Lecture 1 2011 Politics (2)

8/7/2019 Lecture 1 2011 Politics (2)

1/26

Politics, statehood and international

governance

Dr Sarah Bracking

Lecture 1

1st February 2011


2/26

Objectives

This lecture introduces the module andthe subject sub-discipline of politics anddevelopment in the context of post-war

politics and international governance.

2


3/26

Outline

1 What is politics and development?

2 Political science

3 Theories of power

4 What are nation-states and how dothey work politically in terms ofdelivering wellbeing to citizens?

5 What is international governance?

3


4/26


5/26

1.1 Politics and development: complex genealogy

Political science (circa 1960s): institutional focus,generally uses quantitative methodology, studies politicalinstitutions, parties, voting systems.

Political sociology: from Weber or earlier, particularlystrong from the post-structuralist and cultural turn in the

social sciences. Focus on discourse, ideology and power,Gramsci, Foucault, Bourdieu. Uses qualitativemethodology.

Politicalliberalism: resonates with the tradition ofEnglish classical liberalism and political economy(Hobbes and Locke). Uses normative, but historicalmethodology. [next week]

In development, political liberalism is dominant andpolitical development advocates liberaldemocratisation.

5


6/26

2 Political science

Political science generally concerned withthe processes, principles, and structureof government and of political

institutions. Quantitative, comparative and normative

political science methodologies are mosteffective when evaluating broad regimetypes and long-run institutional changes.

Techniques used around polling andpredictive public opinion sampling alsohave a utility to planners and politicalrepresentatives.

6


7/26

2.1 Political science research

Is outcome oriented, based in measuringinstitutional features such as numbersand types of representatives, rather than

about social processes that underpin andinfluence these outcomes.

The standardisation of politics intocategories of regime types, electoral

systems, political parties does notaddress the specific and local in theresearch process.

7


8/26

2.2 Political research in development

Traditional political science has categorisedpoor people as living in environments whichlack democratic norms of representationand accountability, such as in Freedom

House terms, societies which are partlyfree or unfree (Freedom House, 2003 seealso Human Rights Watch, 2003).

Arguments can quickly become circular: alack of power leads to poverty, poor people

have a lack of power, and a consequence ofbeing poor is to, again, have little power. Few signposts to the policy maker in terms

of when to intervene, and what to do, indevelopment.

8


9/26

2.3 Has found

Two broad trends relevant to the politicsof development. Poor people

have very few positive relationships withformal political institutions measured by theirrepresentation and likelihood of participatingin voting processes (Beetham et al, 2002).

Are likely to have weak means to holdpolitical and economic elites to account andwith which to claim rights to resources(International IDEA, 2000).

9


10/26

2.4 Within the modernist tradition

Political science is about the application of science,normally using quantitative methods, to understandingpolitical processes and procedures, for example, in studiesof voters and voting

Power is understood as instrumental and about outcomesin decision-making processes

An agency-centred, measureable, objective contest ofplural interests

For example, Dahl, classic definition of power: A has power over B to the extent that s/he can get B to do

something that B would not do otherwise (1957, p.201)

See Colin Hay, (1997)

Political science still tends to maintain a pluralist view ofpower

10


11/26

3 But sociological concept of power expands

discipline of politics

Bachrach and Baratz, 1962, 1970, introduced

non-decision-making where

A devotes his (sic) energies to creating or reinforcing

social and political values and institutional practices thatlimit the scope of the political process to public

consideration of only those issues which are

comparatively innocuous to B (1962, p.948)

Contentious issues removed from chamber An agenda-setting dimension added [to the

agency-centred approach]

classical pluralism undermined11


12/26

3.1 Power

But what if there is no conflict/apparentconsensus, and actors do not perceivethemselves to have an interest, or judge itwrongly [cf. false consciousness]?

Enter Lukes, who discusses when A can influenceor shape Bs preferences is it not the most insidious exercise of power to prevent

peoplefrom having grievances by shaping theirperceptions, cognitions, and preferences in such a waythat they accept their role in the existing order of things,either because they can see or imagine no alternative toit, or because they see it as natural or unchangeable, orbecause they value it as divinely ordained and beneficial?(Lukes, 1974, p.24)

12


13/26

3.2 Hays solution

Colin Hay (1997), if power is decision-making, agenda-setting and preference-shaping, can we go beyondbehaviouralism [and idea of real and perceivedinterests, which invites elite judgement?]

[in Politics 17(1) ps. 45-52] Distinguish between identifying where power exists,

or its analysis, from its critique.

