This paper presents an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of using non-compliance procedures versus adjudication pursuant to compulsory dispute settlement clauses under multilateral environmental agreements. Advice on the... more
This paper presents an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of using non-compliance procedures versus adjudication pursuant to compulsory dispute settlement clauses under multilateral environmental agreements.
Advice on the choice of mechanism is presented to States based on five factors: jurisdictional basis, ease of access, expertise and independence of the board, the range of measures available and the degree of enforcement possible.
Devolved government has had many consequences for Scotland’s political landscape. Scotland has become a locus of policy-making again with its own political universe, encompassing political parties, single-issue interest groups and a... more
Devolved government has had many consequences for Scotland’s political landscape. Scotland has become a locus of policy-making again with its own political universe, encompassing political parties, single-issue interest groups and a number of a certain breed of policy research institutes, broadly called “think-tanks”. This article will describe this unexplored Scottish think-tank landscape within a framework of three dimensions – organisation and resources; goals and ideology and integration into the policy community. Four think-tanks, based in Scotland and with a focus on Scottish policy, will be studied. The aim of the paper is to offer a conceptual approach to these think-tanks by using a four-fold typology and a policy network approach.
"Abstract A plethora of institutional forms has emerged whose remit is to link climate change science topolicy-making. These can be understood as boundary organisations where science and politics meet and intertwine. This article... more
"Abstract
A plethora of institutional forms has emerged whose remit is to link climate change science topolicy-making. These can be understood as boundary organisations where science and politics meet and intertwine. This article examines the role of boundary organisations in the production and social status of climate change knowledge. A multi-level conceptual model is outlined which demonstrates how context is crucial to understanding the operation and impact of boundary organisations. The framework is applied to analyse climate governance boundary arrangements at the international
level and a number of national contexts. In the framing years of the global climate change issue, IPPC and other (inter)national boundary organisations were set up for addressing a (moderately) structured problem, instead of geared to an as yet full-blown wicked problem. IPPC was in fact designed as ‘certification machine’ and ‘scientific trigger’ to depoliticize a multilateral international agreement and its supposedly smooth implementation. Boundary arrangements at national levels
showed cognitive and institutional isomorphic responses; the highly instrumental nature of boundary arrangements, organisations and projects stands out. However, it is becoming increasingly apparent that ‘one size fits all’ policy instruments such as Kyoto may not be the best mechanism for
dealing with climate change. We therefore end with a call for boundary work in climate change governance to provide pluralized strategic advice, conceptual clarification, and critical
deconstruction of issues of uncertainty and normativity. In order to open up debate again it should be more problem- than solution-orientation and influence different agendas in different parts of the world."
This dissertation – in its limited scope – seeks to explore the blurred boundary between Indian politics and science on qualitative sociological grounds by studying the social persuasive dimensions of social-scientific advisory reports.... more
This dissertation – in its limited scope – seeks to explore the blurred boundary between Indian politics and science on qualitative sociological grounds by studying the social persuasive dimensions of social-scientific advisory reports. The underlying theoretical premise hereby is that "[t]he legitimacy of public reason depends not only on its logic and propositional content but also on the performance of reasoning in the public square" (Jasanoff 2012, 9). My approach mainly utilizes an interpretative framework and thematic document analysis. It centers on the analytical concepts of substantial argumentation (Toulmin 2003), inscription (Latour and Woolgar 1986), and stage management (Goffman 1959). Furthermore, I seek methodological advice from Bruno Latour's – Science in Action (1987) – and Stephen Hilgartner's – Science on Stage (2000) – microsociological attempts to understand the intended textual and contextual rhetoric that scientific texts and advisory reports perform. The ensuing close reading and the subsequent qualitative data analysis is complemented by the construction of thematic networks that reveal the argumentative multimodality of the advisory documents.
Four “hot spots” to engage with advisory practice in politics are presented. Any approach should be aware of a rich legacy and long history of advisers and political decision-makers. Secondly, the predisposition and role of advice-takers... more
Four “hot spots” to engage with advisory practice in politics are presented. Any approach should be aware of a rich legacy and long history of advisers and political decision-makers. Secondly, the predisposition and role of advice-takers is key to understanding advice. A third concern are the rivalries between advice types of and advisers, particularly conflicts between political and policy advisers. Fourthly, the identity of political advice is changing with the advent of advocates who insist that their counsel may be interest-driven but nevertheless good advice, too.
