Bøger udgivet af University of Copenhagen

PhD thesis from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.This thesis explores the politics of numbers through the concepts of quantification, objectivity, controversiality and relevance. Quantification means that the focus is not on numbers as such but on all the steps involved in rendering something in numeric form. Controversies are public disputes about a quantification. Relevance means that number makes a difference, affecting how political issues are interpreted and handled. Finally, numbers are objective when they are taken for granted, when the production process of quantification fades from view. It is often argued that such objectivity is made. Numbers never arrive from nowhere but are produced by someone according to some procedure. Work needs to be done for quantitative information to appear as objective information. When objectivity-making succeeds, however, numbers become politically relevant due to the political attractiveness of seemingly neutral descriptions. The politically relevant numbers are those that appear objective, whereas controversial numbers make less of a political difference. This, however, only captures one aspect of the politics of numbers. Politics is about dissent, contestation and conflict, and quantification does not succeed only when it manages to suppress or supersede conflictual politics. To get at this, the thesis explores a number of dynamics between relevance and controversiality.The first is controversial relevance. When something matters, it matters in a way that some will contest. In many contexts, numbers will do political work in spite of critique and controversiality. Controversies cannot be eliminated but if they can be managed, they do not preclude relevance. Secondly, the importance of avoiding controversiality sometimes causes relevance to be traded away in managed irrelevance, where politically relevant use of numbers is eschewed in order to evade critique. Finally, controversies can enable relevance. Because quantification is an authoritative form of information, arguing that something should be quantified signals seriousness about addressing it, opposing the quantifier to those who want to ‘ignore’ the issue by leaving it unmeasured. In this case, debate and contestation about numbers will underline the politically relevant difference between quantification opponents and proponents. A dynamic I term relevant controversiality. The politics of numbers is not always a politics of objectivity. There are limits to objectivity.

PhD Dissertation from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology

PhD Dissertation from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Sciene

Doctor of Philosophy from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Sciene

PhD Dissertation from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science

PhD Dissertation from Department of Anthropologi, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Copenhagen

PhD thesis from Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Copenhagen

PhD Dissertation from Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Copenhagen

PhD thesis from Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Copenhagen.

PhD Dissertation from Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social Science, University of Copenhagen

PhD thesis from Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social Science, University of Copenhagen

PhD thesis from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology

PhD Dissertation from Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social Science, University of Copenhagen

PhD dissertation from Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social Science, University of Copenhagen

PhD Dissertation from Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Social Scienes, University of Copenhagen

PhD Dissertation from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science

PhD Dissertation from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science

PhD thesis form University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Anthropology

This PhD thesis examines how and why the EU developed its discourse about sustainable development over time, and in particular its ability to ‘speak with one voice’ as a supranational actor in international negotiations, attempting to shape but also being shaped by its involvement in multilateral diplomatic processes. More specifically, the thesis looks at how, over the period of 1992-2017, the EU has dealt with the economic dimensions of sustainable development, in particular globalization. Focusing on key summits (UNCED, WSSD, Rio+20 and the SDG process), it draws on and further develops a discursive institutionalist perspective to understand the interplay of discourses and institutions in the EU’s diplomacy and attempt to handle the challenges of a changing economic order and a (multifaceted) crisis of sustainability. In doing so, the analytical categories of the ‘content’, ‘conduct’ and ‘culture of discourse’ is developed and it is argued that only by studying the latter can we uncover the taboos in EU diplomacy that have a significant effect on outcomes.Moreover, the thesis is grounded in debates on ontology and epistemology and brings an array of methods and sources to bear on the empirical research. This includes 27 interviews, 2 x 6 months of participant observation, analysis of video material of key meetings, extensive archive work (ca. 2200 pages of documents from the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ archives) and discourse analysis. On the basis of the direct participation in the Rio+20 and SDG negotiations, the thesis offers an insider account. This positionality is used to explore how the EU works diplomatically.

PhD Dissertation from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Science, Department of Political Science

PhD dissertation from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Science, Department of Sociology

PhD Dissertation from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Science, Department of Sociology

PhD Dissertation from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Anthropology

PhD thesis from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science

PhD thesis from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Antropology

PhD thesis from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Science, Department of Political Science

PhD thesis from University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Anthropology

PhD thesis form University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Anthropology

PhD Dissertion from Department of Politcal Science, Faculty of Social Science,University of Copenhagen, Denmark

“ʻOrden i kaosʼ behandler indsigtsfuldt og gribende de dilemmaer, der dagligt præger det pædagogiske arbejde med børn i Røde Kors Asylafdeling. Børnenes fremtid er uafklaret. Ingen ved, om de og deres forældre får opholdstilladelse, eller om de får afslag og skal rejse ud af Danmark. Konsekvenserne af dette grundvilkår belyses kritisk og nænsomt i et velskrevet speciale, som tilfører vigtig ny viden til området. Alle med interesse for asylarbejde bør læse dette mesterværk.”- Henrik Bang Pedersen, Fagleder Pædagogisk Enhed i Røde Kors AsylBogen er en redigeret udgave af Maise Johansen og Laura Vestergaard-Andersens speciale, der vandt Ib Damgaard Petersen prisen 2016 for bedst at kombinere stor faglig indsigt og engageret faglig formidling.Den øgede flygtningestrøm presser Danmark på mange måder. I bogen er fokus på om og hvordan Røde Kors Asyl som organisation er i stand til at leve op til love og konventioner om at sikre en me-ningsfuld udvikling for asylbørn i en tid, hvor antallet af flygtninge stiger, de økonomiske rammer beskæres og politikerne træffer nye beslutninger på asylområdet.”I en samlet vurdering skal forfatternes store overblik over teori og case fremhæves sammen med en stringent og systematisk tilgang til brug af den komplekse analysemodel, der bidrager til en reflekteret konklusion… Det er en styrke og fortjenstfuldt, at specialet bidrager med indsigt i et område, der kun er sparsomt behandlet inden for politologien, men samtidig udgør et fagligt felt, hvor alle forvaltningsniveauer og private og frivillige aktører i Danmark er udfordret på grund af en øget flygtningetilstrømning.”- Redigeret uddrag fra specialeudtalelsen skrevet af lektor og specialevejleder Hanne Nexø Jensen, og kommunaldirektør og censor Jette Joan Runchel.