Katharina Glaab | Norwegian University of Life Sciences (original) (raw)

Uploads

Papers by Katharina Glaab

Social Science research cannot be neutral. It always involves the (re)production of social realit... more Social Science research cannot be neutral. It always involves the (re)production of social reality and thus has to be conceived as political practice. From this perspective, the present article looks into constructivist norm research. In the first part, we argue that constructivist norm research is political insofar as it tends to reproduce predominantly Western values that strengthen specific hegemonic discursive structures. However, this particular political position is hardly acknowledged in norm research. Hence, it is our goal in the second part of the article to outline contrapuntal reading as a research strategy to advance a more advance a reflective and critical norm research.

In ihrer Reaktion auf unseren Beitrag »In der Sprechstunde« melden Nicole Deitelhoff und Lisbeth ... more In ihrer Reaktion auf unseren Beitrag »In der Sprechstunde« melden Nicole Deitelhoff und Lisbeth Zimmermann dreierlei Zweifel an unserem Vorschlag eines kritischen Normenforschungsprogramms an: erstens an unserer Auseinandersetzung mit der konstruktivistischen Normenforschung, zweitens an unserer Verwendung der Begriffe lokal und westlich und drittens schließlich am kritischen Potenzial unseres Vorschlags schlechthin, den sie als reinen Entlarvungsgestus kritisieren. Unsere Replik nehmen wir zum Anlass, einerseits die Stoßrichtung unseres Beitrags noch einmal zu klären. Zum anderen begegnen wir den oben genannten Kritikpunkten und legen dar, dass Deitelhoffs und Zimmermanns Kritik nur durch ihre spezielle Lesart unseres Beitrags aufrechterhalten werden kann, sich außerdem in drei größere Widersprüche verstrickt und auf einem problematischen Verständnis des Verhältnisses von empirischer Faktizität und normativer Bewertung basiert.

Sozialwissenschaftliche Forschung kann nicht neutral sein. Sie ist, so die Grundhaltung dieses Au... more Sozialwissenschaftliche Forschung kann nicht neutral sein. Sie ist, so die Grundhaltung dieses Aufsatzes, immer an der (Re-) Produktion sozialer Wirklichkeit beteiligt und somit als politische Praxis zu verstehen. Aus dieser Perspektive setzt sich der vorliegende Aufsatz mit der konstruktivistischen Normenforschung auseinander. Wir argumentieren, dass konstruktivistische Normenforschung insofern politisch ist, als sie westliche Wertbestände tendenziell reproduziert und ihre globale
Hegemonie unhinterfragt lässt und stärkt. Diese politische Haltung wird in der Normenforschungjedoch kaum reflektiert. Demgegenüber ist es unser Ziel im zweiten Teil des Aufsatzes, mögliche Wege aufZuzeigen, wie eine reflexive und kritische
Normenforschung betrieben werden könnte. Dafür schlagen wir ein poststrukturalistisch inspiriertes, kritisches Forschungsprogramm vor, das auf drei zentralen forschungspraktischen Schritten aufbaut: erstens der Hinterfragang global hegemonialer Wertbestände, zweitens der Rekonstruktion alternativer Wissensbestände und drittens der expliziten Reflektion der eigenen Forschungsperspektive.

Knowledge-claims about the past tend to be problematic; they go seldom uncontested and are always... more Knowledge-claims about the past tend to be problematic; they go seldom uncontested and are always infused with power. Hence, both collective memory and historical knowledge often represent contested sites of struggle in the politics of identity construction. The case of Germany is a particularly noteworthy example in this respect: the country has accepted its extremely violent past in a strategy of self-stigmatization, and German policy-makers often invoked the Third Reich to refrain from military aggression. Yet, historical knowledge and remembrance of the past are in a difficult relation of desire and delusion that do not always go easy. The paper looks at the case of the historical committee that enquired the role of the German diplomatic corps during the Nazi period and its reconstruction after World War II and the role of the German political science association that had to deal with the Nazi past and its reflection of one of its ‘founding fathers’. It highlights the tensions between contending German desires of coming to terms with a painful past on the one hand, and sticking to an idealized self-image about the diplomatic corps as a place of resistance to Nazi ideology and German political science understanding as a post-war ‘science of democracy’ on the other.

