- RWTH Aachen University, Human Technology Centre (HumTec), Faculty MemberTechnische Universität Berlin, Department of Sociology, Faculty Memberadd
- Social Studies of Politics, Performativity, Knowledge and Power, Sociology of politics, Cultural Politics, Political Sociology, and 8 moreGovernance, Governmentality, Politics and science, Sociology of Knowledge, Critical Policy Studies, Constructionism, Science, Technology and Society, and Cultural Sociologyedit
Are aesthetics and politics really two different things? The book takes a new look at how they intertwine, by turning from theory to practice. Case studies trace how sensory experiences are created and how collective interests are shaped.... more
Are aesthetics and politics really two different things? The book takes a new look at how they intertwine, by turning from theory to practice. Case studies trace how sensory experiences are created and how collective interests are shaped. They investigate how aesthetics and politics are entangled, both in building and disrupting collective orders, in governance and innovation. This ranges from populist rallies and artistic activism over alternative lifestyles and consumer culture to corporate PR and governmental policies. Authors are academics and artists. The result is a new mapping of the intermingling and co-constitution of aesthetics and politics in engagements with collective orders.
Research Interests: Sociology, Political Sociology, Social Movements, Sociology of Culture, Aesthetics, and 15 morePractice theory, Cultural Theory, Political Science, Governance, Political Culture, Politics, Anthropology of the Senses, Affect Studies, Sensory Ethnography, Affect (Cultural Theory), Innovation Studies, Sensory Studies, Artivism, The Senses, and Innovation & Change Management
Knowing Governance sets out to understand governance through the design and making of its models and instruments. How are new understandings of governance produced in practice, by scientists and policy makers and by the publics with whom... more
Knowing Governance sets out to understand governance through the design and making of its models and instruments. How are new understandings of governance produced in practice, by scientists and policy makers and by the publics with whom they engage? How does politics work through the production of ideas and information that both describe and prescribe how governing is done? This book outlines and explores a new approach to the study of governance at the intersection of governmentality studies, interpretive policy studies and science and technology studies. Each chapter presents an empirically-grounded case study of how particular accounts of governing are worked out, and how new realities of governance emerge in the course of making it knowable. Each introduces and applies a key concept from science and technology studies, setting out a variety of ways of making knowledge about governance and its constituent politics.
Research Interests:
This book presents an innovative approach to the study of policy instruments in the context of broader governance dynamics. It mobilises concepts from innovation studies to reconstruct emerging trajectories of policy practice that result... more
This book presents an innovative approach to the study of policy instruments in the context of broader governance dynamics. It mobilises concepts from innovation studies to reconstruct emerging trajectories of policy practice that result from interactions of models and real world configurations of governance. Case studies are presented on emissions trading and network access regulation in the utilities, two instruments with a key role in market-oriented governance transformations over the last decades. The analysis offers insights into patterns of innovation journeys in governance, the social life of policy instruments and the formation of instrument constituencies and regimes of policy technology, and the ambivalent role of technical models in the dynamics of social change.
Research Interests:
This book deals with the issue of sustainable development in a novel and innovative way. It examines the governance implications of reflexive modernisation – the condition that societal development is endangered by its own side-effects.... more
This book deals with the issue of sustainable development in a novel and innovative way. It examines the governance implications of reflexive modernisation – the condition that societal development is endangered by its own side-effects. With conceptualising reflexive governance the book leads a way out of endless quarrels about the definition of sustainability and into a new mode of collective action.
The authors assert that sustainability is not a defined end-state, but should be understood as the capacity of society to learn about the conditions of its future existence and wants. This requires, in their view, a specific kind of problem solving framework which emphasises the interlinkage of problems and scales, as well as long-term and indirect effects of various actions. Sustainability calls for new forms of governance with attention given to uncertainty, ambivalence about multiple goals and distributed power. The book develops an alternative framework with which to address the challenge of sustainability and derives a set of strategy elements for dealing with sustainability in practice. These are discussed from conceptual as well as practical perspectives.
