Archive for the 'Uncategorized' Category



GegenBewegungen. Rechtspopulistische Weltentwürfe wider die offene Gesellschaft. Beitrag zum Männerkongress 2018

Am 21. und 22. September organisierten das Klinische Institut für Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie des Universitätsklinikums Düsseldorf und die Akademie für Psychoanalyse und Psychosomatik Düsseldorf den fünften Männerkongress. Das diesjährige Tagungsthema war MÄNNER. MACHT. THERAPIE.

Im Rahmen des Kongresses wurde ich eingeladen, einen Beitrag zur Frage von Rechtspopulismus und Gegenentwürfen zur offenen Gesellschaft beizusteuern:

Globalisierung, Individualisierung und nicht zuletzt die fortschreitende Digitalisierung führen zu einer zunehmenden Pluralisierung und Fragmentierung von Gesellschaften und zur Auflösung von Identität stiftenden Erzählungen. Besonders davon betroffen sind die hochentwickelten Industrienationen. Seit mindestens 20 Jahren sind in diesen Staaten Gegenbewegungen zu beobachten: Populistische Bewegungen und Parteien aus dem rechten politischen Spektrum bieten alternative Lösungs- und Identitätsmuster an, die geprägt sind durch Eindeutigkeit, Exklusivität, Anti-Elitarismus sowie autoritäre Dominanz- und Überlegenheitsnarrative. Erklärungen für die Erfolge bieten ökonomische Krisentheorien ebenso wie soziokulturelle, politische und psychologische Forschungsansätze. Allein mit Handlungsempfehlungen tut sich die Wissenschaft etwas schwer, da es – nicht zuletzt auch aufgrund sehr heterogener Motive für die Unterstützung populistischer Akteure – nur wenige generalisierbare Strategien gibt. In meinem Beitrag werde ich ausgehend von den gesellschaftlichen Metatrends aufzeigen, wie (rechte) Populismen entlang von reduktionistischen nationalen, autoritären und exklusiven Positionen Gegenpositionen zu pluralistischen, offenen, toleranten Gesellschaften entwerfen und in politische Erfolge ummünzen. Dass sich Populismus und Autoritarismus gegenseitig befördern, zeigt sich auch im „revival“ archaischer und autoritärer Männlichkeit, wie die Erfolge politischer Führer von Trump bis Duterte, von Putin bis Erdogan in unterschiedlicher Weise illustrieren. Doch wie können Strategien gegen Populismus aussehen? Neben sozialer Absicherung dürfte Bewusstseins- und Wahrnehmungsänderungen eine zentrale Rolle im produktiven und demokratischen Umgang mit Populismus zukommen. Ansätze finden sich in der politischen Bildung ebenso wie in konkreten politischen Interventionen, aber auch darüber hinaus. Einige davon werden abschließend vorgestellt.

In Kürze wird der Beitrag online auf der Kongress-Seite zur Verfügung stehen.

For me, democracy is…

In August 2o18, I have presented a paper at a writer’s conference on ““Measuring Understanding of Democracy: Discussing Solutions for Methodological Fallacies” at the Humboldt-Universität in Berlinorganized by Norma Osterberg-Kaufmann, Toralf Stark and Christoph Mohamad-Klotzbach.