World Political Science Review, 2014

Social Science research cannot be neutral. It always involves, so the argument of this article, t... more Social Science research cannot be neutral. It always involves, so the argument of this article, the (re)production of social reality and thus has to be conceived as political practice. From this perspective, the present article looks into constructivist norm research. In the first part, we argue that constructivist norm research is political insofar as it tends to reproduce Western values that strengthen specific hegemonic discursive structures. However, this particular political position is hardly reflected on in norm research. Hence, it is our goal in the second part of the article to outline research strategies potentially useful in reflective and critical norm research. We propose a critical research program based upon three central methodological steps that are inspired by post-structuralism: first, the questioning of global hegemonic values; second, the reconstruction of marginalized knowledge; and third, the explicit reflection of one’s own research perspective.

World Political Science Review, 2014

In their response to our article »Office Hours«, Nicole Deitelhoff and Lisbeth Zimmermann issue t... more In their response to our article »Office Hours«, Nicole Deitelhoff and Lisbeth Zimmermann issue three major points of critique towards our proposal of a critical approach to norm research: They criticize, firstly, our discussion of constructivist norm research, secondly, our use of the concepts of local and Western and, thirdly, the overall critical potential of our proposed approach, which they criticize as going merely beyond an unmasking gesture. We take our response to our critics, firstly, as an opportunity to clarify some of the arguments made in our article. Secondly, we confront the points of criticism outlined above and show that Deitelhoff’s and Zimmermann’s critique can only be maintained if one accepts their specific reading of our article. Moreover, it gets tangled up in three major contradictions and is built upon a problematic understanding of the relation between empirical facticity and normative evaluation.

This special section aims to investigate the interaction of global and local forces in shaping ag... more This special section aims to investigate the interaction of global and local forces in shaping agrifood governance. It starts from the recognition that a multitude of actors and norms shape today’s agrifood system. The resulting opaqueness of the systems makes it extremely difficult to understand and explain processes and outcomes of agrifood governance. Given the sustainability challenges facing the agrifood system, improvements in our understanding of what the interaction of global and local actors and norms means on the ground are urgently needed, however. The section, therefore, analyses agrifood governance in India across a selected group of cases. It does so by employing a systematic framework emphasizing the material and ideational dimensions of power and their interaction. The section has chosen India as the setting in which to analyze this interaction due to the crucial role the food demand and supply of this rising power plays in today’s agrifood system. This article provides the special sections’ analytical framework, which uses the interplay of material and ideational dimensions of power as a focal lens. In addition, the article applies this framework to an empirical study of the political conflict around GMO foods in India, specifically the case of ‘Golden Rice’.

In this essay, we aim to demonstrate the value of a power lens on consumption and absolute reduct... more In this essay, we aim to demonstrate the value of a power lens on consumption and absolute reductions. Specifically, we illuminate what we perceive to be a troublesome pattern of neglect of questions of power in research and action on sustainable consumption and absolute reductions. In pursuit of our objectives, we delineate how many of the informal and implicit “theories of social change” of scholars and activists in sustainable consumption and sustainable development fail to address power in a sufficiently explicit, comprehensive and differentiated manner and how that failure translates into insufficient understandings of the drivers of consumption and the potential for and barriers to absolute reductions. Second, we develop the contours of a power lens on sustainable consumption. Third, we illustrate the value of such a power lens, with a particular focus on the case of meat consumption.

Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 2014

The language used by norm research exercises a form of epistemological violence that seeks to min... more The language used by norm research exercises a form of epistemological violence that seeks to minimise normative ambiguity, hence foreclosing alternative ways of reading and writing about norms. Taking a seminal text of constructivist literature on norms as an example, this paper examines how this research has been dominated by a specific ‘norm language’. In order to uncover the power of this language, we will look into the normalising effects and implications of a particularly influential work in norm research literature. Inspired by Derrida’s work on deconstruction and his critique of Western metaphysics, we inquire into the presuppositions of Finnemore and Sikkink’s International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. A double reading of the text traces how it relies on logocentric dichotomies that need to be frequently sustained by discursive moves of deferral, closure, and forgetting. We provide an alternative reading of some of the stories in the text that work to destabilise its underlying logics. Lastly, we will give a perspective on ‘writing norms’ that accepts ambiguity instead of the practised ‘norm language’. We call for a culture of tolerance and an ethics of ‘hospitality’ that do not seek to eliminate normative ambiguity, but celebrate it as a source for dialogue.

Social Science research cannot be neutral. It always involves the (re)production of social realit... more Social Science research cannot be neutral. It always involves the (re)production of social reality and thus has to be conceived as political practice. From this perspective, the present article looks into constructivist norm research. In the first part, we argue that constructivist norm research is political insofar as it tends to reproduce predominantly Western values that strengthen specific hegemonic discursive structures. However, this particular political position is hardly acknowledged in norm research. Hence, it is our goal in the second part of the article to outline contrapuntal reading as a research strategy to advance a more advance a reflective and critical norm research.

In ihrer Reaktion auf unseren Beitrag »In der Sprechstunde« melden Nicole Deitelhoff und Lisbeth ... more In ihrer Reaktion auf unseren Beitrag »In der Sprechstunde« melden Nicole Deitelhoff und Lisbeth Zimmermann dreierlei Zweifel an unserem Vorschlag eines kritischen Normenforschungsprogramms an: erstens an unserer Auseinandersetzung mit der konstruktivistischen Normenforschung, zweitens an unserer Verwendung der Begriffe lokal und westlich und drittens schließlich am kritischen Potenzial unseres Vorschlags schlechthin, den sie als reinen Entlarvungsgestus kritisieren. Unsere Replik nehmen wir zum Anlass, einerseits die Stoßrichtung unseres Beitrags noch einmal zu klären. Zum anderen begegnen wir den oben genannten Kritikpunkten und legen dar, dass Deitelhoffs und Zimmermanns Kritik nur durch ihre spezielle Lesart unseres Beitrags aufrechterhalten werden kann, sich außerdem in drei größere Widersprüche verstrickt und auf einem problematischen Verständnis des Verhältnisses von empirischer Faktizität und normativer Bewertung basiert.

Sozialwissenschaftliche Forschung kann nicht neutral sein. Sie ist, so die Grundhaltung dieses Au... more Sozialwissenschaftliche Forschung kann nicht neutral sein. Sie ist, so die Grundhaltung dieses Aufsatzes, immer an der (Re-) Produktion sozialer Wirklichkeit beteiligt und somit als politische Praxis zu verstehen. Aus dieser Perspektive setzt sich der vorliegende Aufsatz mit der konstruktivistischen Normenforschung auseinander. Wir argumentieren, dass konstruktivistische Normenforschung insofern politisch ist, als sie westliche Wertbestände tendenziell reproduziert und ihre globale
Hegemonie unhinterfragt lässt und stärkt. Diese politische Haltung wird in der Normenforschungjedoch kaum reflektiert. Demgegenüber ist es unser Ziel im zweiten Teil des Aufsatzes, mögliche Wege aufZuzeigen, wie eine reflexive und kritische
Normenforschung betrieben werden könnte. Dafür schlagen wir ein poststrukturalistisch inspiriertes, kritisches Forschungsprogramm vor, das auf drei zentralen forschungspraktischen Schritten aufbaut: erstens der Hinterfragang global hegemonialer Wertbestände, zweitens der Rekonstruktion alternativer Wissensbestände und drittens der expliziten Reflektion der eigenen Forschungsperspektive.

