Calls for papers

The section Political Sociology – Contempory Challenges has been accepted for the ECPR General Conference at Hamburg Universität, August 22-25, 2018.

Section chairs: David Swartz (Boston University), Niilo Kauppi (University of Jyväskylä)

Abstract: At the dawn of the twenty-first century there were signs of a new political sociology emerging that would broaden the focus beyond classical concerns such as the social basis of political participation, voting and political parties, anti-democratic right-wing and left-wing extremism and bureaucratization, elite domination, and the modern state. Attention was shifting to historical change at a global scale (globalization). Culture (language, symbols, religion, the media) was coming to be seen as central to the exercise of power. New linkages among global, society-wide organizations and group levels were being thought about. The formation of social identity and new social movements became key concerns. And data and methodologies integrating structure with agency became the order of the day. Now is a good time to assess how those shifts in attention are working out in light of contemporary challenges such as migration, regional conflict, populism, citizenship, transnational organizations, and particularly those phenomena that challenge established institutions and state-centered analyses. This Section will invite Panel proposals that take up contemporary challenges to the new political sociology.

The Academic Convenors have provisionally allocated the Section 7 Panels. Panels (with 4-5 Papers) and individual Papers can be submitted as of now. The following links are available:

Click here to propose a Panel with Papers (login with your MyECPR account)

Click here to propose an individual Paper (login with your MyECPR account)

Please note, if you included Panels in your Section proposal, these will need to be submitted formally via MyECPR using the links provided above.

The deadline for Panel and Paper proposals is midnight UK time on 15 February 2018.  However, Niilo and I are asking that you submit everything by February 1 so that we can review all submissions and have time to adjust panels and papers and request an additional panel if the number of paper submissions warrant it.

Thanks,

David L. Swartz

ECPR General Conference, Hamburg, August 22-25, 2018

Section chairs: Romain Carnac (Universit of Lausanne), romain.carnac@unil.ch; Alexandre Lambelet (University of Applied Sciences of Western Switzerland) alexandre.lambelet@eesp.ch

Questions of public utility, and the role of private actors in promoting the public interest are intimately linked to changing conceptions of the role of the state in society. Over the past decades, neoliberal ideology and policies have questioned the scale of the welfare state; political, economic and financial crises have further eroded state capacity and social policies. And most European countries have experienced over the past decades a number of reforms questioning in different ways the role of the state, its domains of action, and the division of tasks between public and private actors.

Tax policies and fiscal tools are crucial in regard to this question (Reich 2010). Studying fiscal welfare (Morel, Touzet and Zemmour 2016) or the « Hidden Welfare State » (Howard 1993), and more specifically the political debates on the question of public utility recognition and on tax legislations related to the involvement of private fortunes or organizations in social policies, is a way to analyse the transformations of the welfare state (or welfare mix) in western countries. What kind of fiscal tools are promoted as a way to encourage third sector development or private investment in welfare policies? If there is a need of a « public utility recognition » by some authorities to enjoy a tax exemption, what are the conditions under which tax exempt status is granted and how have they evolved during the last decades? How are public authorities involved in these topics?

In order to start a dialogue between researchers from different disciplines working on a variety of national contexts, we are looking in particular for: 1) Theoretical and methodological contributions addressing the ways tax expenditures are applied in contemporary welfare states, their evolution over time or the comparison between different national contexts and different sectors of activity. 2) Empirical analyses of the ways the notion of « tax expenditures for public utilities » is applied in different sectors of activity. Contributions could in particular speak to one of the following three axes (but other aspects and panel contributions are possible too):

1) Fiscal policy debates and the welfare state: Since the 1990s, all European countries have embarked on a series of reforms to promote philanthropy. Using a political sociology perspective, with a special attention for the role of politics and ideas in shaping the reform process, this axis asks questions such as: What are the policy debates with regard to philanthropy and fiscal expenditures? Who intervenes in these debates? How does the conception of what public utility is evolve? What is the legitimacy of different fiscal tools? And what do these debates tell us on the welfare mix and his evolutions in different countries? What is the role of international contexts and debates (for instance, competition to welcome large non profit organizations).

