Discoursive Institutionalism

This study examines the urge to construct indicators of sustainable development that has been outlined in the Agenda 21 of the Rio Earth Summit 1992, re-expressed in the Rio+20 Declaration “The Future We Want” in 2012, and discussed in the work by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress (2009). An indicator of sustainable development (SDI) is a measure expected to signal whether a society is on a sustainable path, or not, by organising large data sets into easily readable illustrations for the purposes of policy-makers. The study positions into the earlier work of sociologists of science and philosophers such as Hacking and Latour who have aimed to understand the contexts in which knowledge is formed. For policymakers and the wider public, understanding the limitations of these different measurement approaches can be beneficial. This study suggests that SDIs can be considered analogous to evidence-based autonomous models that can be framed in various ways. One-dimensional indicators select a single bottom-line against which other considerations are judged; composite SDIs typically aim to balance environmental, social and economic considerations; and monetary-based indicators attempt to incorporate ecological and social losses into economic costs. Depending on the choice of approach, a SDI may either adhere to the principle of ‘strong sustainability’ according to which no ecological harm is acceptable, or ‘weak sustainability’ that accepts substitutability between different types of capital, including the loss of natural capital. However, a general weakness of several SDIs has been their inability to signal when ecological thresholds are crossed. Under energy and resource constraints, these efforts reflect an aspiration, borrowing the terms of seventeenth century political economists, the need to explore means towards a ‘new’ political arithmetic. This study aims to observe what choices researchers and political institutions have and have made in adapting to the realities of climate change and other ecological constraints. The study will argue that the depiction of ‘sustainable development’ may be a worthy ideal but for measurement purposes of actual ecological or social thresholds, a notion of multiple meanings has challenged the work of scientists who have been unable to agree over a ‘proper’ indicator. By assessing the theoretical underpinnings of science, the aim of this study is provide common ground to the multidisciplinary subject matter of sustainability for natural and social scientists who often conduct research in their separate research strands. Furthermore, scientific work itself follows societal progress and is limited by theoretical underpinnings that inevitably also influence the attempts to construct meaningful indicators. The study observes how in the context of political decision-making, institutions that act as gatekeepers that shape the understanding of politicians about the choices they have, even if these institutions are constrained by ideological discourses as well as existing institutional arrangements. For the purpose of the measurement of sustainable development, existing cross-country measures such as the GDP have serious weaknesses. At least in the advanced economies, while the measurement of aggregate economic growth may remain useful, it may be less relevant than it was in the contexts of modernisation and post-Second World War reconstruction when the current UN System of National Accounts was adopted. However, pragmatic challenges also undermine some of the alternative indicators, including the lack of available data as well as the need for institutional capacity and improved theoretical understanding about sustainability. Nevertheless, it is suggested that states could engage more closely to explore the possibility to use SDIs as a new technology of governance. For this purpose, the study also examines indicators of climate change, material flows and energy. It is also suggested that decision-makers may need to better adopt a perspective of systemic thinking that adopts an ecological view that also internalises social considerations rather than macroeconomic theories that treat ecological and social costs as externalities.

When convergent trends in the world society encounter regional filters or countervailing forces, political or social dynamics result in local patterns of adaptation or even stimulate resilience. This paper suggests that meaning constellations represent an important mediating factor in the world society, responsible for the translation of global influences in national settings. Most generally, meaning constellations can be conceived as a set of historically constructed mental and ideational schemes or cognitive frames providing institutional architectures with sense, importance and, ultimately, legitimacy. Because institutional rules are often fraught with considerable ambiguity, such meaning constellations are crucial as they provide political agents with powerful resources to either challenge or stabilize an established political order. Moreover, when certain sets of beliefs about the purpose and legitimacy of institutional orders become dominant early in a historical sequence, it is difficult to de-construct such seemingly " given truths " at later points in time. The contingencies entailed in the historical construction of meaning constellations, therefore, are important to understand how universal (political) ideas and rationalizing models find their expression in a variety of concrete institutional forms and developmental patterns.

Nos últimos anos veuse desenvolvendo unha nova ollada aos fenómenos políticos e ás actuacións en políticas públicas a partir da consideración das ideas e os procesos discursivos que se activan. En base a esta perspectiva teórica do institucionalismo discursivo procedemos á análise do sistema de partidos galegos co obxecto de aportar novas explicacións que complementen ás xa existentes desde outras ramas do neoinstitucionalismo. En concreto, analizaremos o discurso comunicativo do BNG nas sesións de investidura do Parlamento de Galicia, valorando se nos encontramos ante un partido nicho, que papel xoga o discurso anticorrupción e se teñen algún efecto sobre os resultados eleitorais e finalmente analizaremos que temáticas discursivas presentan algún tipo de correlacións en relación apoio electoral ao BNG, observando que a énfase na rexeneración democrática explica boa parte da súa evolución electoral.

How should we analyze the dialogue over war and peace in the United States? If, as many studies hold, an important part of the debate is about justifying and rebutting justifications of martial policies, how do those attempts work in terms of argument types and strategies? Furthermore, what are those strategies, and how do they function to mobilize support for either side? Extant research on the details involved in such questions is surprisingly scant. To rectify this, the present work analyzes the dialogue and typologizes the arguments used by proponents and opponents by organizing them into categories. I deploy a discursive institutionalist methodology, combining new research on the arguments used by proponents of war with previous work on opposition to wars. The study provides a new understanding of the constituent arguments, norms, and typologies of recent political discussions concerning war and peace in the United States. In so doing, this article offers a new explanation of the dynamics of the debate as well as a thorough rendering of the positions participants take when supporting and opposing the use of armed force.