@techreport{StawskiLauth2024, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Stawski, Theresa Paola and Lauth, Hans-Joachim}, title = {The Stateness Index (StIx) - Conceptual Design and Empirical Results}, doi = {10.25972/OPUS-34761}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-347616}, pages = {32}, year = {2024}, abstract = {Exploring and explaining diversity and patterns of stateness is crucial for understanding causes of efficiency, duration, or the collapse of a state. The new Stateness Index (StIx) contributes to the conceptual and analytical debate on stateness and state fragility. StIx is a tool for measuring stateness and state quality since 1950 that includes country-ranking through aggregated and disaggregated data to advance performance comparison and policy analysis. This article first sums up the main theoretical aspects, followed by descriptive results.}, subject = {Begrenzte Staatlichkeit}, language = {en} } @article{DanielLauthRothfuss2023, author = {Daniel, Antje and Lauth, Hans-Joachim and Rothfuß, Eberhard}, title = {Local Self-Governance and Weak Statehood: A Convincing Liaison?}, series = {Politics and Governance}, volume = {11}, journal = {Politics and Governance}, number = {2}, issn = {2183-2463}, doi = {10.17645/pag.v11i2.7166}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-321149}, pages = {272-279}, year = {2023}, abstract = {This thematic issue addresses the relationship between local self-governance and the state. Self-governance is understood as the rules that emerge in the local social and spatial context. Local self-governance of individual local groups, actors, communities, and their social and institutional arrangements are considered. From this situated collective entanglement, the interactions and relations with state authorities are analysed in the various contributions embedded in local contexts of different world regions and based on empirical social science research containing mostly interdisciplinary approaches. The nine case studies of this thematic issue reflect a variety of statehoods (weak to restrained), divers "intentionalities" of local self-governance (emancipatory and democratic, socio-economically, and socio-culturally oriented, security-driven or ecological), and their state-locality entanglements range between four forms of relationships: mutually supportive, conflictual, ambivalent, and avoiding.}, language = {en} } @article{LauthSuda2022, author = {Lauth, Hans-Joachim and Suda, Martha}, title = {Editorial}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft}, volume = {15}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft}, number = {4}, issn = {1865-2654}, doi = {10.1007/s12286-021-00514-4}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-270121}, pages = {431-435}, year = {2022}, abstract = {No abstract available.}, language = {en} } @techreport{PfeilschifterLauthFischeretal.2020, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Pfeilschifter, Rene and Lauth, Hans-Joachim and Fischer, Doris and Rothfuß, Eberhard and Schachner, Andreas and Schmitz, Barbara and Werthmann, Katja}, title = {Local Self-Governance in the Context of Weak Statehood in Antiquity and the Modern Era. A Program for a Fresh Perspective}, edition = {English Edition}, issn = {2698-2684}, doi = {10.25972/OPUS-20737}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-207371}, pages = {34}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The nucleus of statehood is situated at the local level: in the village, the neighborhood, the city district. This is where a community, beyond the level of the family, first develops collective rules that are intended to ensure its continued existence. But usually this is not the only level of governance at play. Above it, there are supralocal formations of power, varying in scope from regional networks to empires, which supplement the local orders or compete with them. The premise of this Research Unit is that local forms of self-governance are especially heterogeneous and prominent, wherever supralocal statehood exists in the mode of weak permeation. The central question of our approach is how local forms of self-governance work in this context. We will examine the relations to the state level as well as to other local groups as they develop over time; the scope and spatial contingency of forms of self-governance; their legitimization and the interdependency with the organization and collective identity of those groups which carry them out; finally, we will turn our attention to the significance of self-governance for the configuration of weak statehood. The empirical focus will be at the local level, which has so far been largely neglected in the research on governance beyond the state. In order to achieve this, we will work with case studies that are structured by categories and situated in geographical areas and time periods that lie outside of modern Europe with its particular development of statehood since the Late Middle Ages: in Antiquity, and in the Global South of the present. By incorporating these different time frames, we hope to contribute to overcoming the dichotomy between the modern and pre-modern era, which is often given canonical status. Our goal is to create a comparative analysis of different configurations of order as well as the development of a typology of patterns of local governance. The structure of the empirical