2) Inquiring fiscal policy at the « street-level »: The Street-level bureaucracy perspective (Lipsky 2010) has shown the importance of lower-level administrators in public policy implementation, but has rarely been used in regard with fiscal policies. This axis addresses this level of analysis and questions the role of administrators in fiscal policy decision-making. What are the dilemmas the front-line workers in public services (for exemple: fiscal autorities employees) have to deal with? How do fiscal administrations’ employees enact public policy in their routine work? What are the systematic and practical dilemmas these employees must overcome? What are the methodological difficulties for studying tax policy at this level, and how to overcome research barriers?

3) Tax expenditures as public policy instruments: In a socio-economic perspective, we would like to analyse reform processes of the welfare states through the development of specific policy instruments, namely tax expenditures for public utility purposes, which remained a blind spot in much of the welfare state literature. What are the consequences of the use of this kind of techniques or policy instruments to attain social goals on the welfare state? How do these transformations in the fiscal system shape the welfare state?

Papers and/or panel proposals must be submitted through the MyECPR platform by February 15, 2018.

https://ecpr.eu/Events/EventDetails.aspx?EventID=115

Click here to download the pdf of this call for papers.

Lipsky M. (2010). Dilemmas of the individual in public services. In: Lipsky M, editor. Street-level bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. 2nd edn. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2010.

Reich, R. (2010). Toward a political theory of philanthropy. Giving well: The ethics of philanthropy, 177–95.

Morel N., Touzet C., Zemmour M., 2016. Fiscal Welfare and Welfare State Reform: A Research Agenda. LIEPP Working Paper, 45.

Howard, Christopher (1993). « The Hidden Side of the American Welfare State », Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 108, No. 3 (Autumn, 1993), pp. 403-436

Conference organized by COSMOS/SNS, ECPR/SG P&M, ESA/RN25

At Scuola Normale Superiore, Florence, Italy

23-25 of May 2018

2018 will mark the anniversary of the 1968 social movements mobilization: from Frenc May, over Anti-Vietnam War protests or the Tlatelolco massacre, to Prague Spring. The 1968 protest cycle considerably shaped social movements, political parties, universities, states, and societies as well as the social movement scholarship. Taking the 1968 anniversary as a stimulating moment for reflection, this conference seeks to provide space for looking at the implications of that period on social movement research as well as addressing a number of key questions in current social movement research. For instance: How have the theoretical and methodological approaches in the social movements field evolved in the aftermath of 1968? How did issues of protest change: which have emerged, disappeared of taken new forms? What is the impact of protest? When do movements bring social change? How do social movements select their strategies? How do they interact with other actors like parties, interest groups or NGO’s? Where do protestors end up in the aftermath of mobilization? What is the role of memory in social movements mobilization? What is the impact of individualisation on contentious politics? What is the role of media coverage and new communication technologies?

We invite submissions from a variety of theoretical and disciplinary perspectives and using a variety of methodologies. The midterm conference aims to bring together distinguished scholars and younger researchers not only from sociology and political science, but also from related disciplines, including economics, geography, anthropology, psychology, history, international relations, and area studies.

To submit an abstract, please email an abstract of no more than 250 words to fiftyyearsafter68@gmail.com.

The deadline for all abstract submissions is the 8th of January 2018.

Applicants will be informed of the outcome by email no later than the 29th of January, 2018. Those offered places must confirm their participation within 10 days, after which places maybe offered to applicants on the reserve list. Participants to the Conference are required to write and submit a max. 7000-8000-word paper no later than 1st of May 2018, papers should be sent to fiftyyearsafter68@gmail.com. Oral presentations should not last more than 10 minutes. Discussants are given 5 minutes per paper.

The conference will open with a mentoring session for young scholars. Young scholars (doctoral and postdoctoral level) will be invited to submit research proposals of up to five pages upon which they would wish to receive feedback. To apply for the mentoring session, send an abstract (250 words including “mentoring session” in the title) to fiftyyearsafter68@gmail.com no later than 8th January 2018. Research proposals should be then sent to fiftyyearsafter68@gmail.com, no later than 1st of May 2018. They will be coupled with two senior scholars who are specialized in the proposal’s subject, and who will read the proposal. The young scholar will get 30 minutes with each senior scholar to receive feedback and to get to know their more senior colleagues.

