The limits of a diliberative cosmopolitanism : the case of 'new governance' in the EU

This paper illuminates the limits of a cosmopolitan deliberative governance via an analysis of EU practices and theories of ‘governance’. Analysing the point at which the term ‘governance’ became prominent in the institutions, via a consideration of the European Commission’s 2001 White Paper and the various proposals for ‘new governance’ produced by its in-house think-tank, the Forward Studies Unit (FSU), in the late 1990s, it detects in this turn a Habermasian discourse ethic, which has informed much contemporary social, legal and political theorising on governance and deliberative democracy. In these reports an open, pluralist and procedural rationality and practice of governance is advocated as thirdway between state and market. However, the implicit conditions required for consensus or learning are constitutive of important closures. Turning to recent practice, the EU’s ‘Open Method of Co-ordination’ (OMC) – much vaunted by certain deliberative scholars - while ostensibly embodying an inclusive procedural rationality, is significantly circumscribed by an extant market constitution which excludes certain forms of welfare or social policy. More generally, it is suggested that advocates of a deliberative post-national governance fail to scrutinise the ways in which their key agent, civil society, has been intimately connected with dominant governing rationalities such as those which privilege the market, both historically and contemporaneously

The ethics of cosmopolitan government in Europe : subjects of interest/subjects of right

Adopting a Foucauldian critical methodology, this thesis reflects upon the inherent ambiguities of cosmopolitan government in/of EU(rope), which, it is suggested, are borne out in the ambiguous relationship between the particular liberal subjects – a ‘subject of interest’ and ‘subject of right’ - that such government seeks to identify, produce and foster. Developing Foucault’s own recently published genealogy of liberal government, it is argued that cosmopolitan government can be conceived as the promotion of (neo)liberal deregulatory market agendas within and beyond EU(rope): a EU(rope) of free competitive ‘subjects of interest’, increasingly conceived as entrepreneurs. This, it is argued, is the constitutive basis of contemporary post-national government in EU(rope) (Part I). Taking seriously the nuances in Foucault’s analysis, cosmopolitan government can, however, also be understood in terms of the evocation of EU(rope) as socially just nation-state rooted in constitution and social-contract: a EU(rope) of ‘subjects of right’ or citizens. Such a conceptualisation is often evident in scholarly and practical opposition to the perceived extremes of a ‘market’ Europe, as illustrated via an analysis of Habermas’s scholarship and French discourses on EU(rope) (Part II). Finally, taking the deliberative impulse in Habermas much further than he does in his own work on EU(rope), a range of scholarly interventions and associated institutional innovations have thought/ practiced cosmopolitan government as a multi-levelled, multi-scalar, open-ended deliberative endeavour ostensibly respectful of Europe’s extant plurality in theory and practice, but this is not without its own foundational ontology of the autonomous, rational, reasonable European subject. Indeed, via an analysis of deliberative forms of governance in contemporary EU(rope), it is argued that such a conception of rationality or reason is - in both theory and practice - closely associated with the aforementioned (neo)liberal rationality of cosmopolitan government to the extent that such rationalities are EU(rope)’s very condition of possibility (Part III). The thesis demonstrates, then, that the ambiguous relationship between a ‘subject of interest’ and ‘subject of right’ is not overcome in either the theory or practice of cosmopolitan government. It concludes by postulating that there may be good ethico-political reasons for giving up the attempt to overcome such ambiguity

Haemodynamic optimisation: are we dynamic enough?

Perioperative haemodynamic optimisation of high-risk surgical patients has long been documented to improve both short-term and long-term outcomes, as well as to reduce the rate of postoperative complications. Based on the evidence, cardiac output monitoring and fluid resuscitation, combined with the use of inotropes, would seem to be the gold standard of care for these difficult surgical cases. However, clinicians do not universally apply these techniques and principles in their everyday practice. By exploring the reasons why this is so, perhaps we could move forward in the standardisation of care and the application of evidence-based practice

The ethics of cosmopolitan government in Europe : subjects of interest/subjects of right