comparison itself promises methodological insights, since it will entail recognizing, dealing with, and overcoming disciplinary limitations. Starting with the identification of typical patterns and processes, we hope to gain a better grasp of the mechanisms by which local configurations of order succeed, while at the same time advancing the theoretical debate. This will allow us to make an interdisciplinary contribution to the understanding of fundamental elements of statehood and local governance that are of central importance, especially in the context of weak statehood. The insights we hope to gain by adopting this historical perspective will contribute to understanding a present that is not based exclusively on its own, seemingly completely new preconditions, and will thus significantly sharpen the political analysis of various forms of governance.}, subject = {Begrenzte Staatlichkeit}, language = {en} } @article{LandmanLauth2019, author = {Landman, Todd and Lauth, Hans-Joachim}, title = {Political Trade-Offs: Democracy and Governance in a Changing World}, series = {Politics and Governance}, volume = {7}, journal = {Politics and Governance}, number = {4}, issn = {2183-2463}, doi = {10.17645/pag.v7i4.2642}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-144308}, pages = {237-242}, year = {2019}, abstract = {The investigation of trade-offs in political science receives only limited attention, although many scholars acknowledge the importance of trade-offs across a variety of different areas. A systematic and comprehensive examination of the topic is missing. This thematic issue of Politics and Governance sheds light on this research deficit by providing a holistic but also an integrative view on trade-offs in the political realm for the first time. Researchers of trade-offs from different political areas present and discuss their findings, and promote a fruitful exchange, which overcomes the current isolation of the approaches. They consider the theoretical and methodological questions as well as the identification of empirical tradeoffs. Furthermore, they provide insights into the possibility to balance trade-offs and strategies, which could help actors to find such compromises.}, language = {en} } @article{LauthSchlenkrich2018, author = {Lauth, Hans-Joachim and Schlenkrich, Oliver}, title = {Making Trade-Offs Visible: Theoretical and Methodological Considerations about the Relationship between Dimensions and Institutions of Democracy and Empirical Findings}, series = {Politics and Governance}, volume = {6}, journal = {Politics and Governance}, number = {1}, doi = {10.17645/pag.v6i1.1200}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-159588}, pages = {78-91}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Whereas the measurement of the quality of democracy focused on the rough differentiation of democracies and autocracies in the beginning (e.g. Vanhanen, Polity, Freedom House), the focal point of newer instruments is the assessment of the quality of established democracies. In this context, tensions resp. trade-offs between dimensions of democracy are discussed as well (e.g. Democracy Barometer, Varieties of Democracy). However, these approaches lack a systematic discussion of trade-offs and they are not able to show trade-offs empirically. We address this research desideratum in a three-step process: Firstly, we propose a new conceptual approach, which distinguishes between two different modes of relationships between dimensions: mutual reinforcing effects and a give-and-take relationship (trade-offs) between dimensions. By introducing our measurement tool, Democracy Matrix, we finally locate mutually reinforcing effects as well as trade-offs. Secondly, we provide a new methodological approach to measure trade-offs. While one measuring strategy captures the mutual reinforcing effects, the other strategy employs indicators, which serve to gauge trade-offs. Thirdly, we demonstrate empirical findings of our measurement drawing on the Varieties of Democracy dataset. Incorporating trade-offs into the measurement enables us to identify various profiles of democracy (libertarian, egalitarian and control-focused democracy) via the quality of its dimensions.}, language = {en} } @techreport{Lauth2015, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Lauth, Hans-Joachim}, title = {The Matrix of Democracy: A Three-Dimensional Approach to Measuring the Quality of Democracy and Regime Transformations}, doi = {10.25972/OPUS-10966}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-109665}, pages = {29}, year = {2015}, abstract = {The article presents a proposal for the assessment of the quality of democracy. After elaborating on the methodological strategy, a definition of democracy is proposed, which entails the construction of the matrix of democracy based on three dimensions (political freedom, political equality, and political and judicial control) and five institutions. The methodological application of this measuring tool is then explained. This conception guarantees an appropriate measurement in different cultural contexts, enables the characterization of democratic profiles, and allows for the identification of deficiencies in democracies. Before the conclusion, three examples of the measurement (USA, Russia, and Italy) illustrate how the matrix works.}, subject = {Vergleichende politische Wissenschaft}, language = {en} }