首页> 外文期刊>Urban Studies >Agonistic failures: Following policy conflicts in Berlin's urban cultural politics
【24h】

Agonistic failures: Following policy conflicts in Berlin's urban cultural politics

机译:激动的失败:柏林城市文化政治的政策冲突之后

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The paper intervenes in critical policy studies to challenge the ‘success bias’ lingering in public policy accounts of collaborative governance. I suggest conflict, rather than consensus, is a productive resource to navigate collaborations between state and civic stakeholders. By developing a conflict-oriented framework that foregrounds political decisions as always-already failing – regardless of whether promoted as success or failure – I argue that the recognition of nuanced conflicts contributes to new understandings on what counts as success or failure to whom. To substantiate the conflict-oriented framework of policy failure, I present empirical insights into Berlin’s urban cultural politics, shedding light on a new funding instrument for artists. Unpacking artists’ and administrators’ understandings about what constitutes a failure, and how to proceed from there, I propose ‘policyfailing’ as ongoing failure. Conceptualising failure along the lines of operational conflicts (i.e. concrete, procedural disagreements) and meta conflicts (i.e. overarching, ideological differences), two scenarios of policy failure emerge: absolute policy failure, pointing to unsolvable conflicts between state and civic stakeholders; and agonistic policy failure, referring to wider-ranging disagreements about the purpose of policy issues, which are however transferred into temporary policy solutions. Following one such agonistic policy failure in Berlin over time, I show how new opportunities for both absolute and agonistic policy failure unfold. Ultimately, I outline the practical, political and analytical potential of an agonistic framework to understand policies as inherently contested and, to some degree, always failing.
机译:本文介入了关键政策研究,挑战协同治理公共政策账户中的“成功偏见”。我建议冲突,而不是共识,是一种促进国家和公民利益攸关方之间的合作的生产力资源。通过制定面向冲突的框架,即始终已经失败的前景政治决定 - 无论是促进的成功还是失败 - 我争辩说,对患者的患者的认可有助于对谁成功或失败的新谅解。为了证实导向的政策衰退框架,我向柏林城市文化政治提出了实证洞察力,阐明了艺术家的新资金工具。解压缩艺术家和管理员的了解关于什么构成失败,以及如何从那里进行,提出“政策申请”作为持续的失败。概念性的失败沿着运营冲突(即具体,程序分歧)和元冲突(即总体,思想差异),两种政策失败的情景出现:绝对政策失败,指出国家和公民利益攸关方之间的无法解决的冲突;和激动的政策失败,提到更广泛的分歧,了解政策问题的目的,然而转入临时政策解决方案。在随着时间的推移之后,柏林这样一个令人痛苦的政策失败,我展示了绝对和激动主义政策失败的新机遇。最终,我概述了激动框架的实际,政治和分析潜力,以了解固有的竞争政策,一定程度始终失败。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号