Bringing recent insights from innovation research, governance studies and complexity theory in common focus, Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development will be of great interest to researchers in social change, innovation and governance studies, as well as policymakers confronted with sustainable development issues.
The authors assert that sustainability is not a defined end-state, but should be understood as the capacity of society to learn about the conditions of its future existence and wants. This requires, in their view, a specific kind of problem solving framework which emphasises the interlinkage of problems and scales, as well as long-term and indirect effects of various actions. Sustainability calls for new forms of governance with attention given to uncertainty, ambivalence about multiple goals and distributed power. The book develops an alternative framework with which to address the challenge of sustainability and derives a set of strategy elements for dealing with sustainability in practice. These are discussed from conceptual as well as practical perspectives.
Bringing recent insights from innovation research, governance studies and complexity theory in common focus, Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development will be of great interest to researchers in social change, innovation and governance studies, as well as policymakers confronted with sustainable development issues.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Science Policy, Corporate Governance, Political Science, Governance, Nanotechnology, and 11 moreSustainability Science, Engineering Ethics, Nanotechnologie, Governance of Science, Governance of Science and Technology, Sociology of Science Technology and Innovation studies, Sozialwissenschaften, De Facto States, Sustainability, Science and Technology Studies, and Wissenschaft
Research Interests:
Utility systems for the provision of electricity, gas, water or telecommunication are at the interface of society and nature. They interconnect broader production and consumption patterns and are thus of central importance for sustainable... more
Utility systems for the provision of electricity, gas, water or telecommunication are at the interface of society and nature. They interconnect broader production and consumption patterns and are thus of central importance for sustainable development. Yet, they are particularly difficult to shape. Large technical systems are intertwined with patterns of market organization, administrative institutions, user routines and policy networks. Transformation is not a matter of planning and control but of co-evolution across such heterogeneous domains. The transformation of utility systems therefore, exemplifies the limits of conventional steering approaches to achieve sustainable development. Reflexive governance forms are needed which take into account the embedding of steering activities in dynamic system contexts, and which take up uncertainty, ambivalence and distributed influence as basic features for shaping sustainable development. Sustainability Foresight represents a methodical ap...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Zuerst veroffentlicht im Campus-Verlag: Vos, Jan-Peter ; Bauknecht, Dierk: Der Einfluss von Technik auf Governance-Innovationen : Regulierung zur gemeinsamen Netznutzung in Infrastruktursystemen. - In: Dolata, Ulrich ; Werle, Raymund... more
Zuerst veroffentlicht im Campus-Verlag: Vos, Jan-Peter ; Bauknecht, Dierk: Der Einfluss von Technik auf Governance-Innovationen : Regulierung zur gemeinsamen Netznutzung in Infrastruktursystemen. - In: Dolata, Ulrich ; Werle, Raymund (Hg.): Gesellschaft und die Macht der Technik. - Frankfurt, New York : Campus, 2007. - ISBN: 978-3-593-38357-6. - S. 109–131.