The conference will feature keynote speeches from:

-Professor Donatella Della Porta, COSMOS, Scuola Normale Superiore

-Professor Olivier Fiellieule, University of Lausanne

-Professor Marco Giugni, University of Geneva

-Professor Béla Greskovits, Central European University

-Professor James Jasper, City University of New York

-Professor Hanspeter Kriesi, European University Institute

-Professor Michele Micheletti, Stockholm University

-Professor Eva Anduiza, Autonomous University of Barcelona

A roundtable will be organized discussing a book:

– Roggeband, Conny and Klandermans, Bert, eds. 2017. Handbook of Social Movements Across Disciplines. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer.

The Conference has no fees and will provide a dinner.

With best regards,

Lorenzo Bosi (SNS, COSMOS), Joost de Moor (Keele University) and Kate?ina Vráblíková (OSU)

Conference to be held in Tampere, Finland, on May 10-11, 2017

CALL FOR PAPERS

The Consortium of Trust Research (CONTRE) at University of Tampere and Åbo Akademi University, Finland, has the pleasure of inviting paper proposals to an international conference.

The conference brings together scholars who study the causes and consequences of social and political trust at different levels of society. It consists of keynote addresses by Professor Jonas Linde (University of Bergen) and Professor Eric M. Uslaner (University of Maryland) as well as four thematic panels.

The conference is organized as a part of the activities of the Academy of Finland funded project the Consortium of Trust Research – Pathways to Political Trust (CONTRE), in operation since September 2015. The key objective of the project is to understand to what extent short-term factors explain fluctuations in political trust and whether long-term cumulative forces explain gradual change.

HOW TO PROPOSE A PAPER

• Participants should apply by proposing a paper related to the general theme of the conference. Participants can indicate their panel preferences in their submission.
• Applications should include an abstract of no more than 250 words describing the proposed paper.
• The deadline for paper proposals is February 22, 2017.
• Propose your paper here: https://www.lyyti.in/politicalandsocialtrust_callforpapers

CONDITIONS OF PARTICIPATION

• Panel chairs will select the papers to be presented at the conference. Those who have proposed papers will be informed about the selection by the end of February 2017.
• The deadline for registration is March 31, 2017. Link to the registration form will be sent to participants via email.
• The deadline for full papers is May 1, 2017.
• There will be no conference fee. The local organizers will cover accommodation costs for two nights as well as lunches and dinners during their stay.

PANEL ABSTRACTS

Panel I The relevance of Social Capital

Chair: Maria Bäck, University of Tampere

The last two decades have seen an upsurge in research on the relevance of social capital in society. Social capital has been claimed to have both a private and a public dimension and it can thus be treated as either an individual-level or an aggregate-level trait. This is the also case when studying the link between social capital and political trust. There has been a large debate on the questions of whether political trust is a cause or consequence of social trust. The relevance of social capital has also been a recent topic of interest in research concerning immigration, multiculturalism and questions of community cohesion. The panel invites papers that scrutinize various aspects of social capital and the causal mechanisms through which it works in society. Papers that propose social capital as a public policy tool, e.g. to achieve social cohesion, are also welcome.

Panel II Contextual factors

Chair: Peter Söderlund, Åbo Akademi University

This panel focuses on the questions of if, how and why the context matters for citizens’ levels of political trust. Contextual factors capture variations in the wider cultural, social, economic, political and institutional context. A variety of contextual factors have been shown to explain cross-national differences in political trust, such as the longevity of democratic rule, cultural homogeneity, aggregate social trust, socioeconomic development, economic performance, political corruption, and power-sharing institutions. We welcome papers that address the mechanisms by which contextual factors, measured at an aggregate level, affect individual attitudes. For example, some environments can be conducive for trust to develop and remain stable over time, while others can be characterized by low trust and short-time fluctuations. As data accumulate over time, more comprehensive cross-sectional or longitudinal analyses are possible to test or refine contextual theories of political trust. Furthermore, contextual effects can be contingent in the sense that particular subsets of citizens develop higher (or lower) trust under certain circumstances. An interesting avenue for research is how and why trust levels vary across various social groups depending on context.

