Suchergebnisse

"This book discusses and conceptualises key questions for the study of politicisation and democratisation of the EU, as well as EU identity. Comparatively analysing two prototypical cases, namely the discourses related to the ratification of the EU Constitutional Treaty in 2005 in Germany and France, and their outcomes it addresses key questions: Why is it necessary to democratise the EU? Can increasing EU politicisation help democratising the EU or will it put EU integration in danger? What is it that unites the European Union as a polity? Discussing then the two cases in relation to more current events such as Brexit and the French elections of 2022, the book develops key theoretical models and delivers profound findings on EU democratisation, identity, politicisation and contestation: This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of European Union studies/politics, democratic theory, discourse analysis and more broadly to comparative politics"--

What is it that unites the European Union as a polity? Why is it necessary to democratise the EU? Can EU politicisation help democratising the EU? Why do EU citizens in referenda seemingly vote against the EU? And how can a European identity develop? To tackle these questions, this book makes a theoretical, conceptual and empirical contribution to the study of EU politicisation, democratisation, identity formation, and the ways these three are related to one another. The results of a thorough comparative analysis of two prototypical cases, namely French and German national EU discourses and in particular the discourses on the Treaty on a Constitution for Europe (TCE) in 2005, are discussed in relation to more current events such as Brexit and the French elections of 2022. The book thus develops key concepts and theoretical models and delivers profound findings on EU democratisation, identity, politicisation and contestation and their interrelations. This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of European Union studies/politics, democratic theory, discourse analysis and more broadly to comparative politics. The Open Access version of this book, available at http://www.taylorfrancis.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons [Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND)] 4.0 license.

This book decisively advances the academic debate on politicisation beyond the state of the art. It is the first book to theorise and conceptualise 'politicisation' across the epistemic communities of different subdisciplines, bringing together the different strands in the debate: (international) political theory, political sociology, comparative politics, EU studies, legal theory and international relations. This provides a comprehensive discussion of different concepts of politicisation, their ontological and theoretical backgrounds, and their analytical value, including speech-act, practice- and actor-oriented approaches. Furthermore, the linkages of politicisation to the concepts of politics and the political, democracy, depoliticisation, juridification, populism, and Euroscepticism are clarified. Finally, the book shows how the methodological toolbox in empirical politicisation research can be completed regarding different arenas, actors and modes of politicisation. The volume thus provides a much-needed theoretical and conceptual reflection to the newly emerging research field of politicisation in order to recognise and define the key issues and build a solid foundation for further debate and empirical research.

Intro -- Preface -- Contents -- Inventing the EU as a Democratic Polity: Introduction -- The EU as an Arena of Controversies -- The EU as a Democratic Polity? -- Concepts as Categories, Factors and Indicators -- Theoretical Premises -- Research Methodology -- What This Book Is and What It Is Not -- The Book and Its Parts -- References -- Part I The Theoretical and Methodological Toolkit -- Conceptualising Representative Democracy in the EU -- Academic Controversy on the EU as a Representative Democracy -- The Triad of Representative Democracy: Citizenship, Parliament, Government -- Citizens-Subjects-People-Sovereign-Electorate-Demos -- Parliament-Representation-Legislature -- Government-Executive -- Conclusion and Outlook -- References -- Towards a Reflexive Perspective on Political Concepts -- What Is a Concept? -- The Methodological Perspective of Conceptual History -- A Heuristic and Analytical Toolbox for Studying Conceptual Change -- A Taxonomy for Studying Conceptual Change -- In Sum: A Reflexive Usage and Analysis of Concepts -- References -- Studying Conceptual Change via European Integration: A Research Agenda -- Conceptual Change and EU Integration-Lining Out the Research Field -- How to Study Conceptual Change in EU Integration? -- Concepts as Analytical Categories -- Concepts as Factors and Indicators of Institutional, Political and Social Changes in the EU -- A Wide Array of Potential Research Questions -- Discussing One Slice of the Agenda: What I Will Do in the Book -- References -- Studying Conceptual Controversies in This Book -- Conceptual Controversies and Their Reflection in Texts and Documents -- Document and Qualitative Analyses -- Determining Cases and Research Material -- Finding Out About the How and the Why in a Conceptual Controversy -- Cases and Design of the Studies in This Book -- References.