Research Interests:
Im Verkehrssektor sind die Emissionen in den vergangenen Jahren gestiegen statt gesunken. Schnelle Entscheidungen und innovative Mobilitatskonzepte sind notwendig, damit Stadte klimafreundlicher werden konnen. Haben sich Kommunen aber... more
Im Verkehrssektor sind die Emissionen in den vergangenen Jahren gestiegen statt gesunken. Schnelle Entscheidungen und innovative Mobilitatskonzepte sind notwendig, damit Stadte klimafreundlicher werden konnen. Haben sich Kommunen aber einmal festgelegt, ist der Umstieg auf einen alternativen Ansatz mitunter schwierig und teuer - es konnen Pfadabhangigkeiten entstehen. Dabei weis niemand derzeit genau, welche Technologien sich in den kommenden Jahrzehnten durchsetzen werden. Dies gilt gleichermasen auch fur zahlreiche Bereiche bei der Umsetzung der Energiewende. Die vorliegende Analyse des Akademienprojektes "Energiesysteme der Zukunft" (ESYS) zeigt Strategien fur den Umgang mit Pfadabhangigkeiten auf und will damit Politikerinnen und Politiker in ihrem Entscheidungsprozess unterstutzen. Die Autorinnen und Autoren erklaren in der Analyse, wie die Entscheidungstheorie Kommunal- und Bundesspolitiker bei der Gestaltung eines zukunftsfahigen Mobilitatssystems und beim Umbau der...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
First published by Profil-Verlag: Vos, Jan-Peter; Truffer, Bernhard; Konrad, Kornelia: Sustainability Foresight as a method to shape socio-technical transformation in utility systems. - In: Bamme, Arno; Getzinger, Gunter; Wieser, Bernhard... more
First published by Profil-Verlag: Vos, Jan-Peter; Truffer, Bernhard; Konrad, Kornelia: Sustainability Foresight as a method to shape socio-technical transformation in utility systems. - In: Bamme, Arno; Getzinger, Gunter; Wieser, Bernhard (Ed.): Yearbook 2005 of the Institute for Advanced Studies on Science, Technology and Society. - Munchen, Wien: Profil-Verlag, 2005. - (Technik- und Wissenschaftsforschung ; 47). - ISBN: 3-89019-595-4. pp. 285–305.
Research Interests:
As a new concept in policy analysis, instrument constituencies shed light on the ‘supply side’ of policy-making and thereby fill a gap in our understanding of national and transnational policy dynamics. Policy instruments are not only... more
As a new concept in policy analysis, instrument constituencies shed light on the ‘supply side’ of policy-making and thereby fill a gap in our understanding of national and transnational policy dynamics. Policy instruments are not only ‘active’ because they contain scripts for reordering society but also because they gather a constituency comprised of practices and actors oriented towards developing, maintaining and expanding a specific instrumental model of governing. Instrument constituencies account for a hitherto neglected form of agency and explain the often-observed paradox that policy solutions sometimes chase policy problems, although the former are meant to emerge as answers to the later. We give an outline of the concept as it has been developed so far, formulate propositions, and discuss linkages with established research traditions in policy studies.
Research Interests: Economics, Philosophy of Agency, Governmentality, Corporate Governance, Political Science, and 11 moreGovernance, Interpretive policy analysis, Technological Innovation, Social Studies Of Science, Innovation Studies, Epistemic communities, Public Administration and Policy, Social Studies of Science, Music Information Dynamics, Public Policy, and Science and Technology Studies
We reconstruct the innovation journey of ‘citizen panels’, as a family of participation methods, over four decades and across different sites of development and application. A process of aggregation leads from local practices of designing... more
We reconstruct the innovation journey of ‘citizen panels’, as a family of participation methods, over four decades and across different sites of development and application. A process of aggregation leads from local practices of designing participatory procedures like the citizens jury, planning cell, or consensus conference in the 1970s and 1980s, to the disembedding and proliferation of procedural formats in the 1990s, and into the trans-local consolidation of participatory practices through laboratory-based expertise since about 2000. Our account highlights a central irony: anti-technocratic engagements with governance gave birth to efforts at establishing technoscientific control over questions of political procedure. But such efforts have been met with various forms of reflexive engagement that draw out implications and turn design questions back into matters of concern. An emerging informal assessment regime for technologies of participation as yet prevents closure on one domi...
Research Interests: Sociology, Political Participation, Innovation Ecosystems and Their Dynamics, Sociology of Knowledge, Reflexivity, and 15 moreSocial Construction of Technology, Deliberative Democracy, Public Participation In Governance, Medicine, Public Engagement, Social Innovation, Knowledge generation and governance in the context of sustainable development, Public Participation, Reflexive practice, Public Engagement with Science and Technology, Democracy and Citizenship Education, Sozialwissenschaften, Responsible Research and Innovation, Innovation In Governance, and Science and Technology Studies
Research Interests: Sociology, Policy Analysis/Policy Studies, Expertise, Corporate Governance, Innovation Policy, and 14 moreSustainable Development, Governance, Performativity, Policy Studies, Knowledge Production, Sustainability Transitions, Co-Production, Wirtschaft, Policy Sciences, Policy Instruments, Public Policy, Science and Technology Studies, Innovation, and Science-Policy Interaction
A report based on an interactive, anticipatory assessment of the dynamics of governance instruments, 26 April 2013
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
... This is due to close interlinkages between natural resources, technology, institutions, concepts and values which make up a ... want to explore new forms of problem treatment which could become part of a more reflexive governance... more
... This is due to close interlinkages between natural resources, technology, institutions, concepts and values which make up a ... want to explore new forms of problem treatment which could become part of a more reflexive governance arrangement in dealing with sustainability. ...
What happens when practices are transferred from one place to another? This question lurks in the background of competing concepts of social order, modernization and globalization: Does it expand a homogeneous space where the... more
What happens when practices are transferred from one place to another? This question lurks in the background of competing concepts of social order, modernization and globalization: Does it expand a homogeneous space where the functionality of original practices is reproduced? Or does it mix up any settled orders and create a dynamic space of heterogeneous assemblages? We here draw on a mobile ethnography following the travel of ‘mini-publics’, a pratice of organizing public participation, across different situations. We find three different modes by which mobilized elements of this practice (people, texts and artefacts) link up with local configurations: Firstly, colonization is when the original practice is sought to be replicated at the site of destination, reflecting a modern ambition to territorially expand the order that guarantees the original function. Secondly, appropriation is when mobilized elements of practice are left to freely change their meanings and effects as they are absorbed into various local configurations, reflecting a postmodern ambition to dissolve boundaries and hybridize settled orders. Thirdly, commensuration is when elements embedded in different sites are linked with each other through a broader abstract model within which they are positioned as functionally equivalent, reflecting a reflexive-modern ambition to build network infrastructures for integrating diversity. We find that the three modes coexist and thus propose them as components of a broader conceptual repertoire for empirically analysing how transfer happens, how translocal spaces are constituted, and how globalization takes shape, rather than a priori assuming either one, or the other mode as the generally dominant pattern.
Research Interests: Cultural Sociology, Globalization, Practice theory, Glocalization, Actor Network Theory, and 9 moreTranslation theory, Knowledge Transfer, Socio-cultural theory, Actor Network Theory (ANT), Actor-Network-Theory, Translocality, Modernity/coloniality/decoloniality, Democratic innovations, and Science and Technology Studies
Research Interests: Taste and Sozialtheorie
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
We study efforts at promoting deliberative mini-publics as a model of democracy. Our focus is on practices supporting the circulation of know-how for doing mini-publics. In this paper we center on the building of infrastructures for... more
We study efforts at promoting deliberative mini-publics as a model of democracy. Our focus is on practices supporting the circulation of know-how for doing mini-publics. In this paper we center on the building of infrastructures for knowledge exchange in and around a network known as Democracy R&D. This is a network of mini-publics practitioners from around the world with the declared goal of adding momentum to democratic innovation by enhancing translocal connections, community building, and knowledge. We look at how the network is organized, how online communication platforms are installed, and how observatory devices draw dispersed practices together into a shared frame of mutual learning and collective action. How do such practices configure the ways in which knowledge can flow across sites? How do they constitute an instrument space, a translocal assemblage of knowing and doing democracy by means of deliberative mini-publics? Using concepts like scopic media and centers of calc...
Research Interests: Globalization, Ethnography, Spatial Practices, Design for Social Innovation, Political Science, and 15 moreDeliberative Democracy, Globalization And Postcolonial Studies, Democracy, Public Participation In Governance, Postcolonial translation studies, Social Practice, Medicine, Praxeology, Infrastructure studies, Social Innovation, Cultural Globalization, Infrastructure, Assemblage Theory, Democratic innovations, and Science and Technology Studies
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,... more
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 wmbodied 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.
