Suchergebnisse

This article theorizes how public performances matter in international negotiations. Studies of international negotiations are predominantly focused on power-political instruments in use around the negotiating table. I argue that public communication cannot be dismissed as cheap talk but that it plays a constitutive role in and on international negotiations. Contributing to the international relations (IR) literature on negotiations, the article suggests an orientation toward an increasingly important aspect of international negotiations in a hypermediated world political context, namely public performances that challenge the distinction between domestic signaling and claim-making toward negotiating parties. Hypermediated negotiations mean that much of what goes on in IR is spread to large audiences in new and emerging digital sites in near real time. Actors use public performances to define and legitimize their desired visions for negotiating outcomes. As public performances, these are power-political instruments in and of themselves, part of the array of tactics that states turn to when competing for influence in international negotiations. The theorization is illustrated with an example from the UK–EU Brexit negotiations. The illustration is a qualitative Twitter analysis that shows the performative toolbox in use, as well as the importance of public performances themselves in the endgame of the Brexit negotiations.

Public Performance Budgeting- Front Cover; Half Title; Title Page; Copyright Page; Contents; About the Authors; List of Illustrations; Box; Figures; Tables; Acknowledgements; Chapter 1: One Mission Shared by Governments; Introduction; What is Performance Budgeting?; Ubiquity of Practice: Who Engages Performance Budgeting?; Why Focus on State Juvenile Justice Services and Programming?; Foundations of a Research Strategy: Our Framework; Research Methods and Chapter Sequence; Conclusion; Notes; References; Chapter 2: Foundations for Performance Budgeting; Introduction

This is an article about performance in government. It considers how performance, in a variety of senses, has become a dominant theme in probably the majority of OECD countries (although not all). It asks some fundamental questions about what is 'performance' in, and of, government by reflecting on what governments do in terms of the policy instruments available to them. It looks briefly at how developments in the use and understanding of 'performance' concepts (and related issues of quality) have been changing in the private sector - especially the emergence of new holistic models of performance or 'balanced scorecards'. It discusses how far these are relevant to public services performance, concluding that while there is much to learn there are also key areas of difference between 'performance' in the private and public sectors. Drawing on the evident strengths of the more holistic models developed in the private sector, it outlines a similar approach - a balanced framework - for public services, but one which takes account of the constraints and purposes of public service - the Public Service Excellence Model.

Please join us for a panel discussing the Aereo case and the public performance right of copyright law. Our distinguished panelists are as follows: Peter DiCola is an associate professor of law at Northwestern University. He received both his J.D. and his Ph.D. in economics from the University of Michigan. His dissertation was about regulation of the radio and music industries. While in graduate school, he worked with the Future of Music Coalition as director of economic analysis from 2000–2004 and served as full-time research director from 2005–2006; he remains on the organization's board of directors. After law school, he served as a law clerk to the Honorable Thomas L. Ambro of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. He is the co-author of Creative License: The Law and Culture of Digital Sampling with Kembrew McLeod (University of Iowa), published by Duke University Press in 2011. His recent work concerns the regulation of digital music services and the ways musicians earn revenue. Steve Effros has been deeply involved in telecommunications policy and practice for the past 40 years. Following stints at ABC and NBC Network News and The New York Times, Effros graduated with honors from NYU Law School ('70) and became part of the five-person FCC legal team which drafted the 1972 set of original comprehensive federal rules regulating cable television. He participated in the negotiation and drafting of portions of the comprehensive Copyright Act of 1976, the Cable Communications Acts of 1984 and 1992, and the Telecommunications Act of 1996. He has been involved in the legislative and regulatory policy development of cable and broadband technology ever since. Steve spent five years at the FCC as an attorney-advisor and then became partner in the telecommunications Law Firm of Brown & Effros. In 1976 he became head of the Washington, DC based association representing independent cable television operators, The Cable Telecommunications Association (CATA). He was President of the association for ...

"A deep and wide-ranging exploration of relationships among public performance genres and the underlying political motivations they share. Illustrating the connections among three themes--the political, carnivalesque, and ritualesque--this volume provides rich and comprehensive insight into public performance as an act of power assertion"--Provided by publisher