The EU as a democratic polity has been invented: it is a product of creative and innovative actors and thinkers that conceptualized and by and by helped to realise it, from the beginning up to the present. But the concepts, ideas, and utopias of a democratic Europe differ considerably. The processes of inventing and building a democratic EU are marked by conceptual controversies in both public and academic debates. These are the resource for the present book, which focuses on the concepts, actors and controversies related to inventing the EU as a democratic polity. The chapters study exemplary long-term and detail cases related to inventing and institutionalizing the decisive elements of representative democracy in the EU--a parliament, citizens that vote for it in universal suffrage and governmental bodies that are linked to parliament in much the same way as government is in a parliamentary democracy.

Dieses Buch untersucht theoretisch und empirisch die Zusammenhänge zwischen Multi-Level-Governance und lokaler Demokratie. Es enthält umfassende konzeptionelle und theoretische Überlegungen. Auf diesen aufbauend werden die Auswirkungen von Modellprogrammen und Politikinnovationen im EU-Mehrebenensystem auf die Aktivierung von benachteiligten Personengruppen und die Stärkung von Gemeinwesen und Demokratie anhand von vier Modellvorhaben vergleichend untersucht. Abschließend werden umfassende weiterführende Schlussfolgerungen zu den Themenfeldern Multi-Level-Governance und lokale Demokratie gezogen. Der Inhalt Multi-Level-Governance und lokale Demokratie: 1) Theorien, Konzepte und Innovationsbereiche 2) Untersuchungsergebnisse zu vier Modellprojekten 3) Vergleich, Erfolgsindikatoren und weiterführende Schlussfolgerungen Die Autorin PD Dr. Claudia Wiesner ist derzeit Vertretungsprofessorin für Vergleichende Regierungslehre an der Universität Hamburg

"The book presents the key results of an international cooperation network connecting scholars and politicians from Finland, Germany, France, Sweden, Austria, Italy and Canada who worked on the development, rhetorical challenges, political and interpretative struggles, and relationships between two key concepts of contemporary political thinking and debate: 'Parliament' and 'Europe'. The volume contains chapters discussing different key aspects of the relations between these two concepts"--Claudia Wiesner, Kari Palonen and Tapani Turkka, p. 5

Stößt das neuartige Coronavirus auf Menschen, deren ökonomische Lage und/oder sozialer Status sich deutlich unterscheiden, weichen die gesundheitlichen Auswirkungen für die Betroffenen häufig stark voneinander ab. Infektions-, Morbiditäts- und Mortalitätsrisiken der einzelnen Bevölkerungsschichten differieren zum Teil ganz erheblich, sind mit Abstand am höchsten bei armen und am niedrigsten bei reichen Personen. Die wirtschaftlichen Kollateralschäden der Pandemie und der Infektionsschutzmaßnahmen des Staates (zweimaliger bundesweiter Lockdown) verteilen sich ebenfalls nicht gleichmäßig über alle Bewohner:innen der Bundesrepublik. Vielmehr gibt es Gewinner:innen und Verlierer:innen, sowohl in der Wirtschaft (Differenzierung zwischen einzelnen Branchen) als auch in der Gesamtgesellschaft (Polarisierung zwischen verschiedenen Klassen und Schichten). Schließlich weisen die bisherigen Hilfsmaßnahmen, Finanzspritzen und Rettungsschirme des Staates eine verteilungspolitische Schieflage auf, wodurch die sozioökonomische Ungleichheit wächst, statt abgemildert zu werden. Angesichts der bevorstehenden Konflikte um die Rückführung der hohen Staatsverschuldung, die Deutschland in den nächsten Jahren vor eine politische Zerreißprobe stellen dürften, sollte Verteilungsgerechtigkeit bei der Subventionsvergabe oberste Priorität haben. Wenn der Sozialstaat nicht in dem Sinne als 'systemrelevant' gelten will, dass er nur die bestehenden Herrschaftsverhältnisse, Machtstrukturen und Verteilungsmechanismen stabilisiert, muss er die Fehlkonstruktion der staatlichen Finanzhilfen zügig revidieren und künftig diejenigen Personengruppen stärker unterstützen, die auf den Märkten, insbesondere dem Arbeits- und dem Mietwohnungsmarkt, die geringsten Durchsetzungschancen haben. ; The coronavirus crisis has had a distinct impact on the labour market. The lockdown has led to job losses, especially in the catering and tourism industries. Certain sectors have also been affected by short­term work. This also has consequences for the income situation of affected households. It is evident that households with incomes that were already lower before the crisis are more affected by income losses during the crisis. However, the federal government's economic stimulus and crisis management aid package is certainly effective at stabilising jobs and averting social hardship. However, men benefit from this comparatively more than women.