In this article, I argue that narrow, standardized, quantitative instruments might miss to assess this broad variety of individual understandings of democracy, as there is a much broader variety than can be measured by standardized tests. I argue that research in understandings of democracy beyond survey research should address four major issues: First, if we use open questions in surveys as well as qualitative methods we need a theoretical and methodological basis on how people construe their basic concepts, or “everyday life philosophy”. Phenomenology offers basic theoretic and methodological assumptions that can be used for this purpose and is outlined. Rooted in a Schutzian phenomenological perspective and empirical insight of 389 qualitative episodic interviews, we argue that developing more sophisticated instruments to assess understandings of democracy in large-n studies can only be derived from and complemented by open, qualitative assessments. Second, I argue that simply asking for understandings of democracy may lead to a confusion of concepts, as people often compound the meaning of democracy with other issues. This should be considered carefully if one investigates in understandings of democracy. Third, I advocate a qualitative multi-dimensional analysis that separates democracy, politics/polity and actual use of democracy. This can be used to develop a typology of individual, but collectively shared, political lifeworlds. Based on two qualitative studies in Baden-Wuerttemberg I find three groups of life worlds – distant, delegative, and participatory – with different patterns and concepts of Democracy and Politics, as well as different levels and forms of participation. Finally, I argue that insights from this research could be used to develop a comprehensive instrument to assess the variety of understandings of democracies in a more comprehensive way.

If you are interested in more information, please contact me.

Local Politics in a comparative Perspective – Petrozavodsk and Tuebingen

Most recently I have published an edited volume on Local Politics in a comparative perspective together with my collegue Elena Ivanovna Chernenkova from Petrozavodsk State University. It brings together case study and comparative articles on aspects of local politics in both cities that were intensly discussed in a workshop in October 2016 and are the groundwork for further cooperation.

  • Rolf Frankenberger & Elena Chernenkova (eds.): Local Politics in a Comparative Perspective – The Cases of Petrozavodsk and Tübingen. Baden-Baden: Nomos. 272 pp., ISBN 978-3-8487-3892-2

All Politics is local. This is at least what former Congressman and US Speaker of the House of Representatives Tip O’Neill is said to have stated referring to the principle that successful politicians have to stay connected to their constituency and to the problems, interests and opinions of their local electorate.[1] But, as Peter Allen and David Cutts ask, “what do we mean by local?”.[2] Can we reduce the term local to the rootedness of national politics in the grass of constituencies, communities, or municipalities? This might be one way to define it. One could also argue that even though all politics is local, local politics is where the people are. This shifts the focus of analysis away from the national level of the political system towards the regional or even local level of governance, government, politics and participation. There are manifold studies dealing with political phenomena on the local level in different disciplines from political science to public administration, from geography to ethnography, from economics to architecture. Even though probably addressing the same entities, the foci of interest slightly shift: Whereas Urban Studies[3] mainly focus on development and planning of cities, Local and Municipal Government Studies highlight the importance of public administrations and governmental institutions in local politics.[4] Local Governance Studies instead broaden the perspective of politics by including private, business and not-for business actors in their analysis of political decision making.[5] And there are also different perspectives on actors in local politics. Whereas some studies focus on political elites, others take a grassroots perspective on citizen government, civic participation, and social engagement.

Starting from the notion that local self-government is one of the core principles for the political organization of municipalities across Europe[6], this volume takes a slightly different perspective, that in a way combines several aspects of the fields of study mentioned above. Municipalities are the venue for citizens to directly experience politics, and they also constitute the playground for diverse actors from business, civil society, administration and politics in the political arena. Thus, one could argue that local politics work similarly irrespective of cultural, political and social environments, as they are driven by local needs and demands. This narrow perspective on local politics seems to be somewhat misleading, given the fact that the local political level of municipalities is embedded in multi-level governance arrangements and political institutions. And they are embedded in different settings of (political) culture and society.

If we then want to understand local politics, we should widen the perspective of analysis and treat regional belonging, institutional settings and multi-level governance at least as potential determinants of variation. As research-literature doing or dealing with inter- and cross-regional comparisons suggests, these systemic environments still do have impact on local self-government[7]: They might constrain political actors and shape political processes in very specific ways. Examining two cities – Petrozavodsk and Tübingen – in comparative case studies and from a comparative perspective, social scientists and practitioners in politics and civil society from both municipalities contributing to the volume analyze how local politics and political culture are shaped in multi-level governance, how state-society relations and civic participation work in different systemic settings.

