating a Common Dialogue -- 2 Enter the Strange -- 2.1 Key Concepts -- 2.1.1 Structural Power -- 2.1.2 Four Key Structures -- The Knowledge Structure -- 2.1.3 State and Non-State Actors -- Market and Authority -- 2.1.4 Research Focus and Emphasis on Empirical Work -- 2.2 Strange in Critical Focus -- 2.2.1 Underdeveloped Conception of the Knowledge Structure -- 2.2.2 Identity Construction and Definitions of Granularity -- 2.2.3 Status Quo Bias -- 2.3 Productive Problems -- 3 Organisation of This Volume -- References -- Part I: Susan Strange and the Twenty-First Century Knowledge Structure -- Taking Knowledge Seriously: Towards an International Political Economy Theory of Knowledge Governance -- 1 Structural Power, Knowledge, and the Knowledge Structure -- 2 Unpacking the Knowledge Structure -- 2.1 Knowledge-Legitimation -- 2.2 Knowledge-Regulation -- 3 Operationalising Strange: The Knowledge Structure in the Global Political Economy -- 3.1 The Curious Cases of Intellectual Property and Data in International Trade Agreements -- 3.1.1 Knowledge Feudalism -- 3.1.2 Digital Statism -- 3.2 Trade and the (CP)TPP: When Is a Trade Agreement Not a Trade Agreement? -- 3.3 A Strangean Analysis of the TPP and CPTPP -- 4 Conclusion -- References -- A Strange Approach to Information, Network, Sharing, and Platform Societies -- 1 The Knowledge Structure -- 1.1 Knowledge Structure: Technology -- 1.2 Knowledge Structure: Ideas -- 1.3 Knowledge Structure: Regulation -- 2 The Production Structure -- 2.1 Interactions Between the Production Structure and the Knowledge Structure -- 2.1.1 Technology -- 2.1.2 Ideas -- 2.1.3 Regulation -- 2.2 Feedback to the Knowledge Structure -- 3 The Security Structure.

"Power and Authority in Internet Governance investigates the hotly contested role of the state in today's digital society. The book asks: is the state "back" in internet regulation? If so, what forms are state involvement taking, and with what consequences for the future? The volume includes case studies from across the world and addresses a wide range of issues regarding internet infrastructure, data and content. The book pushes the debate beyond a simplistic dichotomy between liberalism and authoritarianism in order to consider also greater state involvement based on values of democracy and human rights. Seeing internet governance as a complex arena where power is contested among diverse non-state and state actors across local, national, regional, and global scales, the book offers a critical and nuanced discussion of how the internet is governed - and how it should be governed. Power and Authority in Internet Governance provides an important resource for researchers across international relations, global governance, science and technology studies, and law, as well as policymakers and analysts concerned with regulating the global internet"--