1,721,055 research outputs found

    Replication Data for "The partisan politics of the penal-welfare nexus"

    No full text
    These two datasets are analyzed in the paper "The partisan politics of the penal-welfare nexus" by Helge Staff and Georg Wenzelburger and published in the "Journal of Public Policy". You can download two files taht are analyzed in the paper: 1) Dataset on welfare legislation (analysed in Table 2): welfareleg_data 2) Data on penal legislation (analysed in Table 3 and in Appendix Table A2): penalleg_dat

    The two faces of Liberalism:Liberal parties and penal-welfare turns in Britain and Germany, 1906–2016

    Full text link
    Liberalism has been emphasized as a main ideational influence on penal and welfare policies—be it the new liberalism in the late 19th century leading to penal-welfarism or the neoliberal wave in the late 20th century pushing toward cutting welfare and increasing punitiveness. However, and surprisingly so, a political science perspective that zeroes in on the actors and their strategies is mostly missing from the state of the art. Instead, the literature is dominated by general ideational and sociological arguments. To address this weakness, the present paper theorizes that political liberalism involves an economic and a cultural dimension which is taken up by its political proponents to different degrees, depending on opportunity structures in the political realm. Building on both, theories about cleavages structuring societies as well as party competition, and a more in-depth study of the ideational core of liberalism, we propose that the strategic behaviour of liberal parties can add to our understanding of penal and welfare politics. Empirically, we use two historical case studies of British and German penal and welfare policies to illustrate how liberal parties emphasize the two faces of liberalism depending on the context in which they operate. Our analysis contributes to the literature in three ways: First, we add to our understanding of liberal politics by proposing an explanation for why liberalism has been associated with both permissiveness and toughness in penal and welfare policies. Indeed, according to our argument, this has to do with the two faces of liberalism, namely how liberal parties react to changes in economic and political contexts. And second, by proposing an empirical illustration over a long period of time, we offer a broad picture of decisive penal-welfare turns during periods when liberal parties held office. This is an important addition to a literature that has only started to focus on how political parties matter in the relationship between penal and welfare policies. And third, our study sheds light on an under-researched party family in political science—liberal parties.</p

    Unequal Security:Why it matters and how to study it

    Full text link
    This chapter is an introduction to the theme of unequal security and an overview of some of the central themes of this edited volume. We first argue that the notion of equal security is tightly connected to the modern nation-state project. We then trace how it has moved far beyond the provision of physical security over time and extends over a broad range of protective policies. Security is, however, also a difficult and multidimensional analytical concept. Inspired by the international relations and anthropological literature on the topic, we conceptualize security for the study of (mostly domestic) policies as a ‘political affect’ with five core dimensions (danger dimension, issue dimension, reference and distributional dimension, spatial dimension and evidential dimension). We close with an outlook on the chapters of this book.</p

    Conclusion

    Full text link
    The aim of this volume has been to put the idea of ‘unequal security’ on the agenda of the social sciences. An important reason for this is that we see a danger that current political concerns about insecurity might crowd out distributive issues: Whereas ‘inequality’ was the buzzword of the 2010s, insecurity is on its way to becoming the new ‘defining challenge of our time’, as Barack Obama called inequality in 2013. 1 Specifically, the succession of crises since the turn of the millennium—increasingly conceptualized as an interactive and systemic ‘polycrisis’ (Tooze, 2022; UNICEF, 2023; World Economic Forum, 2023; Zeitlin et al., 2019)—has led many to conclude that we have entered a new age: the age of insecurity.</p

    Infrastrukturpolitik

    No full text
    Die Infrastrukturpolitik sieht sich an der Schnittstelle zu Verkehrspolitik, Raum- und Stadtplanung sowie Wirtschaftspolitik mit besonderen Herausforderungen konfrontiert. Der Beitrag zeigt diese infrastrukturpolitischen Besonderheiten und ihre Bedeutung in den unterschiedlichen Phasen des Politikprozesses systematisch auf: In der Politikformulierung besteht insbesondere ein Spannungsfeld zwischen der notwendigen Einbindung ingenieurwissenschaftlicher Expertise und partizipativer Einbindung von Betroffeneninteressen. Die Akzeptanz stellt auch bei der Entscheidung über infrastrukturpolitische Maßnahmen eine zentrale Hürde dar. Dagegen erfordert die Umsetzung von Maßnahmen gleichermaßen ein abgestimmtes Vorgehen zwischen unterschiedlichen politischen Regelungsebenen und Gebietskörperschaften sowie das Austarieren staatlicher und marktwirtschaftlicher Governance-Modi. Die starke Raumrelevanz erschwert eine Evaluation infrastrukturpolitischer Maßnahmen, umso mehr da ihre Wirkungen durch Faktoren auf der Individualebene beeinflusst werden. In der zukünftigen Policy-Forschung zu Infrastrukturpolitik werden technische Innovationen, Veränderungen individueller Präferenzen und Bedürfnisse in der Arbeits- und Freizeitgestaltung, (nicht nur) damit verbundene räumliche Veränderungen sowie die durch den Klimawandel fokussierte Nachhaltigkeitsorientierung stärker ins Zentrum rücken

    Machtressourcentheorie und Korporatismusansatz

    No full text
    Die Machtmittel gesellschaftlicher Interessengruppierungen, ihre politischen und außerparlamentarischen Einflussmöglichkeiten und die Interessenvermittlung durch Aushandlungsprozesse von Staat und Verbänden in Politik und Wirtschaft stehen im Fokus zweier verwandter sozialwissenschaftlicher Paradigmen: der Machtressourcentheorie und des (Neo-)Korporatismus-Ansatzes. Bei beiden steht der Interessenkonflikt zwischen Arbeit und Kapital in demokratischen Industriegesellschaften, insbesondere zwischen Gewerkschaften und Arbeitgebern, im Zentrum des Forschungsinteresses, jedoch können diese Ansätze auch auf andere Interessengruppen angewendet werden

    Vetospieler und Institutionen

    No full text

    Process Tracing in der Policy-Forschung

    No full text
    Process Tracing ist eine Untersuchungsmethode zur kausalen Erklärung, bei der vielfältige empirische Beobachtungen innerhalb eines oder mehrerer Fälle als Implikationen – oder „Spuren“ – theoretischer Kausalmechanismen verstanden werden. Die möglichst vollständige empirische Rekonstruktion kausaler Prozesse durch Fallstudien erlaubt Schlussfolgerungen über (alternative) theoretische Erklärungen. Der Beitrag stellt die wichtigsten Merkmale der Methode, Beispiele aus der Policy-Forschung, Stärken, Schwächen sowie methodische Gütekriterien vor

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore