Suchergebnisse

Politicisation, in a broad and basic understanding, means to turn something – an issue, an institution, a policy – that previously was not a subject to political action into something that now is subject to political action. So far, most definitions of the concept would agree. But besides this basic approach, there is much discussion: Politicisation is a concept that is currently much used in the social sciences, and also a concept that is contested in its definitions and understandings. Several paths and subdisciplines contribute to the debate, but they are not necessarily connected to one another. Political theory or political economy discusses politicisation and also what can be termed the counter-concept, depoliticisation, theoretically and often with a normative background, whereas comparative politics and EU studies have increasingly taken to deliver empirical studies on the politicisation of the European Union. These latter studies most often rely on the indicators of salience, actor involvement and polarisation in and of political debates and processes. International Relations, last not least, increasingly discusses the politicisation of international politics and international organisations. ; peerReviewed

Cover -- Half Title -- Dedication -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table of Contents -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- 1 Trade Unions and Politics -- 2 Miners and Politics -- 3 A Study of the 1984/5 Miners' Strike and its effects upon Politicisation -- 4 The Role of the Police -- 5 The Role of the Media -- 6 The Role of the Women -- 7 This particular study - Hemsworth -- 8 Conclusion -- Bibliography -- Appendices

Politicisation, in a broad and basic understanding, means to turn something – an issue, an institution, a policy – that previously was not a subject to political action into something that now is subject to political action. So far, most definitions of the concept would agree. But besides this basic approach, there is much discussion: Politicisation is a concept that is currently much used in the social sciences, and also a concept that is contested in its definitions and understandings. Several paths and subdisciplines contribute to the debate, but they are not necessarily connected to one another. Political theory or political economy discusses politicisation and also what can be termed the counter-concept, depoliticisation, theoretically and often with a normative background, whereas comparative politics and EU studies have increasingly taken to deliver empirical studies on the politicisation of the European Union. These latter studies most often rely on the indicators of salience, actor involvement and polarisation in and of political debates and processes. International Relations, last not least, increasingly discusses the politicisation of international politics and nternational organisations. This is why the contributions in this Critical Exchange bring together differing strands of the debate and aim to rethink politicisation in both theoretical and empirical understandings and usages. Kari Palonen starts the exchange with an overview on historical usages of the concept. Claudia Wiesner follows with an approach to challenges and possible pathways of concept specification. Veith Selk discusses politicisation and its linkages to populism. Niilo Kauppi and Hans-Jörg Trenz, as well as Claire Dupuy and Virginie Van Ingelgom, critically regard the state of the art in studying EU politicisation and depoliticisation. Philip Liste closes with a discussion of the linkages between the concepts of juridification, depoliticisation, and politicisation in transnational politics. Taken together, the contributions raise a number of crucial issues in the academic debate on politicisation: the conception of politics and the political that politicisation relates to, its linkage to depoliticisation and juridification, and the relation of politicisation and populism.

Politicisation, in a broad and basic understanding, means to turn something – an issue, an institution, a policy – that previously was not a subject to political action into something that now is subject to political action. So far, most definitions of the concept would agree. But besides this basic approach, there is much discussion: Politicisation is a concept that is currently much used in the social sciences, and also a concept that is contested in its definitions and understandings. Several paths and subdisciplines contribute to the debate, but they are not necessarily connected to one another. Political theory or political economy discusses politicisation and also what can be termed the counter-concept, depoliticisation, theoretically and often with a normative background, whereas comparative politics and EU studies have increasingly taken to deliver empirical studies on the politicisation of the European Union. These latter studies most often rely on the indicators of salience, actor involvement and polarisation in and of political debates and processes. International Relations, last not least, increasingly discusses the politicisation of international politics and nternational organisations. This is why the contributions in this Critical Exchange bring together differing strands of the debate and aim to rethink politicisation in both theoretical and empirical understandings and usages. Kari Palonen starts the exchange with an overview on historical usages of the concept. Claudia Wiesner follows with an approach to challenges and possible pathways of concept specification. Veith Selk discusses politicisation and its linkages to populism. Niilo Kauppi and Hans-Jörg Trenz, as well as Claire Dupuy and Virginie Van Ingelgom, critically regard the state of the art in studying EU politicisation and depoliticisation. Philip Liste closes with a discussion of the linkages between the concepts of juridification, depoliticisation, and politicisation in transnational politics. Taken together, the contributions raise a number of crucial issues in the academic debate on politicisation: the conception of politics and the political that politicisation relates to, its linkage to depoliticisation and juridification, and the relation of politicisation and populism.

Understanding politics as a contingent and controversial activity, politicisation refers to those activities that create or make visible the political quality in the phenomena in question. Parliamentarisation is a distinct strategy of politicisation. In this chapter, parliament refers to a certain procedural and institutional ideal type of acting politically. The parliamentary way of politicising acting and thinking forms a Gedankenbild, a mental image. It is an ideal type that one-sidedly accentuates and intensifies the political way of thinking. The parliamentary way of proceeding politically transcends the given polity: 'parliament' is not primarily a parliament 'of' a unit, such as the nation state, but concerns any polity level, from city councils to the worldwide institutions. The chapter discusses different analytically and historically relevant dimensions of parliamentary politicisation. ; peerReviewed

This chapter analyses the actual speech acts of politicisation among parliamentarians, which also makes it possible to set the current debates among European Union (EU) scholars in a wider context. My aim is to sketch a scheme for distinguishing different aspects of politicisation, referring to concepts of politics (sphere or activity and its specific aspects), to the politicisation of topics or persons, to its time dimensions (past, present, and future), to different activities of politicisation (adversaries, unintended changes, the actors themselves), as well as to opposing evaluations of politicisation. The data set consists of the plenary debates of the UK House of Commons, the (West) German Bundestag, and the European Parliament (EP), in all of which a great variety of both interpretations and evaluations of the speech acts of politicisation can be found. ; peerReviewed

"Why are migration policies sometimes heavily contested and high on the political agenda? And why do they, at other moments and in other countries, hardly lead to much public debate? The entrance and settlement of migrants in Western Europe has prompted various political reactions. In some countries anti-immigration parties have gained substantial public support while in others migration policies have been hardly controversial. The Politicisation of Migration examines the differences between seven Western European countries by developing a conceptual framework to empirically explain patterns of politicisation and de-politicisation. The analyses show that over the past decade immigration has been increasingly defined in socio-cultural terms and that it has been receiving less political attention since the economic crisis started in 2007. This book also looks at the role of mainstream parties and political actors in the process of politicisation, and demonstrates how the role of 'challengers' is more limited than often assumed. Contributing to literatures on migration, party politics and agenda-setting, the book will be of interest to students and scholars in the fields of politics and migration studies"--

This research focuses on two trends in the field of Confucian studies, namely, the politicisation and de-politicisation of Confucianism in contemporary China. Four intellectuals-Yu Dan, Jiang Qing, Kang Xiaoguang and Liu Qiliang-are selected as the representative intellectuals of these two trends. Under the increasingly firm control from the CCP government, the connection between these two trends indicates that they both have the same potential effect: by producing the knowledge or the "truth" demanded by power, the cultural leadership of the CCP government is thus consolidated and the current regime is stabilised. The "knowledge" created by the intellectuals is designed to support the exercise of power and to provide a better environment for the exercise of that power. In return, the "knowledge" or the "truth" produced by the intellectuals makes the intellectuals themselves become a component of the power networks and part of the power chain. (Issues Stud/GIGA)

Growing government intervention in the international currency markets has distorted incentives and disguised risks. Rodney Atkinson, formerly an economist with Grindlay's Bank, argues that increasing state interference has led bankers to respond to political, not commercial, signals. Many bankers are now rewarded according to their ability to 'work the system' rather than for economic expertise.

Economists and historians debate the argument on evidence that doctors outmanoeuvred working people by Dr David Green in Economic Affairs Vol. 5 No. 1,'Doctors Against the People'.

The functional pressures shaping policy design may be disrupted in salient policies and politicised contexts, according to recent postfunctionalist/new intergovernmentalist theories. We contrast these expectations with those derived from liberal intergovernmentalism and neofunctionalism by analysing the reforms of the European Union economic governance. Its Council-centred enforcement, which has been a dominant feature until the euro crisis, despite noncompliance, does not sit comfortably with traditional theories but can be explained by policy salience and implementation uncertainties. Instead, the emphasis that traditional approaches assign to noncompliance, commitment problems, threats of exclusion and veto, issue linkages, path dependencies and supranational decision-making, allows to adequately account for the overall direction of reforms toward more tightening and delegation, notwithstanding the pooled enforcement in recent ancillary measures. Postfunctionalist theories overall fall short in highly politicised contexts, exactly where they should do most of the explaining. We conclude discussing politicisation as a strategic elite response.

Orientation: Employees are a source of competitive advantage for organisations and human resource management seek to promote employee efficiency. One of the tools organisations utilise to achieve this goal is performance appraisals. Research purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the weaknesses in performance appraisal and to determine whether it is politicised in the North West Department of Health and Social Development in South Africa. Motivation for study: Many organisations either ignore the existence of politics in the appraisal process or assume that its impact can be minimised if they refine their appraisal instruments. Executives admit that, in appraising others, they often intentionally avoid meeting the goal of accuracy in favour of achieving goals that have more to do with exercising discretion and maintaining departmental effectiveness. Ironically, these same executives lament that the appraisals they receive often do not accurately represent their abilities and performance (Gioia & Longenecker, 1994). Research approach, design and method: Self-administered questionnaires were used as a means of collecting data and analysis was done through the use of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Main findings: The results of the study showed that respondents believe that performance appraisals are highly politicised. Practical/managerial implications: If used effectively, performance appraisals may improve employee productivity and efficiency as well as motivation and performance. However, if performance appraisal is perceived as unfair and political, it can diminish rather than enhance employee attitudes and performance. Contribution: Amongst others, it is recommended that managers should consider separating assessment for development and assessment for rewards.