Utopia,Food Sovereignty,and Ethical Fashion: The Narrative Power of anti-GMO Campaigns

ABSTRACT

The idea of utopia has become pervasive in the age of everyday humanitarianism. Digital media communicate utopian ideas that allow people to “do good” for vulnerable others and the environment. At the same time, campaigns mobilize citizens by invoking apocalyptic images, such as genetically modified (GM) “monster” foods. This article looks at the construction of utopian and apocalyptic narratives in social movement campaigns and how they contribute to the construction of identities in the campaigns against GM food and Bt cotton, especially in India. Based on an analysis of campaign material, we show that “organic food” and “ethical cotton” products would be less successful without the concurrent use of apocalyptic narratives. Narratives that are more radical enabled the anti-GM food movement to mobilize large resistance. By contrast, a more inclusive narrative approach in the cotton/textile sector risks supporting interests that are detrimental to social justice and environmental protection.     

Playing games of governance: How and why Fair Trade pioneers evade corporate capture

The concept of power in political governance has traditionally focused on domination and the preservation of the status quo. In an economic context, institutional and organizational studies have expressed growing interest in the dynamics of agency and institutional change, captured in the concept of “institutional entrepreneurship.” In the context of global free trade, the Fair Trade movement's experience shows that ongoing institutional entrepreneurship is important for entrepreneurs to transcend absorption by corporate hegemony. In this article I examine the capacity for agency in market institutions through the lens of “defiance” to illuminate the imaginative “game players” who evade institutional capture in the evolution of market governance.     

The Bio-economy and the Competition State: Transcending the Dichotomy between Coordinated and Liberal Market Economies

This article examines the role of the state in the emerging bio-economy. The starting point is that state interventions, including supportive regulatory arrangements and the shaping of public attitudes, constitute core assets in the evolution of bio-industrial complexes. Public policy in the bio-economy, across advanced industrial countries, is well captured by the “competition state” concept. This type of state takes different forms, analogously with the historical variants of the Keynesian welfare state. The article compares patterns of governance of the biotechnology sector in Finland and Sweden, the USA and the UK, and Australia. It is concluded that the bio-industry sector does not fit with the “models of capitalism” paradigm which postulates coherence within, and systemic divergences between, national models of economic governance. The bio-economy displays trends toward convergence, in particular mounting public investments in health care and in research and development. On the other hand, countries differ in their approach to market regulation, industrial support, and ethical restrictions. These differences do not follow the dichotomy between “liberal” and “coordinated” models of capitalism.     

The fallacy of perfect regulatory controls: Lessons from database surveillance of migration in West Germany from the 1950s to the 1970s

Surveillance studies have long argued that electronic databases are designed to maximize state surveillance as a “superpanopticon” or “surveillant assemblage.” But how are databases being implemented in practice, and do they actually enhance control? This article addresses these questions by examining the case of the German Central Foreigners Register (Ausländerzentralregister [AZR]). Established in 1953, the AZR was one of the first databases on migrants in the western liberal world, and remains a pillar of Germany's migration control system today. By analyzing internal ministerial records from the 1950s to the 1970s – the time when this database was introduced, expanded, and automatized while still relatively free from legal or public constraints – this article examines whether, or how, databases enhance state control. I argue that the AZR did not provide the “perfect surveillance” it was intended to deliver; rather, it produced major bureaucratic and political challenges and a series of malfunctions. This case study confirms that database surveillance, such as the German AZR in the 1970s and European databases today, depends on three basic conditions: shared expectations regarding data usages, cooperation in data supply, and capacities of data storage and maintenance. Moreover, databases serve the additional symbolic function of reassuring the self-imagination of sovereign, modern state power.     

Transparency and mistrust: Who or what should be made transparent?

It is increasingly recognized in public administration that the relationship between trust and transparency is not straightforward. Recently, right‐wing populists have risen to power, rejecting transparency requirements based on documents while claiming that they “hide nothing.” Clearly, existing scholarly conceptualizations are insufficient for understanding how transparency operates as a value in real‐world political contestation. An analysis of state‐ and national‐level politics in Nigeria reveals that, while always retaining a core informational component, there are multiple competing conceptions of transparency. Popular demands for transparency express a belief that not only should data be made transparent, but also the social networks in which politicians are embedded. “Transparency in people” can clash with more traditional, technocratic transparency practices centered on data. By rethinking who or what should be made transparent—data, things, or people—this article offers fresh theoretical insights on the complex politics of transparency and trust.     