Research Interests: Political Sociology, Cultural Sociology, Political Participation, Participatory Research, Practice theory, and 15 moreSociology of Food and Eating, Governance, Performativity, Cultural Politics, Jacques Rancière, Design of Experiments, John Dewey, Aesthetics and Politics, Democracy, Food Sensory Analysis, Radical Democracy, Citizen Science, Sensory Studies, Taste, and Science and Technology Studies
Emerging patterns of public engagement in science and technology are at the heart of an ongoing historical transformation of science. It is here that a much debated “new social contract for science” is currently being negotiated in... more
Emerging patterns of public engagement in science and technology are at the heart of an ongoing historical transformation of science. It is here that a much debated “new social contract for science” is currently being negotiated in practice. Alternative future constitutions of science and technology are implied in various ways of doing public engagement. I take a few steps towards developing an analytics for differentiating and relating practices of public engagement. This is led by three questions: Why is the public concerned about science and technology? How does the public, or specific publics, engage with science and technology? Who speaks for the public in which ways and what kinds of political orders does this implicitly perform? In conclusion I make the case for setting up an observatory to trace forms of public engagement as they currently unfold in practice in order to systematically map their diversity and assess effects for the emerging future constitution of knowledge societies.
Research Interests:
As a new concept in policy analysis, instrument constituencies shed light on the ‘supply side’ of policy-making and thereby fill a gap in our understanding of national and transnational policy dynamics. Policy... more
As a new concept in policy analysis, instrument constituencies shed
light on the ‘supply side’ of policy-making and thereby fill a gap in
our understanding of national and transnational policy dynamics.
Policy instruments are not only ‘active’ because they contain scripts
for reordering society but also because they gather a constituency
comprised of practices and actors oriented towards developing,
maintaining and expanding a specific instrumental model of
governing. Instrument constituencies account for a hitherto neglected
form of agency and explain the often-observed paradox that policy
solutions sometimes chase policy problems, although the former are
meant to emerge as answers to the later. We give an outline of the
concept as it has been developed so far, formulate propositions, and
discuss linkages with established research traditions in policy studies.
light on the ‘supply side’ of policy-making and thereby fill a gap in
our understanding of national and transnational policy dynamics.
Policy instruments are not only ‘active’ because they contain scripts
for reordering society but also because they gather a constituency
comprised of practices and actors oriented towards developing,
maintaining and expanding a specific instrumental model of
governing. Instrument constituencies account for a hitherto neglected
form of agency and explain the often-observed paradox that policy
solutions sometimes chase policy problems, although the former are
meant to emerge as answers to the later. We give an outline of the
concept as it has been developed so far, formulate propositions, and
discuss linkages with established research traditions in policy studies.
Research Interests:
We study efforts at promoting deliberative mini-publics as a model of democracy. Our focus is on practices supporting the circulation of know-how for doing mini-publics. In this paper we center on the building of infrastructures for... more
We study efforts at promoting deliberative mini-publics as a model of democracy. Our focus is on practices supporting the circulation of know-how for doing mini-publics. In this paper we center on the building of infrastructures for knowledge exchange in and around a network known as Democracy R&D. This is a network of mini-publics practitioners from around the world with the declared goal of adding momentum to democratic innovation by enhancing translocal connections, community building, and knowledge. We look at how the network is organized, how online communication platforms are installed, and how observatory devices draw dispersed practices together into a shared frame of mutual learning and collective action. How do such practices configure the ways in which knowledge can flow across sites? How do they constitute an instrument space, a translocal assemblage of knowing and doing democracy by means of deliberative mini-publics? Using concepts like scopic media and centers of calculation, we discuss these practices for how they enable and constrain the circulation of know-how, configure processes of mutual learning, shape the translocal innovation process, and thus, at a distance, also prefigure local ways of knowing and doing politics.