Panel III Political actors

Chair: Elina Kestilä-Kekkonen, University of Tampere

The panel focuses on the relationship between citizens’ political trust and decisions taken by the political elite. It invites both theoretical and empirical papers dealing especially with one of three themes: 1) Economy: How is political trust linked to the economic management of incumbents and consumer confidence? 2) Issue representation: Does opinion congruence between representatives and citizens affect the level of political trust? 3) Anti-incumbency and anti-establishment voting: To what extent is distrust in political actors channeled through the anti-political-establishment vote in Europe, compared to alternate expressions of dissatisfaction, i.e. anti-incumbency voting and abstention?

Panel IV Citizens

Chair: Kim Strandberg, Åbo Akademi University

Variations in short-term trust are often argued to take place due to the occurrence of political scandals or crises of various kinds. Repeated short-term trends in political trust are additionally argued to accumulate and eventually become long-term trends. It is thus crucial to gain more knowledge on the micro-level mechanisms leading to either a decrease or increase in citizens’ short-term political trust. This panel explores the mechanisms shaping citizens’ political trust in the short-term. The panel especially welcomes contributions on how experimental methods can be used to assess such fluctuations in political trust and their causes. Both theoretical and empirical pieces concerning citizens’ political trust are welcome.

CONTACT

Aino Tiihonen
Email: aino.tiihonen(a)uta.fi
Tel: +358 50 318 7649
Address: School of Management (JKK)
FI-33014 UNIVERSITY OF TAMPERE

Josefina Sipinen
Email: josefina.sipinen(a)uta.fi
Tel: +358 50 318 7681
Address: School of Management (JKK)
FI-33014 UNIVERSITY OF TAMPERE

Please find below the call for papers for the conference on Democracy and Participation in the 21st Century organised at the University of Lisbon 12-15 July 2017 (http://pascal.iseg.utl.pt/~socius/eventos/ISA-RC10/index.shtml). In order to send an abstract, please contact the session organisers via email before the 12 March 2017.

Session 6.4. Mandate type, participation as democratisation or deliberation as a limit?

Session Organized by: Cristiano Gianolla, Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal; cgianolla@gmail.com and Ryan Jepson, University of Vienna, Austria; ryan.jepson@uni.vie.ac

Imperative mandates are generally considered contrary to the spirit of liberal representative democracy in which elected representatives must be free to speak and make decisions in the best interest of the whole political community, as opposed to a specific section of society. This session aims to engage with research on the relationship between mandate type (free or imperative) and the implications for participation, deliberation, political patronage, populism and other consequences for the political system. Is it possible to consider that a free mandate expands the distance between the representative and the represented, thereby contributing to the political crisis experienced by liberal democratic regimes? How do people perceive and react to the decision of elected representatives to share their ‘mandate freedom’ with the community, adopting participatory exercises to enable the co-creation and negotiation of political decisions within political constituencies or the electorate? The session especially welcomes papers from political science and sociology researchers in order to investigate the relationship between the mandate, the political system and the political commitment of the political community. Papers may address one or more of the following or similar topics:

• Implications of mandate type in the level of political participation;
• Relation between mandate type and political patronage;
• Relation between mandate type and the commons;
• Relation between mandate type and political responsibility;
• Implications of mandate type in the relationship between representative and represented;
• Implications of mandate type in political satisfaction and accountability;
• Implications of mandate type in the raise of populist phenomena;
• Enhancement of interconnection between representative and represented through e-democracy;
• Mandate type and ideological position;
• Relation between mandate type and party system;
• Relation between mandate type and party organisation;
• Relation between mandate type and social activism;
• Relation between mandate type and infrastructures;
• Mandate types in different world regions;
• Mandate types and social movements.