No abstract

This article explains how microcredit as a policy idea has been institutionalized at the transnational level, and what role strategic actors play in the institutional change and governance of microcredit. Special attention is given to three dominant actors, the Grameen Bank, the World Bank, and SKS Microfinance. To explain the emergence of microcredit as a transnational policy idea this article explores the relations between theories of institutional change and Rosenau's concept of spheres of authority.

Motivation The idea of partnerships in international development originated in the 1970s and was canonized in the rhetoric of the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, but such partnerships have been criticized for their inability to create ownership and capacity changes in practice. Purpose The article presents a case study of a partnership between a Northern NGO (NNGO) and a Southern NGO (SNGO) that aims to enhance capacity development. Approach and methods While acknowledging the critiques of partnerships, we ask how a praxis‐informed analysis of the SNGO–NNGO partnership might create a basis for capacity development. A case study of an NNGO–SNGO partnership that seeks to enhance capacity development. Results We argue that the potential for capacity development through partnerships can be enhanced by using a pragmatically oriented approach that renders visible power relations and values differences between donors and recipients. Conclusion The case study has implications for partnerships in practice. As partnerships mature, organizational and strategic complexity increase the need for phronetic praxis, or practical wisdom, rather than just sticking to managerialism. An approach to capacity development that is less power‐blind, and more aware of value differences, could enhance the potential for capacity development. Policy implications Our study contributes to the pragmatic tradition in partnerships in development, suggesting that the praxis approach can be a way to enhance and deal with opportunities for capacity development.

No abstract

The ‘fourth age’ of political communication is emerging. In the fourth age the logics of media and digitization shapes the public sphere, because algorithms and polarized drama increasingly determine what we become aware of in digital and mass media. The result may very well be a less informed public sphere. The emerging class of policy professionals has the opportunity to mix the logics of mediatization and digitization. While such a mix may very well lead to democratic decay, based on elitism, it may also hold fruitful potentials for a more democratic and ethical type of political communication, called phronetic political communication.