Research Interests: Globalization, Ethnography, Spatial Practices, Design for Social Innovation, Political Science, and 15 moreDeliberative Democracy, Technology transfer, Globalization And Postcolonial Studies, Democracy, Public Participation In Governance, Postcolonial translation studies, Social Practice, Praxeology, Translocality, Infrastructure studies, Social Innovation, Cultural Globalization, Assemblage Theory, Democratic innovations, and Science and Technology Studies
Research Interests:
In this chapter, I do two things. First, I briefly reconstruct how political participation becomes technologised and argue that there is a modal shift in how constitutions of democracy are built: from politics to technoscience. I discuss... more
In this chapter, I do two things. First, I briefly reconstruct how political participation becomes technologised and argue that there is a modal shift in how constitutions of democracy are built: from politics to technoscience. I discuss how this modal shift is accompanied by reflexive engagement practices that counter technoscientific closure and seek to open up and repoliticise methods of public participation. Second, I give a more detailed account of a recent interactive assessment exercise on the future development of citizen panels. It was an attempt to apply methodological considerations of constructive technology assessment (CTA) to the ‘social technology’ of participation methods. The chapter discusses how the exercise engages with the innovation of citizen panels, but also how, as an expertly devised method, it may itself be conceived of as further instance of the technoscientisation of governance. In conclusion, I return to the overall innovation dynamics of public participation methods. I show how technoscientisation and reflexive engagement make a precarious balance in coping with ambiguities of innovation, and I briefly discuss what this means for wider areas of ‘social innovation’ and their links with issues of ‘responsible research and innovation’.
Research Interests:
The chapter discusses the politics of experimentation in governance. While experimentation is at the heart of the concept of polycentric governance, it is only weakly developed. A widely held expectation is that polycentric governance... more
The chapter discusses the politics of experimentation in governance. While experimentation is at the heart of the concept of polycentric governance, it is only weakly developed. A widely held expectation is that polycentric governance enhances innovation and learning for the common good, but this rests on naïve assumptions. The literature either assumes experiments to work as neutral tools for testing pre-existing conditions of governing or as a creative process of collectively constructing such condition. In any case, the social process of doing experiments is presupposed to be free and equal. This entails a dangerous myopia with regard to conflict and power. As a starting point for overcoming it we systematically discuss where and how experimentation involves politics. It starts with defining problems and questions for configuring experimental infrastructures, it continues with interactions and the closure of controversies within experimental collectives, and it leads into processes by which locally constructed truths are expanded into wider collective orders, by intertwined processes of building epistemic and political authority. Our conclusions call (a) for carrying out more vigilant research into how experiments are actually done in practice, (b) for drafting a political constitution for governance experiments, and (c) for integrating democratic quality as a key concern into the discourse of polycentric and experimental governance.
Research Interests:
Der Artikel widmet sich der Forschung zu Innovationen in Politik und Governance, verstanden als die aktive Herstellung und Verbreitung von Neuerungen in der Gestaltung kollektiver Ordnungen. Davon ausgehend zeigen wir zunächst, dass sich... more
Der Artikel widmet sich der Forschung zu Innovationen in Politik und Governance, verstanden als die aktive Herstellung und Verbreitung von Neuerungen in der Gestaltung kollektiver Ordnungen. Davon ausgehend zeigen wir zunächst, dass sich in der historischen Rückschau zwei parallele Innovationsdiskurse, einer praxisbezogen und einer analytisch, unterscheiden lassen. Wir stellen dann drei aktuelle Forschungsstränge zu Neuerungsprozessen in Politik und Governance vor. Im Schlussteil identifizieren wir übergreifende Trends in der rezipierten Literatur und Desiderata für zukünftige Forschung.
Research Interests:
The chapter discusses the multiplication of layers of reflexivity in the course of innovation processes. And it discusses different framings that are underlying different kinds of reflexivity, such as epistemic and political. This leads... more
The chapter discusses the multiplication of layers of reflexivity in the course of innovation processes. And it discusses different framings that are underlying different kinds of reflexivity, such as epistemic and political. This leads to a complex entanglement of different forms of reflexivities, as illustrated for the innovation of 'citizen panels' as a particular form of publication participation. Conclusions discuss conceptual implications for understanding innovation dynamics and practical challenges of doing innnovation in a horizon of liquified realities and values through endless spirals of reflexivity.
