Pub Date : 2024-01-08DOI: 10.1332/20437897y2023d000000029
Heikki Ikäheimo
Recognition in general comes in many flavours, and so do desires and hopes for recognition. The same is true of recognition of agency in particular. In this short text, I will engage in some basic conceptual work that could be useful for thinking about the theme of this special issue. I will, first, distinguish between several forms of agency that matter in international relations (though not only there) and that can be either recognised or remain unrecognised. Second, I will reflect on what exactly it may mean to ‘recognise’ agency of these various kinds. Finally, I will discuss possible uses of the denial of agency in international relations.
{"title":"Agency and its recognition in international relations","authors":"Heikki Ikäheimo","doi":"10.1332/20437897y2023d000000029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20437897y2023d000000029","url":null,"abstract":"Recognition in general comes in many flavours, and so do desires and hopes for recognition. The same is true of recognition of agency in particular. In this short text, I will engage in some basic conceptual work that could be useful for thinking about the theme of this special issue. I will, first, distinguish between several forms of agency that matter in international relations (though not only there) and that can be either recognised or remain unrecognised. Second, I will reflect on what exactly it may mean to ‘recognise’ agency of these various kinds. Finally, I will discuss possible uses of the denial of agency in international relations.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":"55 25","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139447033","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-08DOI: 10.1332/20437897y2023d000000033
Haud Guéguen
The aim of this article is to examine the normative effects of neoliberalism on the social processes of recognition, or what we might call the ‘neoliberal regime of recognition’. The hypothesis defended here is that this new regime of recognition tends to make the norm of the ‘hyper-agency’ of the ‘hyper-subject’ the ideal norm to which one must conform in order to be socially recognised. As a result, there is a tendency to misrecognise and instrumentalise the radical vulnerability that underpins human beings’ vital need for recognition.
{"title":"Hyper-agency as the new norm of social recognition: notes on the neoliberal regime of recognition","authors":"Haud Guéguen","doi":"10.1332/20437897y2023d000000033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20437897y2023d000000033","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to examine the normative effects of neoliberalism on the social processes of recognition, or what we might call the ‘neoliberal regime of recognition’. The hypothesis defended here is that this new regime of recognition tends to make the norm of the ‘hyper-agency’ of the ‘hyper-subject’ the ideal norm to which one must conform in order to be socially recognised. As a result, there is a tendency to misrecognise and instrumentalise the radical vulnerability that underpins human beings’ vital need for recognition.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":"46 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139447670","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-04DOI: 10.1332/20437897y2023d000000031
Michelle Murray
How do declining great powers cope with a sudden loss of status? Great powers establish routinized relations of recognition to maintain and reproduce their status as great powers in the international sphere. During periods of structural change, when social norms and these routinized relations of recognition are in flux, the prospect of misrecognition is especially pronounced. Misrecognition leads to the experience of frustrated agency and ontological insecurity. In these scenarios, declining great powers assert agency over their status by anchoring their insecure identity in symbols that are expressive of their status as great powers. To illustrate this argument, the article considers France’s decision to develop an independent nuclear capability after the Second World War. Rather than an instrument of security, nuclear weapons gave France the illusion of an independent identity and offered ontological security.
