‚Dispositif turn’ und Foucaultsche Politikanalyse – Reflektionen zur Dispositivanalyse am Beispiel des Politikfeldes Wald

Winkel, Georg

doi:10.1007/978-3-531-94260-5_10

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The public debate consists only of the statements of different actors in public. In contrast to the theoretical concept of discourse (Leipold 2014;Winkel 2013;Winkel et al 2011;Arts et al 2009;Hajer 2009;Kleinschmit et al 2009) the debate is restricted to formulated arguments. The debate does not determine how these arguments are related to the intended actions of the actors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fragmented national public media debate on international forest issues: a case study of Germany

Logmani¹,

Krott²,

Gießen³

2016

Can. J. For. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past two decades, a number of international forest-related policies have evolved at the global and regional levels. The elements of this International Forest Regime Complex, however, are not equally relevant to all countries. This study analyzes the main actors’ positions in the public media debate in Germany and identifies links to the interests of the actors. First, the study explores the international regime related forest issues. A qualitative content analysis of the public media debate in one high-quality newspaper and in internet sources of relevant state and private actors analyzes the arguments of these actors in the issues. The results show that the debate of international forestry issues is fragmented and conflicting in Germany and that the conflict between use and protection structures in the public media debate is not supported by the data. Drivers of conflicting arguments are mainly associations representing protection, as well as user interests. The ministries avoid confrontation in public. Alliances between public agencies and lobby groups are seldom. Due to the strategic use of the public media, the debate does not indicate very well the existing conflicts about the main issues of the international forest regime in Germany.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fragmented national public media debate on international forest issues: a case study of Germany

Logmani¹,

Krott²,

Gießen³

2016

Can. J. For. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Keller, for instance, argues: “all discourse‐focused approaches [are] itself a discourse about discourses, which follows its own discourse production rules, ways of enabling, and disciplining” (Keller, , p. 73; cf. Fischer & Forester, ; Memmler & Winkel, 2008; Winkel, ). By emphasizing the double hermeneutic process of research (interpreting interpretations; Bevir & Rhodes, 2000), discourse approaches draw attention to the subjectivity of the researcher.…”

Section: Synopsis: Agency In Theory and (Research) Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Discursive Agency: (Re‐)Conceptualizing Actors and Practices in the Analysis of Discursive Policymaking

Leipold¹,

Winkel²

2016

Policy Studies Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interpretive discourse analysis commonly claims to address the interrelation between actors and discourses. However, the analytical focus of most approaches is on structures (discourses) while much less attention is paid to agency. This paper explicitly addresses discursive agency in two steps. First, we systematically review theoretical and analytical dimensions of agency in existing interpretive discourse analysis approaches. This review reveals a set of shared assumptions; most notably a concept of "trialectic" agency emphasizing the constitution of agency among the individual, the (discursive) structures, and the researcher's interpretation. Second, we propose an analytical heuristic, the Discursive Agency Approach, which is developed on the basis of the review and own empirical data. The proposed approach consists of four elements: (1) policy discourses, (2) political institutions, (3) agents defined via a set of characteristics, and (4) strategic practices. This approach is meant to facilitate a systematic exploration of agency under a discourse perspective, tackling the question of how a policy is constituted through the agency ascribed to its proponents in dynamic discursive processes, and how actors acquire political relevance through discursive means. To enable this goal, we propose distinct research steps and associated methods that link the approach to existing means of analysis.

show abstract

“…Recalling the interpretive perspective on policy analysis as a process of generating arguments rather than facts (Forester, ), and a portrayal of scientific knowledge production as developing interpretations about interpretations, the metaphorical world of Kingdon's streams can be transferred from policymaking into policy science. As science and knowledge production are understood as the (re‐)production of discourses, their constructed nature is not different from that of policy discourses, even though the internal logics of the streams may differ and as such affect the strategies of how the coupling can be performed (e.g., in the social sciences they are bound to disciplinary methodological conventions; see Winkel, ). Progressing with the analogy, theory‐building (and theoretical/paradigmatic) changes in (political) science can then be explained in analogy to policy change based on successful coupling and agenda setting.…”

Section: Epistemological Coupling: Between the Streams Of Policy And mentioning

confidence: 99%

Demolishing Dikes: Multiple Streams and Policy Discourse Analysis

Winkel¹,

Leipold²

2015

Policy Studies Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) is an influential theoretical framework for the analysis of policymaking processes, in particular agenda setting. It has inspired numerous empirical applications, which result in substantially different interpretations, for instance, of what exactly the “streams” encompass, how policy entrepreneurship is practiced, and how the coupling of distinct streams works. This article undertakes a systematic assessment of the MSF's core elements from the perspective of policy discourse analysis. Through an understanding of “streams” as discursive patterns, and policy discourses as (historical) couplings of the streams, a new and theoretically consistent interpretation of streams and likely connections between them is offered. One specific focus is on Kingdon's concept of policy entrepreneurship and how it relates to ideas of agency in discourse analysis. Drawing on the recently proposed Discursive Agency Approach, we discuss how concepts such as subject positions in discourses, agent subjectivization via the dialectic interplay of individual characteristics and structural forces, and discursive practices and strategies relate to and can possibly complement the MSF. Particular emphasis is given to the metaphors the MSF provides. In conclusion, the article demonstrates that a post‐positivist perspective holds great potential for enriching the MSF theoretically and strengthening it analytically.

show abstract

‚Dispositif turn’ und Foucaultsche Politikanalyse – Reflektionen zur Dispositivanalyse am Beispiel des Politikfeldes Wald

Cited by 3 publications

References 32 publications

Fragmented national public media debate on international forest issues: a case study of Germany

Fragmented national public media debate on international forest issues: a case study of Germany

Discursive Agency: (Re‐)Conceptualizing Actors and Practices in the Analysis of Discursive Policymaking

Demolishing Dikes: Multiple Streams and Policy Discourse Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About