Research Interests:
Der Beitrag diskutiert die Reflexivität von Innovationen an einem Beispiel aus dem Bereich der Governance-Innovationen: Die Entwicklung und Verbreitung von „Bürgerpanelen“ als ein Format der Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung. Es werden... more
Der Beitrag diskutiert die Reflexivität von Innovationen an einem Beispiel aus dem Bereich der
Governance-Innovationen: Die Entwicklung und Verbreitung von „Bürgerpanelen“ als ein Format der
Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung. Es werden verschiedene Formen von Reflexivität herausgearbeitet, die im
Innovationsprozess zum Tragen kommen. Dafür werden verschiedene Grade und Rahmungen von
Reflexivität unterschieden. Es wird gezeigt, dass Governance-Innovationen bereits kollektive
Ordnungsprozesse im zweiten Grad der Reflexivität sind. Aktivitäten zur konstruktiven Innovations-
Folgenabschätzung für Bürgerpanele werden als Reflexivität im sechsten Grad verortet. In Bezug auf
Rahmungen werden politische und epistemische Reflexivität unterschieden. Es wird gezeigt, wie die
Herstellung neuer Formen von Governance im Wechselspiel von legitimitätsorientierter und
funktionaler Problematisierung eine besondere Dynamik entfaltet. Der Innovationsprozess von
Bürgerpanelen schraubt sich in einer unabgeschlossenen Dialektik politischer und epistemischer
Reflexivitäten in immer weitere Reflexivitätsgrade hinein. Abschließend werden Folgen und praktische
Fragen zum Umgang mit Reflexivität im Innovationsprozess diskutiert.
Governance-Innovationen: Die Entwicklung und Verbreitung von „Bürgerpanelen“ als ein Format der
Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung. Es werden verschiedene Formen von Reflexivität herausgearbeitet, die im
Innovationsprozess zum Tragen kommen. Dafür werden verschiedene Grade und Rahmungen von
Reflexivität unterschieden. Es wird gezeigt, dass Governance-Innovationen bereits kollektive
Ordnungsprozesse im zweiten Grad der Reflexivität sind. Aktivitäten zur konstruktiven Innovations-
Folgenabschätzung für Bürgerpanele werden als Reflexivität im sechsten Grad verortet. In Bezug auf
Rahmungen werden politische und epistemische Reflexivität unterschieden. Es wird gezeigt, wie die
Herstellung neuer Formen von Governance im Wechselspiel von legitimitätsorientierter und
funktionaler Problematisierung eine besondere Dynamik entfaltet. Der Innovationsprozess von
Bürgerpanelen schraubt sich in einer unabgeschlossenen Dialektik politischer und epistemischer
Reflexivitäten in immer weitere Reflexivitätsgrade hinein. Abschließend werden Folgen und praktische
Fragen zum Umgang mit Reflexivität im Innovationsprozess diskutiert.
Policy instruments are tested in various situations across different policy areas and jurisdictions, often accompanied by a promise to develop more effective tools for solving today’s problems. This understanding of policy instruments as... more
Policy instruments are tested in various situations across different policy areas and jurisdictions, often accompanied by a promise to develop more effective tools for solving today’s problems. This understanding of policy instruments as functional tools is widely adopted. Within the ‘Innovation in Governance’ research group we take a different approach. We focus on the social processes by which they are constituted, the formation and activities of actors that come together to support a policy instrument. This allows us to gain insights into the social dynamics, underlying innovation mechanisms and patterns of policy instrument development. The ‘Challenging Futures’ approach is a methodology for exploring the social dynamics of policy design. It is based on the construction of a set of scenarios to provide the basis for a discussion of innovation dynamics among involved actors and for the identification of tensions and critical issues in policy design that were to be more explicitly discussed.
Research Interests:
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... more
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.
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.