Neighborhood Disorder and Local Participation: Examining the Political Relevance of “Broken Windows”

Anyone who has lived in, driven through or walked by a “bad” neighborhood has a sense of the attributes that render such places unique: graffiti, litter, public intoxication and much more. According to the well-known theory of “broken windows,” these readily observable corporeal characteristics signal neighborhood disorder and lead to increased criminal behavior. This article investigates the implications of disorder for political behavior, taking particular care to distinguish between the objective tangible conditions of disorder and residents’ subjective interpretations of those conditions. Utilizing exceptionally rich data, this analysis reveals that while certain aspects of objective “reality” are consequential, perceptions of such reality are a more powerful mechanism through which neighborhood disorder impacts local political engagement. For some political outcomes, a heightened sense of the problems associated with disorder is linearly associated with an increase in participation. For others, the pattern is parabolic: those who perceive so little disorder that they remain content or so much disorder that they become disaffected are substantially less likely to take action to make their communities better. Ultimately, holding objective contextual features constant, the lenses through which residents interpret things like “broken windows” are critical determinants of grassroots politics. This information, combined with broader understandings of what shapes perceptions of disorder, lays the foundation for structuring policy in ways that facilitate grassroots activism—a vital component of the American democratic process.     

Deep Presidency: Toward a Structural Theory of an Unsustainable Office in a Catastrophic World—Obama and Beyond

Modern and postmodern theories of the presidency tend to place the American president on a continuum of power, asserting the need for either a more active or less active chief executive. From the seminal work of Richard Neustadt, celebrating the assertive president seeking to maximize power and leadership, through the contrasting view of historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. and others who sought to restrict the reach of the executive, scholars have battled over the appropriate balance of power—particularly the executive-legislative scale. From an alternative critical/structural view of the office, this expansive-restrictive debate, while important, misses the central point that regardless of party, personality, or management style, all presidents seek the same structural goals. If, as Theodore Lowi has argued, the president is the “state personified,” then we need to ask how the capitalist state shapes and constrains the imperatives presidents must pursue, given our political economy and the ideology that sustains it. Two core imperatives emerge for the literature on theories of the state: the pursuit of economic growth and the provision of “national security.” This article explores debates over theories of the presidency in the light of twenty-first-century challenges to conventional definitions of “growth” and “national security.” In the face of global climate change and the decline of US military and geopolitical preeminence, can the presidency break free from its imprisonment in orthodox notions of growth and national security to forge a more sustainable path for the nation and the office? And more broadly, if our way of life in fact undermines our way of life in an unsustainable self-defeating logic, absent a cataclysmic crisis, what, if any, role can the president play in fostering a deep change of direction? By challenging the power structure of the political economy, a critical/structural theory of the presidency is best situated to address such questions.     

Economic and Ideological Corruptions of the Regulatory State

What accounts for the excesses of the regulatory state? Economists have shown that bad regulations are often due to “rent seeking” and “regulatory capture” and have provided compelling accounts of the incentives that drive these processes. However, there remain many unwarranted regulations, such as recent gun control measures, that cannot be explained by an economic rationale. Rather, it is essential to understand the distinctively ideological origins and functions of such regulations. This paper examines both the economic and ideological corruptions on the regulatory state, suggesting that those concerned with the growth of state power will have to address both of these phenomena.     

Serving Clients When the Server Crashes: How Frontline Workers Cope with E‐Government Challenges

Implementing e‐government in the contemporary American state is challenging. E‐government places high technical demands on agencies and citizens in an environment of budget austerity and political polarization. Governments developing e‐government policies often mobilize frontline workers—also termed “street‐level bureaucrats”—to help citizens gain access to services. However, we know little about how frontline workers cope in these challenging circumstances. This article fills this gap by examining frontline workers implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Based on a qualitative analysis, the authors find that frontline workers “move toward clients” when coping with stress: they bend the rules, work overtime, and collaborate in order to help clients. They are less inclined to “move away” or “move against” clients, for instance, through rigid rule following and rationing. In other words, frontline workers try to serve clients, even “when the server crashes.” Frontline workers, then, can play a vital role in the successful implementation of e‐government policies.     