Adopting a Foucauldian critical methodology, this thesis reflects upon the inherent ambiguities of cosmopolitan government in/of EU(rope), which, it is suggested, are borne out in the ambiguous relationship between the particular liberal subjects – a ‘subject of interest’ and ‘subject of right’ - that such government seeks to identify, produce and foster. Developing Foucault’s own recently published genealogy of liberal government, it is argued that cosmopolitan government can be conceived as the promotion of (neo)liberal deregulatory market agendas within and beyond EU(rope): a EU(rope) of free competitive ‘subjects of interest’, increasingly conceived as entrepreneurs. This, it is argued, is the constitutive basis of contemporary post-national government in EU(rope) (Part I). Taking seriously the nuances in Foucault’s analysis, cosmopolitan government can, however, also be understood in terms of the evocation of EU(rope) as socially just nation-state rooted in constitution and social-contract: a EU(rope) of ‘subjects of right’ or citizens. Such a conceptualisation is often evident in scholarly and practical opposition to the perceived extremes of a ‘market’ Europe, as illustrated via an analysis of Habermas’s scholarship and French discourses on EU(rope) (Part II). Finally, taking the deliberative impulse in Habermas much further than he does in his own work on EU(rope), a range of scholarly interventions and associated institutional innovations have thought/ practiced cosmopolitan government as a multi-levelled, multi-scalar, open-ended deliberative endeavour ostensibly respectful of Europe’s extant plurality in theory and practice, but this is not without its own foundational ontology of the autonomous, rational, reasonable European subject. Indeed, via an analysis of deliberative forms of governance in contemporary EU(rope), it is argued that such a conception of rationality or reason is - in both theory and practice - closely associated with the aforementioned (neo)liberal rationality of cosmopolitan government to the extent that such rationalities are EU(rope)’s very condition of possibility (Part III). The thesis demonstrates, then, that the ambiguous relationship between a ‘subject of interest’ and ‘subject of right’ is not overcome in either the theory or practice of cosmopolitan government. It concludes by postulating that there may be good ethico-political reasons for giving up the attempt to overcome such ambiguity.EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceEconomic and Social Research Council (Great Britain) (ESRC)GBUnited Kingdo

Library of Coastal Vulnerability Indicators guidance document

The Resilience-Increasing Strategies for Coasts – Toolkit (RISC-KIT) FP7 EU project (2013-2017) aims to produce a set of three innovative and EU-coherent open-source and open-access methods, tools and management approaches (the RISC-KIT) in support of coastal managers, decision-makers and policy makers to reduce risk and increase resilience to low-frequency, high impact hydro-meteorological events. Risk is defined within this project as the product of the probability of a hazard, the exposure of receptors and their vulnerability. Representing the vulnerability and the potential role of DRR in their reduction is crucial for supporting the decision. As such a specific task of the RISC-KIT project (Task 2.2) is dedicated to developing a Library of Vulnerability Indicators to input in the RISC-KIT Toolkit and to test the tools on 11 case studies. The deliverable “Coastal Vulnerability Indicator Library” is composed of a Microsoft Excel database and a guidance document. The deliverable introduces the necessary concepts and methods, provides a review and a collection of existing indicators and proposes methodologies for developing new indicators. The Library has been constructed around four categories: Built Environment, Population, Ecosystem and Systems. The Library also identifies Disaster Reduction Measures influencing vulnerability and proposes methods to include within the assessment of vulnerability

Ripping off the Band-Aid: Scrutiny Bundling in the Wake of Social Disapproval

Activities that hazard the possibility of increased scrutiny are an unavoidable reality for many firms. While managers may face the need to engage in these activities, there is little research on when managers decide to do so. Existing theoretical perspectives on status quo deviations have not sufficiently addressed how managers order the firm’s essential activities that differ primarily in terms of the scrutiny those activities engender. Drawing from concepts in the accounting and political science literatures, we advance a “scrutiny-bundling” perspective that suggests that firms engage in scrutiny-hazarding action in the wake of social disapproval, assessed in this study via negative media coverage. We further theorize that a strong linkage between the focus of media coverage and the specific scrutiny-hazarding action exacerbates this relationship. We then contend that managers at firms that are either large in size or that perform well relative to their aspirations are less sensitive to social disapproval, and are therefore less likely to engage in scrutiny bundling. We test our hypotheses on a sample of 100 firms in the upstream petroleum industry and find general support for our theories

Civic Engagement and People with Disabilities: The Role of Advocacy and Technology

Disability legislation acknowledges the right of people with disabilities to participate in political and public life on an equal basis with others, but there continue to be significant barriers in accessing all aspects of the policymaking process. Advocacy and technology are two core strategies used by the disability community to advance the rights of people with disabilities. Further understanding of how these strategies and tools empower people with disabilities to connect with government is needed. This research seeks to develop and enhance civic knowledge and practices of people with disabilities by conducting civic engagement training and evaluation and examining the role of four disability advocacy organizations. Using qualitative and quantitative data, the research explores the inclusion and participation of people with disabilities in civic society, with a focus on advocacy and technology

Merit versus maleness: How strategic positioning can mitigate external gender bias

Despite the proactive efforts of many firms to combat gender bias within their organizations, societal prejudices still disadvantage women leaders and the firms who employ them. This external gender bias shapes outside stakeholder evaluations of women leaders’ efforts in various ways, and firms need strategies to cope with this external gender bias. We examine the conditions that might alleviate this burden of external bias and what women leaders and top executives can do to leverage these conditions—from a strategic positioning perspective—that will effectively allow female leaders to differentiate their work. To do this, we synthesize and build upon evidence that the external gender bias against women leaders diminishes when they lead in areas that are unconventional rather than mainstream. We then propose a two-step process based on (1) identifying the likely threat of external gender bias, which is stronger in some industry contexts than others, and (2) leveraging unconventionality to circumvent male prototypical comparisons, thereby reducing the hazards of external gender bias