Research Interests:
This paper analyses the development of a new policy instrument as an innovation process in governance. Using the innovation journey concept to track the process in which ‘emissions trading’ emerges as a novel configuration in... more
This paper analyses the development of a new policy instrument as an innovation process in
governance. Using the innovation journey concept to track the process in which ‘emissions trading’
emerges as a novel configuration in environmental governance shows how the policy instrument
develops dynamics of its own, partly independently of policy problems and goals. These dynamics cut
across governance domains, from air pollution policy in the USA to climate policy in the European
Union. Interactions across science, policy development and the governance domains in which the
instrument is applied prove to be critical for the transition between phases: from options to first
developments; to experiments with a prototype; further diffusion; and, finally, the formation of a
transnational policy regime. Key factors are openings in existing governance structures, establishment
of linkages with contexts of implementation and the generation of momentum through the ‘carbon
industry’ as an emerging service economy.
governance. Using the innovation journey concept to track the process in which ‘emissions trading’
emerges as a novel configuration in environmental governance shows how the policy instrument
develops dynamics of its own, partly independently of policy problems and goals. These dynamics cut
across governance domains, from air pollution policy in the USA to climate policy in the European
Union. Interactions across science, policy development and the governance domains in which the
instrument is applied prove to be critical for the transition between phases: from options to first
developments; to experiments with a prototype; further diffusion; and, finally, the formation of a
transnational policy regime. Key factors are openings in existing governance structures, establishment
of linkages with contexts of implementation and the generation of momentum through the ‘carbon
industry’ as an emerging service economy.
Research Interests:
This is a cal for papers for a Workshop on "the fabrication of democracy. construction sites of performative political representation" to be held on 5-6 Dec 2019 in Duisburg
Research Interests: Political Sociology, Political Theory, Political Anthropology, Political Science, Performativity, and 10 moreSTS (Anthropology), Social Constructionism/ Constructivism, Social Studies Of Science, Political Representation, Representation, science and technology studies (STS), Authority, Theory of Political Representation, STS/ANT, and Social Studies of Politics
The workshop re-examines the nexus between aesthetics and politics by turning away from their conception as institutionally or communicatively differentiated spheres and instead take a "practice turn" to have a look at what is actually... more
The workshop re-examines the nexus between aesthetics and politics by turning away from their conception as institutionally or communicatively differentiated spheres and instead take a "practice turn" to have a look at what is actually done, and how, and to what effect – both in art, design and aesthetics and in politics, policy-making and governance.
The workshop will be opened with keynotes by Antoine Hennion and Sophia Prinz.
The aim is to further probe and outline a more conceptually refined practice-oriented approach toward the intertwined and reciprocally constitutive relationship between aesthetic and political practices. We hope to learn from concrete empirical examples about a variety of specific ways in which sensorial perceptions and collective subjectivities and agencies are shaped and about how they relate to each other, interact, and co-produce or jointly work to dismantle collectively lived realities. We expect that a focus on sensorial perception, affectivity and aesthetic practice will contribute a novel perspective on the (un)making of collective orders as it traditionally concerns studies of politics, governance and innovation, but where, so far, social order has largely been reduced to institutional, discursive and cognitive dimensions.
The workshop will be opened with keynotes by Antoine Hennion and Sophia Prinz.
The aim is to further probe and outline a more conceptually refined practice-oriented approach toward the intertwined and reciprocally constitutive relationship between aesthetic and political practices. We hope to learn from concrete empirical examples about a variety of specific ways in which sensorial perceptions and collective subjectivities and agencies are shaped and about how they relate to each other, interact, and co-produce or jointly work to dismantle collectively lived realities. We expect that a focus on sensorial perception, affectivity and aesthetic practice will contribute a novel perspective on the (un)making of collective orders as it traditionally concerns studies of politics, governance and innovation, but where, so far, social order has largely been reduced to institutional, discursive and cognitive dimensions.
Research Interests:
A report based on an interactive, anticipatory assessment of the dynamics of governance instruments, 26 April 2013
Research Interests:
A report based on an interactive, anticipatory assessment of the dynamics of governance instruments, 19 April 2013