Majesty and mercy: undocumented immigration,deferred removal action,and the spectacle of sovereign exceptionalism

The article casts a critical gaze at the Obama Administration’s decision – articulated in a series of bureaucratic memos and directives issued June 2010–July 2012 – to exercise prosecutorial discretion in processing 300,000 undocumented immigrants slated for deportation from the US Commentators on the partisan left hailed the Administration’s decision as a pragmatic and humane effort to implement federal immigration laws. Commentators on the partisan right argued that prosecutorial discretion constituted an effective – and illegal – abdication of the president’s mandate to execute the letter of immigration law. This article positions the decision, instead, at the nexus of sovereign exceptionalism and political community-building and argues that deferred action constitutes the highest and most controversial deployment of the “majesty” of territorial state sovereignty: the process of selectively meting out “mercy” to those who approximate the set of expectations bound up in the notion of the “good” American. Petitioners for deferred action status, I argue, function, ideologically, to construct the undocumented petitioner’s liminality as help and reify the sovereign power’s exceptionalism. The discussion, in turn, invites us to revisit Schmittian and Agambenian conceptions of sovereign exceptionalism and rethink the work sovereign prerogative does in the everyday.     

The Politics of Everyday Coalition-Building

One of the most important challenges of contemporary progressive politics is building social movements for change that take up the ways that that relations of power are shaped by the interaction and intersection of race, class, gender, sexuality, ability and other lines of power. As such, questions related to coalition—political solidarity across difference—are key. How do we build coalitions that take up the complexity of these power relationships? How do we build movements that don't leave people out? In this article, I will distinguish between two approaches to coalition. The first are coalitions grounded in shared or overlapping interests or goals; in such coalitions, groups identify common ground and then work together towards the achievement of mutual goals or interests. The second is grounded in a process of what María Lugones (2003) calls becoming “interdependently resistant” in which people recognize and back up each other’s resistances to multiple relations of power in their everyday lives. This article unpacks the nuts and bolts of building such “everyday coalitions” in our lives.     

The rights of (future) humans qua humans

Human rights are rights held “simply in virtue of humanity.” In unpacking this claim, we find that theories of human rights disclose (1) something about what we understand a minimally decent human life to be and (2) who we consider to belong within a community of rights-bearers. In this article, I address two interrelated questions: When and why do future persons have standing as rights-bearing members of a shared moral community? Are the rights held by future generations best expressed in the “greening” of existing rights or in a new distinctly environmental right? I argue that human rights theorists miss an important element of the human qua human if they take ecological embeddedness to be contingently rather than necessarily relevant to human rights. I therefore argue that there are reasons to favor a new distinctly environmental human right.     

Paradigms and Paradox: The Politics of Economic Ideas in Two Moments of Crisis

This article argues that there is a paradox at the heart of Hall's “Policy Paradigms” framework stemming from the desire to see both state and society as generative of social learning while employing two different logics to explain how such learning takes place: what I term the “Bayesian” and “constructivist” versions of the policy paradigms causal story. This creates a paradox as both logics cannot be simultaneously true. However, it is a generative paradox insofar as the power of the policy paradigms framework emerges, in part, from this attempt to straddle these distinct positions, producing an argument that is greater than the sum of its parts. In the second part of the article, I discuss the recent global financial crisis, an area where we should see third‐order change, but we do no not. That we do not strengthens the case for the constructivist causal story.     

Enough and as Good: A Formal Model of Lockean First Appropriation

In developing a theory of the first appropriation of natural resources from the state of nature, John Locke tells us that persons must leave “enough and as good” for others. Detailing exactly what this restriction requires divides right and left libertarians. Briefly, right libertarians interpret “enough and as good” as requiring no or very minimal restrictions on the first appropriation of natural resources, whereas left libertarians interpret “enough and as good” as requiring everyone to be entitled to an equal share of unappropriated resources, able to claim no more beyond this equal share. This article approaches the right versus left libertarian debate by developing a formal model that examines the welfare properties of different interpretations of the Lockean proviso. The model shows that underlying philosophical justifications for left libertarianism, when plausible assumptions hold, will actually be better served by a right libertarian proviso rather than a left libertarian one.     