The volume comprises six thematic sections, each focusing on a different aspect of local politics. Starting from more general theoretical and methodological issues in section I, we investigate in political culture, identity and public opinion in section II . The articles in section III deal with social innovation as a mechanism and driving force of change and development in municipalities. In sections IV, V, and VI we broaden the perspectives, starting from political participation in local politics, passing on to state-society relations and NGOs and ending up with international relations in local politics.

[1]     Cf. Gelman, Andrew 2011: All Politics is Local? The debate and the Graphs. FiveThrityEight, 03.01.2011. https://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/03/all-politics-is-local-the-debate-and-the-graphs/ (01.08.2017).

[2]     Allen, Peter/Cutts, David 2014: All Politics is local – but what do we actually mean by local. Political Insight, 17.02.2014. https://www.psa.ac.uk/insight-plus/blog/all-politics-local-%E2%80%93-what-do-we -actually-mean-local (01.08.2017).

[3]     For an overview on Urban Studies cf. Paddison, Ronan (ed.) 2001: Handbook of Urban Studies, London.

[4]     For an overview on different aspects of local politics cf. Haider-Markel, Donald 2014: The Oxford Handbook of State and Local Government, Oxford; Baldersheim, Harald/Wollmann, Hellmut (eds.) 2006: The Comparative Study of Local Government and Politics: Overview and Synthesis, Leverkusen.

[5]     For trends and the shift from urban studies to urban governance studies, cf. McCann, Eugene 2017: Governing urbanism: Urban governance studies 1.0, 2.0 and beyond, in: Urban Studies 54 (2), pp. 312-326; Pierre, Jon 2005: Comparative Urban Governance-Uncovering Complex Causalities, in: Urban Affairs Review 40, pp. 446–462.  For shifts from Government to Governance, cf. Andrew, Caroline/Goldsmith, Michael 1998: From Local Government to Local Governance and beyond?, in: International Political Science review 19, pp. 101-117; John, Peter 2001: Local Governance in Western Europe, London. An overview on Governance: Bevir, Marc (ed.) 2010: The Sage handbook of governance, London.

[6]     Local self-government is codified in German Basic Law (Art. 28, 2.1) as well as in the Constitution of the Russian Federation (Art.12, 1+2). In addition, both countries have ratified the European Charter on Local Self-Government in 1988, and 1998 respectively.

[7]     Cf. Ahram, Ariel I. 2011: The theory and method of comparative area studies”, in: Qualitative Research 11(1), pp. 69-90; Basedau, Matthias/Köllner, Patrick 2007: Area studies, comparative area studies, and the study of politics: Context, substance, and methodological challenges, in: Zeitschrift für vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 1(1), pp. 105-124; Frankenberger, Rolf/Kiener, Isabel 2015: Kommunale Politik im Wandel: Petrosawodsk und Tübingen, Tübingen; Frankenberger, Rolf/Graf, Patricia 2013: Von Mangos und Pflaumen. Herausforderungen interregional vergleichender Fallstudien, Paper presented at the Conference „Politik, Region(en) und Kultur in der vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft“ der Sektion Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft der DVPW in Leipzig, 09.-11.10.2013.

Bürgerbeteiligung planen – Methodenhandbuch Bürgerbeteiligung

Bürgerbeteiligung gilt in der wissenschaftlichen Diskussion um die Krise der repräsentativen Demokratie als ein zentraler Schlüssel zur Revitalisierung der Demokratie. Darüber hinaus zeigen zahlreiche Untersuchungen, dass gut gemachte Bürgerbeteiligung die Zufriedenheit der Bürgerinnen und Bürger mit politischen Prozessen und Entscheidungen verbessert.

Um Beteiligungsprozesse planen, entwickeln und durchführen zu können, benötigt man ein fundiertes Wissen über Methoden der Bürgerbeteiligung. Dieses Jahr erschienen sind zwei Bände eines fünfbändigen„Methodenhandbuch Bürgerbeteiligung“, das im Kontext der Akademie für Lokale Demokratie e.V. (ALD) (www.lokale-demokratie.de) entwickelt wurde.