Definition can be three dimensional, power is abouthow contexts are shaped and about the capacity to

define what is possible for others [cf Habermas andFoucault], ability of A to have an effect over thepossibilities of B (Hay, 1995: 191)

This definition allows power to have a positive effect,power of/to , and also can lay the basis for judging a

negative effect, power over 13


14/26


15/26

4.1 State cont:

At least three general perspectives are found:

the narrow concept: the state as a set of

institutions or system of authority

the sloppy concept: the state as the

government of the day

the broad concept: the state as the

configuration of power in society, i.e. defined interms of the social interests, class character, of

the society over which it presides and which it

defends.15


16/26

4.2 Different definitions

1) regards the state as being essentially socially

neutral, above and separate from what is called

civil society, and so capable of being understood in

terms of the operation and development of itsinstitutional processes.

3) regards the state as defending, reinforcing,

preserving and shaping a particular social order.

16


17/26

4.3 What states do, according to 1)

The nation-state, liberal ideal form assumesterritorial integrity, sovereignty, and legitimacy,and then (rationally)

R

egulates the domestic economy Manages fiscal and monetary policy

Provides social services and welfare

Defines and defends a common sense of social order andpurpose

It arbitrates (or represses) social disputes

Defends the rule of law, the legal system

Defends the rule of money, the currency

17


18/26

4.4 What states do (according to 3)

The Coercive function: preserving order, ensuringsocial control, defending the status quo. There ismost agreement on this function [Weber, Lenin,Hobbes, etc]

The Legitimation function: obtaining consent forauthority, ensuring social consensus andcohesion, representing class power as socialpower. [Weber, Gramsci, Habermas, Offe]

The social reproduction function: reproducingnation, state and society, i.e. defending the

territory of the state, ensuring economic growthand progress, directing economic developmentand policy, managing social provision and social

investment.18


19/26

4.5 But not all states are the samePost-colonial states (Mick Moore):

Shaped in unequal, pre-existing system

Have a disconnect between the state and the citizen

Suffer from: Incomplete state formation

Unnatural birth

History of external control

Unearned state income

Declining cost of military superiority

International criminal networks

Competitiveness of aid donors

(See also Moore, M (2001) Understanding Variations in Political Systems in DevelopingCountries: A Practical Framework, November, IDS Working Paper)

19


20/26

20

4.6 The State as nation, territory and institution:

a universal framework

Sense of

stateness

Boundary Practices Others Key processes

State as

nation

State as a

community;

state as a

national people

Discursive:

belonging;

communal or

shared national

identity

Inclusion/

exclusion from

full citizenship;

national

ceremony

Women;

ethnic and

religious

minorities;

partial

citizens

Citizenship;

nationalism;

racism; patriarchy;

incarceration

State as

territory

Geo-politicallybounded area of

administrative

sovereignty

Physical:administrativel

y policed

political

frontier/border

Border controls;customs;

defence;

maintenance of

a standing army

Other nation-states; other

foreign

offices;

foreign

citizens

Geo-politics;diplomacy; war

(hot and cold);

defence;

immigration

State as

institution

State as an

assemblage of

coordinated

apparatuses,

institutions and

practices

Practical:

institutional

reach into the

private sphere,

the economy

and civil

society

Mode of

intervention;

extent of state

regulation,

surveillance and

funding

Apparatuses of

he private

sphere

(family); civil

society

(church,

media); and

the economy

(firms)

Bureaucracy; legal

and economic

regulation;

surveillance;

taxation and

subsidization

Reproduced from Hay, C (1996)Re-stating Social and Political Change, (Open University), p.13


21/26

5. Politics becomes governance

The institutionalist political science tradition is

dominant in politics and development, and power

is generally occluded

Governance speaks to positivist, rational andinstitutional views of progress

Governance is also heavily embedded in liberalism

Well governed societies have democratically

constituted authority and rational public policy

geared to the public good

21


22/26


23/26

23


24/26

5.2 Governance: definition

[Governance] resumes older and broader meanings ofgovernment and governing that are not necessarily tied tothe nation-state and, in some ways, have become

obscured by the rise of the liberal national state and itsidentification of government with the government, i.ewith the body that claims supreme authority within agiven territory and its various apparatuses. It givesparticular emphasis to issues of the government of

human conduct in all contexts, by various authorities andagencies, invoking particular forms of truth, and usingdefinite resources, means and techniques

(Dean, (1999) Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society, Sage p.2-3)24


25/26

Tutorial discussion points:

Good governance and the state

Some general discussion questions:

What is the character of politics in development theory?

What is governance and how does this differ frompolitics?

What role should states play in development?

What role does politics play in meeting developmentobjectives (or not)?

How well do concepts of governance work in southernstates?

What role can advocacy and non-governmentalorganisations play in improving political outcomes?

25


26/26

Conclusion: Impasse in politics and

development interventions?

Is there a widespread failure to think outsidenormative expressions of what should be and whatpolitical institutions should look like?

Is this due to the overwhelming neoliberalparadigm dominant in political science?

(see Bracking, 2005; Hickey, 2010)

How would this paradigm be escaped andempirically informed modelling of politics becarried out?

26

Lecture 1 2011 Politics (2)

Documents

Transcript of Lecture 1 2011 Politics (2)