Innovation in the public sector: Dilemmas in the use of Ad Hoc processes

Increasingly, public sector executives are using ad hoc groups and processes—what we term “parallel processes”—as a vehicle for innovation. The central question is, however, when parallel processes are developmental and when they are bypasses that avoid critical issues. This paper reviews some potential weaknesses in the use of such groups by examining several cases that show how they can impede the actual implementation of the innovation. We propose a transitional perspective that regards parallel process as scaffolding, enabling new ideas and behaviors to grow strong enough to eventually allow their transfer to the permanent structure.     

Communicative Diplomacy for the 3rd Millennium

Abstract

In today's world of revolution in communications and information as well as of global interdependency, a medialised politics became a general reality. One can observe such a trend specifically in the field of international and foreign affairs where state and other actors use communication channels and public relations to a large extent to improve on the content and in particular, on the image of their policies. Here one can also argue that a major share of bilateral and multilateral relations among states is shaped by the international media, or vice versa, that all major “wars” are “fought” through the media.

This article explores the increasing inter-relation between state foreign affairs on one side, and media and public relations, on the other. The article starts off with basic concepts of a “new/democratic diplomacy” (Nicholson, 1988) and a “public diplomacy” (Signitzer in Combs, 1992), and compares them with definitions of “international public relations” (Kunczik, 1997). It attempts to build the general analytical framework on the basis of comparative case studies of developed countries with an established diplomatic tradition and of new democracies still proving themselves on the international fora. In this context, particular attention is given to communication in relation to international organisations like NATO and the EU.     

半嵌入性互动治理的形成逻辑与主要类型——以H街道四个社区的业委会与物业管理运作为例

城市基层治理涉及多元治理主体的复杂互动关系,这种复杂的互动关系内蕴着权力结构与秩序的演变。国家、市场、社会三方主体力量在中国强国家弱市场弱社会的现实背景下,呈现出以结构性非对称性形式相互依赖、三角权力关系稳定、相互弥补各方失灵为特点的互动形态。文章将此互动形态在基层社区中的运作概括为“半嵌入性互动治理”。基于国家-市场-社会三维分析视角,通过多案例比较方法研究H街道四个社区的业委会与物业管理运作,发现“半嵌入性互动治理”在现实运作中呈现多种类型。国家、市场、社会在基层社区治理中的互动关系会根据现实需求与权力博弈进行平衡与调试,最终保证社区内部安全与有效治理。     

Withering in the Heat? In Search of the Regulatory State in the Commonwealth Caribbean

This article explores the “regulatory state hypothesis” in the context of electricity and telecommunications regulation in Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago. This article questions whether institutional features associated with the regulatory state are triggered by a preference for efficiency and added complexity within the policy domain. This article progresses in three steps. After setting out the regulatory state hypothesis as derived from the work by Giandomenico Majone and its empirical consequences, the article explores the four cases in brief. Although the empirical evidence broadly supports the regulatory state hypothesis across domains, states and over time, some puzzles in terms of reform trajectories and extent of regulatory reform do emerge. The final section explores these puzzles through an actor‐centered institutional perspective. It is suggested that the “regulatory state hypothesis” may be useful for predicting institutional arrangements, but has difficulty in accounting for the extent of regulatory reform and timing.     

Awakening the Sleeping Giant: Interstitial Transformation and the Cooperative Movement

In the past few decades, states across several disparate geographical contexts have adopted policies and initiatives aimed at institutionalizing their relationship with groups constituted as “their” diasporas. These practices, which range from creating new ministries for diaspora affairs and reserving seats in the national legislature to granting dual citizenship and allowing members of the diaspora to participate in domestic elections, seem to have a very specific purpose. They are aimed at integrating diasporas as part of a larger “global” nation that is connected to, and has claims on the institutional structure of the home state. This article argues that the best way to understand this phenomenon, conceptualized here as the “domestic abroad”, is to see it as the product of two simultaneous, ongoing processes: the diasporic imagining of the nation, and the neoliberal restructuring of the state. Furthermore, to make sense of the nature and relationship of these processes, we need to focus on the development of capitalist social relations on both global and national scales. This, it is contended, can be best done through the development of a theoretical framework based on the historical materialist concept of hegemony.