{"title":"Illusions of independence: frustrated agency and the politics of great power (mis)recognition","authors":"Michelle Murray","doi":"10.1332/20437897y2023d000000031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20437897y2023d000000031","url":null,"abstract":"How do declining great powers cope with a sudden loss of status? Great powers establish routinized relations of recognition to maintain and reproduce their status as great powers in the international sphere. During periods of structural change, when social norms and these routinized relations of recognition are in flux, the prospect of misrecognition is especially pronounced. Misrecognition leads to the experience of frustrated agency and ontological insecurity. In these scenarios, declining great powers assert agency over their status by anchoring their insecure identity in symbols that are expressive of their status as great powers. To illustrate this argument, the article considers France’s decision to develop an independent nuclear capability after the Second World War. Rather than an instrument of security, nuclear weapons gave France the illusion of an independent identity and offered ontological security.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":"28 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139450649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-02DOI: 10.1332/20437897y2023d000000028
S. Brincat, Thomas Lindemann
The phenomenon of misrecognition has been analysed under various angles by philosophy, political theory, sociology and lately also by international relations (IR). In IR, (mis)recognition is mainly understood as either status denial (i.e. denial of legal state recognition), inflated honor pretentions (including positive self-images, mythical narratives of the past, Great Power projections and so on), or as a denial of vital conditions necessary for identity, individuality, and freedom. There has been much theoretical work on the problem of inclusion/exclusion or the insider/outsider problem in IR and various empirical studies have shown that misrecognition can contribute to international conflict, international inequalities, (neo)colonialism, masculine domination, and limit the overall rationality of decision-making. However, what has been generally overlooked is the question of agency, the ‘who’ that is seeking and/or entitled to be an object and subject of recognition and how such exclusions and related pathologies result from forms of misrecognition. This introduction to Agentic Misrecognition in World Politics engages with some of the problems related to the question of (mis)recognition and agency in IR, the patterns of excluded recognition, and the normative conditions that pertain to these processes of (mis)recognition. It closes with a summation of the research articles and forum contributions to this volume.
{"title":"Agentic misrecognition in world politics","authors":"S. Brincat, Thomas Lindemann","doi":"10.1332/20437897y2023d000000028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20437897y2023d000000028","url":null,"abstract":"The phenomenon of misrecognition has been analysed under various angles by philosophy, political theory, sociology and lately also by international relations (IR). In IR, (mis)recognition is mainly understood as either status denial (i.e. denial of legal state recognition), inflated honor pretentions (including positive self-images, mythical narratives of the past, Great Power projections and so on), or as a denial of vital conditions necessary for identity, individuality, and freedom. There has been much theoretical work on the problem of inclusion/exclusion or the insider/outsider problem in IR and various empirical studies have shown that misrecognition can contribute to international conflict, international inequalities, (neo)colonialism, masculine domination, and limit the overall rationality of decision-making. However, what has been generally overlooked is the question of agency, the ‘who’ that is seeking and/or entitled to be an object and subject of recognition and how such exclusions and related pathologies result from forms of misrecognition. This introduction to Agentic Misrecognition in World Politics engages with some of the problems related to the question of (mis)recognition and agency in IR, the patterns of excluded recognition, and the normative conditions that pertain to these processes of (mis)recognition. It closes with a summation of the research articles and forum contributions to this volume.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":"129 19","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139453328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-02DOI: 10.1332/20437897y2023d000000030
Moudwe Daga, Julia Gallagher
Theories of international recognition posit that states’ identities are formed through dialogical relations with other states. However, they often overlook the ways in which weaker states’ struggles, constrained within the languages of the powerful, produce misrecognition and inhibit identity formation. This is the experience of many post-colonial francophone African states whose search for international recognition has been inhibited by their special relationship with France, their former coloniser. This article shows how such struggles for recognition can fail. It draws on two examples of francophone African countries, showing how their search for recognition sprung from the misrecognition of colonial experiences. Each has made explicit attempts to attract richer forms of state recognition through purposive acts but has continued to do so within post-colonial conditions. Using citizens’ understandings of these struggles, the article explores what drove them, how they manifested and how they unravelled. It draws on Frantz Fanon’s account of misrecognition, making a novel interpretation based on his concept of ‘speaking proper French’, or how experiences of ‘identity alienation’ can only produce further misrecognition.
{"title":"‘Speaking proper French’: citizen bids for state recognition in Chad and Côte d’Ivoire","authors":"Moudwe Daga, Julia Gallagher","doi":"10.1332/20437897y2023d000000030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20437897y2023d000000030","url":null,"abstract":"Theories of international recognition posit that states’ identities are formed through dialogical relations with other states. However, they often overlook the ways in which weaker states’ struggles, constrained within the languages of the powerful, produce misrecognition and inhibit identity formation. This is the experience of many post-colonial francophone African states whose search for international recognition has been inhibited by their special relationship with France, their former coloniser. This article shows how such struggles for recognition can fail. It draws on two examples of francophone African countries, showing how their search for recognition sprung from the misrecognition of colonial experiences. Each has made explicit attempts to attract richer forms of state recognition through purposive acts but has continued to do so within post-colonial conditions. Using citizens’ understandings of these struggles, the article explores what drove them, how they manifested and how they unravelled. It draws on Frantz Fanon’s account of misrecognition, making a novel interpretation based on his concept of ‘speaking proper French’, or how experiences of ‘identity alienation’ can only produce further misrecognition.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":"19 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139452618","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-21DOI: 10.1332/20437897y2023d000000026
John D. Feldmann
This article employs the framework of agentic misrecognition to explore the institutional dynamics and distinct forms of agency operative in the global monetary system. The analysis is framed by the concept of “political recognition,” exploring the relationship between the dominant actor and subordinate actors, and showing the complex ways by which misrecognition is performed through, as well as shaped by, the sociopolitical logics of the monetary system. It shows how with the employment of formalist methodologies, the dominant actor protects its status by misrecognizing and resisting pleas for greater concern and more coordination, seeing subordinates not as creative agents but as challenges to its dominance. The analysis also explores how and why subordinate members come to support the misrecognition scheme even though it perpetuates instability and systemic inequalities. Similar to most studies on recognition theory, this article pays close attention to the plight of the misrecognized, but the analysis is also concerned with understanding the underlying cause of the misrecognition scheme and how the dominant actor as misrecognizer contributes to dysfunctions in the monetary system. In demonstrating the underlying features of the misrecognition scheme, this critique challenges established theories and methodologies in the monetary sphere.
{"title":"Agentic misrecognition in the global monetary system","authors":"John D. Feldmann","doi":"10.1332/20437897y2023d000000026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20437897y2023d000000026","url":null,"abstract":"This article employs the framework of agentic misrecognition to explore the institutional dynamics and distinct forms of agency operative in the global monetary system. The analysis is framed by the concept of “political recognition,” exploring the relationship between the dominant actor and subordinate actors, and showing the complex ways by which misrecognition is performed through, as well as shaped by, the sociopolitical logics of the monetary system. It shows how with the employment of formalist methodologies, the dominant actor protects its status by misrecognizing and resisting pleas for greater concern and more coordination, seeing subordinates not as creative agents but as challenges to its dominance. The analysis also explores how and why subordinate members come to support the misrecognition scheme even though it perpetuates instability and systemic inequalities. Similar to most studies on recognition theory, this article pays close attention to the plight of the misrecognized, but the analysis is also concerned with understanding the underlying cause of the misrecognition scheme and how the dominant actor as misrecognizer contributes to dysfunctions in the monetary system. In demonstrating the underlying features of the misrecognition scheme, this critique challenges established theories and methodologies in the monetary sphere.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":"38 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138949798","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-11DOI: 10.1332/20437897y2023d000000010
_
In Western academic spaces, more and more stakeholders are claiming commitments to ‘decolonisation’. Yet in environments shaped by rankings, impact factors, citation numbers and third-party funding figures, what claims to be decolonial scholarship can easily end up being as extractive and violent as the subject it is claiming to confront. In this article, we reflect on attempts to decolonise both the discipline and practice of ‘development’, especially with regard to knowledge ‘production’ in this academic disciplinary space. We are doing this from a particular situatedness that is itself contradictory, as we are both facilitators of an EU-funded network focused on ‘Decolonising Development’ and of Convivial Thinking, a non-institutional, transnational web-based collective. We argue that imperial forms of knowing and making sense of the world are deeply entrenched in the structures of higher education, both shaping and limiting the ways in which what we call ‘development’ is researched, taught and practised. By reflecting on instances of academic activism and institutional pushback in both aforementioned networks, we show how institutional violence limits scholarly imaginations in ways that make sure academic or dominant knowledge structures are not radically challenged, thereby making claims of decolonisation purely performative. Despite this, we also point to concrete openings in both networks where undoing the entanglements of decolonising narratives, ‘development’ and the imperatives of scholarship – and thereby dismantling the master’s house that sustains it – seems within reach.
{"title":"(Un)Doing performative decolonisation in the global development ‘imaginaries’ of academia","authors":"_","doi":"10.1332/20437897y2023d000000010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20437897y2023d000000010","url":null,"abstract":"In Western academic spaces, more and more stakeholders are claiming commitments to ‘decolonisation’. Yet in environments shaped by rankings, impact factors, citation numbers and third-party funding figures, what claims to be decolonial scholarship can easily end up being as extractive and violent as the subject it is claiming to confront. In this article, we reflect on attempts to decolonise both the discipline and practice of ‘development’, especially with regard to knowledge ‘production’ in this academic disciplinary space. We are doing this from a particular situatedness that is itself contradictory, as we are both facilitators of an EU-funded network focused on ‘Decolonising Development’ and of Convivial Thinking, a non-institutional, transnational web-based collective. We argue that imperial forms of knowing and making sense of the world are deeply entrenched in the structures of higher education, both shaping and limiting the ways in which what we call ‘development’ is researched, taught and practised. By reflecting on instances of academic activism and institutional pushback in both aforementioned networks, we show how institutional violence limits scholarly imaginations in ways that make sure academic or dominant knowledge structures are not radically challenged, thereby making claims of decolonisation purely performative. Despite this, we also point to concrete openings in both networks where undoing the entanglements of decolonising narratives, ‘development’ and the imperatives of scholarship – and thereby dismantling the master’s house that sustains it – seems within reach.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":"9 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138584447","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-07DOI: 10.1332/20437897y2023d000000027
Regina Heller
Russia’s open military aggression against Ukraine is a matter of agentic misrecognition rather than of classic rationalist considerations. Through the war in Ukraine, Russia exercises neglected agency and tries to reverse the feeling of marginalisation, irrelevance and status degradation in world politics. Russia’s war in Ukraine allows the current Russian leadership to escape from the stigma of an impotent power and to stabilise its identity as an important one, independent of Western norms and rules. Looking at Russia’s revisionism from the perspective of agentic misrecognition has some advantages. First, it helps in filling gaps that conventional interpretations and explanations of the war, found prominently in both public and academic discourses, leave open. These are problematic because they are too entrenched in positivist thinking and construct the world along essentialist concepts. Second, it allows room to understand the war as the result of a contingent process. In this process, it is not only the agency expectations of Russia’s leadership that play an important role but also the relational dynamics between Russia and the West and their impact on the further transformation of Russian identity constructions and self-descriptions.
{"title":"Important, not impotent: Russia and the exercise of agency through the war in Ukraine","authors":"Regina Heller","doi":"10.1332/20437897y2023d000000027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20437897y2023d000000027","url":null,"abstract":"Russia’s open military aggression against Ukraine is a matter of agentic misrecognition rather than of classic rationalist considerations. Through the war in Ukraine, Russia exercises neglected agency and tries to reverse the feeling of marginalisation, irrelevance and status degradation in world politics. Russia’s war in Ukraine allows the current Russian leadership to escape from the stigma of an impotent power and to stabilise its identity as an important one, independent of Western norms and rules. Looking at Russia’s revisionism from the perspective of agentic misrecognition has some advantages. First, it helps in filling gaps that conventional interpretations and explanations of the war, found prominently in both public and academic discourses, leave open. These are problematic because they are too entrenched in positivist thinking and construct the world along essentialist concepts. Second, it allows room to understand the war as the result of a contingent process. In this process, it is not only the agency expectations of Russia’s leadership that play an important role but also the relational dynamics between Russia and the West and their impact on the further transformation of Russian identity constructions and self-descriptions.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":"22 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138591329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-29DOI: 10.1332/20437897y2023d000000025
Titus Stahl
Theories of recognition often acknowledge that some forms of recognition can be ideological. Only recently have authors also begun to ask whether all ideological phenomena involve a more basic form of misrecognition of epistemic agents. I argue that an expressivist reconstruction of the Marxian theory of ideology can help us to understand what forms of misrecognition are involved in ideology. According to this understanding, ideological discourses reflect the rules of hierarchical social practices and impose limits on the capacity of subjects to challenge dominant conceptual distinctions. While rational epistemic subjects will tend to experience such limits as misrecognition, this does not require any negative interpersonal attitudes on the part of others. Therefore, at least some forms of ideology involve primarily structural, rather than interpersonal, misrecognition. I argue that ideologies that persist without involving widespread false beliefs can best be understood in this way and that neoliberalism is a paradigmatic example of such an ideology.
{"title":"Ideology as misrecognition","authors":"Titus Stahl","doi":"10.1332/20437897y2023d000000025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20437897y2023d000000025","url":null,"abstract":"Theories of recognition often acknowledge that some forms of recognition can be ideological. Only recently have authors also begun to ask whether all ideological phenomena involve a more basic form of misrecognition of epistemic agents. I argue that an expressivist reconstruction of the Marxian theory of ideology can help us to understand what forms of misrecognition are involved in ideology. According to this understanding, ideological discourses reflect the rules of hierarchical social practices and impose limits on the capacity of subjects to challenge dominant conceptual distinctions. While rational epistemic subjects will tend to experience such limits as misrecognition, this does not require any negative interpersonal attitudes on the part of others. Therefore, at least some forms of ideology involve primarily structural, rather than interpersonal, misrecognition. I argue that ideologies that persist without involving widespread false beliefs can best be understood in this way and that neoliberalism is a paradigmatic example of such an ideology.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139211220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-22DOI: 10.1332/20437897y2023d000000023
John Lazarus
Drawing on the experience of editing this special issue, I propose a method for developing the early stages of social policy interventions requiring cooperation, based on two phenomena foundational to approaching this challenge. I recommend that the first stage is methodological – the application of behavioural game theory – and that the second is analysis of a psychological process – the motivations of those involved. A potential third step is use of a toolbox of factors known to encourage cooperation that I discussed in my introductory article for the issue. Three further processes are important for social dilemma policy development: conditional cooperation, trust and feedback. I go on to discuss: the contrasting properties of selfish and altruistic motives for cooperating, particularly in terms of their sensitivity to influence; the long-term prospects for altruistically motivated cooperation; and ethical aspects of tackling societal dilemmas through bottom-up and top-down agents for change. Finally, I consider the current state of the relationship between behavioural science and social policy.
{"title":"Designing a social policy initiative for greater cooperation: social dilemmas, behavioural game theory, motives, altruism and ethics","authors":"John Lazarus","doi":"10.1332/20437897y2023d000000023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20437897y2023d000000023","url":null,"abstract":"Drawing on the experience of editing this special issue, I propose a method for developing the early stages of social policy interventions requiring cooperation, based on two phenomena foundational to approaching this challenge. I recommend that the first stage is methodological – the application of behavioural game theory – and that the second is analysis of a psychological process – the motivations of those involved. A potential third step is use of a toolbox of factors known to encourage cooperation that I discussed in my introductory article for the issue. Three further processes are important for social dilemma policy development: conditional cooperation, trust and feedback. I go on to discuss: the contrasting properties of selfish and altruistic motives for cooperating, particularly in terms of their sensitivity to influence; the long-term prospects for altruistically motivated cooperation; and ethical aspects of tackling societal dilemmas through bottom-up and top-down agents for change. Finally, I consider the current state of the relationship between behavioural science and social policy.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139247549","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：