Den HerausgeberInnen Peter Patze-Diordiychuk, Jürgen Smettan, Paul Renner und Tanja Föhr ist es ein zentrales Anliegen, „den gesamten Beteiligungsprozess in den Blick zu nehmen, indem ein breites Set an Methoden vorgestellt wird, die von der Auftragsklärung bis zur Ergebnis- und Lerntransfersicherung reichen“ (Bd. 1,S. 18).

Band 1 stellt Methoden der Planung und Auftragsklärung vor, insbesondere der Erhebungs- und Analysetechniken. Band 2 (vgl. die Rezension) beschäftigt sich mit Beteiligungsformaten und stellt 20 Methoden vor. Die geplanten Bände 3 (Online-Beteiligungsverfahren), 4 (Werkzeuge zur Lern- und Transfersicherung) und 5 (Moderationstechniken) sind für die nächsten drei Jahre angekündigt.

Literatur

Peter Patze-Diordiychuk, Jürgen Smettan, Paul Renner, Tanja Föhr (Hrsg.): Beteiligungsprozesse erfolgreich planen. Methodenhandbuch Bürgerbeteiligung, Band 1: oekom Verlag (München) 2017. 205 Seiten. ISBN 978-3-86581-833-1. 34,95 EUR.

Peter Patze-Diordiychuk, Jürgen Smettan, Paul Renner, Tanja Föhr (Hrsg.): Passende Beteiligungsformate wählen. Methodenhandbuch Bürgerbeteiligung. Band 2. oekom Verlag (München) 2017. 364 Seiten. ISBN 978-3-86581-853-9. D: 34,95 EUR, A: 36,00 EUR.

Lesen Sie die vollständigen Rezensionen zu beiden Bänden bei Socialnet unter:

 

 

State Councillor for Civil Society and Participation nominates Scientific Advisory Board

The State Councillor for Civil Society and Participation, Baden-Württemberg, Gisela Erler, has nominated a scientific advisory board that shall accompany the process of further strengthening citizen participation in political processes.

Erler argues that during her work as State Councillor, she alway sought and found inspiriation in the social sciences and wants to intensify exchange and cooperation between science and politics. The advisory board will work on citizen participation, direct democracy, social cohesion, european integration and political and civic education.

170323_Wissenschaftlicher_Beirat_fuer_Zivilgesellschaft_und_Buergerbeteiligung_01

The advisory board consists of fifteen scholars from political science, communication science, management sciences and other social sciences. These are

  • Prof. Dr. Gabriele Abels, University of Tuebingen
  • Prof. Dr. André Bächtiger, University of Stuttgart
  •  Prof. Dr. Frank Brettschneider, University Hohenheim
  • Prof. Dr. Ulrich Eith, University of Freiburg / Studienhaus Wiesneck
  • Prof. Dr. Adalbert Evers, University of Heidelberg, CSI
  • Dr. Rolf Frankenberger, University of Tuebingen,
  • Prof. Dr. Manuela Glaab, University Koblenz-Landau,
  • Prof. Dr. Cordula Kropp, University of Stuttgart
  • Prof. Dr. Arne Pautsch, University of Applied Sciences – Public Administration and Finance Ludwigsburg
  • Prof. Dr. Paul-Stefan Roß, Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University Stuttgart
  • Prof. Dr. Roland Roth, University of Applied Sciences Magdeburg-Stendal, Centre for Corporate Citizenship Deutschland
  • Prof. Dr. Karen Schönwälder, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity
  • Dr. Uwe Serdült, Zentrum für Demokratie Aarau, Switzerland
  • Prof. Dr. Angelika Vetter, University of Stuttgart
  • Prof. Dr. Hans-Georg Wehling, University of Tübingen

Categories