DEUTSCH Vier Aspekte der Beratungspraxis in der Politik werden thematisiert. Jede Annäherung sollte sich des reichen Erbes und der langen Geschichte von Beratern und politischen Entscheidungsträgern bewusst sein. Zweitens sind die Einstellungen und Rollen der Ratnehmer ein Schlüssel zum Verständnis der Beratung. Ein dritter Aspekt sind Reivalitäten zwischen Beratungs- und Beratertypen, insbesondere Konflikte zwischen prozessualen und inhaltlichen Politikberatern. Viertens verändert sich die Identität der Politikberatung durch die Ankunft von Interessenvertretern, die darauf bestehen, dass ihr Rat zwar interessengetrieben ist, aber doch gute Politikberatung sein kann.
ZUM BUCH: Lobbying, Kampagnenberatung, professionelles Kommunikationsmanagement und zusammenfassend Politikberatung sind spätestens seit dem Bundestagswahlkampf 1998 und dem Aufblühen der Beraterlandschaft in Berlin heiß diskutierte und... more
ZUM BUCH: Lobbying, Kampagnenberatung, professionelles Kommunikationsmanagement und zusammenfassend Politikberatung sind spätestens seit dem Bundestagswahlkampf 1998 und dem Aufblühen der Beraterlandschaft in Berlin heiß diskutierte und umstrittene Themen. Mit dem vorliegenden Buch kommen erstmals drei Personengruppen zu Wort, die am unmittelbarsten an diesen neuen Entwicklungen beteiligt und am besten über sie informiert sind: aktive Spitzenpolitiker, Politikberater und Wissenschaftler. Ihre Fachbeiträge decken insgesamt drei Themenkomplexe ab, die sich ergänzen und zu einem Gesamtbild zusammenfügen: die Entwicklung der Politikberatung in der Bundesrepublik, ihre Inhalte und schließlich die unterschiedlichen Kanäle und Wege, über die sich Berater und Beratene treffen.
Chapter questions if the contemporary metaphors used to describe IR's relation with its environment are adequate in the light of an upcoming knowledge society. An alternative vocabulary is developed based on actor network theory.
This article looks at UK-based think-tanks and their communicative and cooperative networks with other actors in Britain and beyond. Which institutions and people do British think-tanks talk to most to exert influence on domestic public... more
This article looks at UK-based think-tanks and their communicative and cooperative networks with other actors in Britain and beyond. Which institutions and people do British think-tanks talk to most to exert influence on domestic public policy? What forms do such communications take? What are British think-tanks' objectives for cooperation with non-UK organisations? This article is based on a survey with analysts at British think-tanks that was conducted in 2012. The data suggests that while British think-tanks communicate and co-operate intensively with some actors within Britain, contacts and cooperation with organisations outside the UK are rather lacklustre. Particular actors are more important for advocacy think-tanks than they are for academic think-tanks; some actors have very little importance for either type.
Bioethicists sometimes defend compromise positions, particularly when they enter debates on applied topics that have traditionally been highly polarised, such as those regarding abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research.... more
Bioethicists sometimes defend compromise positions, particularly when they enter debates on applied topics that have traditionally been highly polarised, such as those regarding abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research. However, defending compromise positions is often regarded with a degree of disdain. Many are intuitively attracted to the view that it is almost always problematic to defend compromise positions, in the sense that we have a significant moral reason not to do so. In this paper we consider whether this common sense view can be given a principled basis. We first show how existing explanations for the problematic nature of compromise fall short of vindicating the common sense view, before offering our own explanation, which, we claim, comes closer to vindicating that view. We argue that defending a compromise will typically have two epistemic costs: it will corrupt attempts to use the claims of ethicists as testimonial evidence, and it will undermine standards that are important to making epistemic progress in ethics. We end by suggesting that the epistemic costs of compromise could be reduced by introducing a stronger separation between ethical debate aimed at fulfilling the epistemic role of ethics, and ethical debate that aims to directly produce good policy or practice.