Knowledge-claims about the past tend to be problematic; they go seldom uncontested and are always... more Knowledge-claims about the past tend to be problematic; they go seldom uncontested and are always infused with power. Hence, both collective memory and historical knowledge often represent contested sites of struggle in the politics of identity construction. The case of Germany is a particularly noteworthy example in this respect: the country has accepted its extremely violent past in a strategy of self-stigmatization, and German policy-makers often invoked the Third Reich to refrain from military aggression. Yet, historical knowledge and remembrance of the past are in a difficult relation of desire and delusion that do not always go easy. The paper looks at the case of the historical committee that enquired the role of the German diplomatic corps during the Nazi period and its reconstruction after World War II and the role of the German political science association that had to deal with the Nazi past and its reflection of one of its ‘founding fathers’. It highlights the tensions between contending German desires of coming to terms with a painful past on the one hand, and sticking to an idealized self-image about the diplomatic corps as a place of resistance to Nazi ideology and German political science understanding as a post-war ‘science of democracy’ on the other.

World Political Science Review, 2014

Social Science research cannot be neutral. It always involves, so the argument of this article, t... more Social Science research cannot be neutral. It always involves, so the argument of this article, the (re)production of social reality and thus has to be conceived as political practice. From this perspective, the present article looks into constructivist norm research. In the first part, we argue that constructivist norm research is political insofar as it tends to reproduce Western values that strengthen specific hegemonic discursive structures. However, this particular political position is hardly reflected on in norm research. Hence, it is our goal in the second part of the article to outline research strategies potentially useful in reflective and critical norm research. We propose a critical research program based upon three central methodological steps that are inspired by post-structuralism: first, the questioning of global hegemonic values; second, the reconstruction of marginalized knowledge; and third, the explicit reflection of one’s own research perspective.

World Political Science Review, 2014

In their response to our article »Office Hours«, Nicole Deitelhoff and Lisbeth Zimmermann issue t... more In their response to our article »Office Hours«, Nicole Deitelhoff and Lisbeth Zimmermann issue three major points of critique towards our proposal of a critical approach to norm research: They criticize, firstly, our discussion of constructivist norm research, secondly, our use of the concepts of local and Western and, thirdly, the overall critical potential of our proposed approach, which they criticize as going merely beyond an unmasking gesture. We take our response to our critics, firstly, as an opportunity to clarify some of the arguments made in our article. Secondly, we confront the points of criticism outlined above and show that Deitelhoff’s and Zimmermann’s critique can only be maintained if one accepts their specific reading of our article. Moreover, it gets tangled up in three major contradictions and is built upon a problematic understanding of the relation between empirical facticity and normative evaluation.

This special section aims to investigate the interaction of global and local forces in shaping ag... more This special section aims to investigate the interaction of global and local forces in shaping agrifood governance. It starts from the recognition that a multitude of actors and norms shape today’s agrifood system. The resulting opaqueness of the systems makes it extremely difficult to understand and explain processes and outcomes of agrifood governance. Given the sustainability challenges facing the agrifood system, improvements in our understanding of what the interaction of global and local actors and norms means on the ground are urgently needed, however. The section, therefore, analyses agrifood governance in India across a selected group of cases. It does so by employing a systematic framework emphasizing the material and ideational dimensions of power and their interaction. The section has chosen India as the setting in which to analyze this interaction due to the crucial role the food demand and supply of this rising power plays in today’s agrifood system. This article provides the special sections’ analytical framework, which uses the interplay of material and ideational dimensions of power as a focal lens. In addition, the article applies this framework to an empirical study of the political conflict around GMO foods in India, specifically the case of ‘Golden Rice’.

In this essay, we aim to demonstrate the value of a power lens on consumption and absolute reduct... more In this essay, we aim to demonstrate the value of a power lens on consumption and absolute reductions. Specifically, we illuminate what we perceive to be a troublesome pattern of neglect of questions of power in research and action on sustainable consumption and absolute reductions. In pursuit of our objectives, we delineate how many of the informal and implicit “theories of social change” of scholars and activists in sustainable consumption and sustainable development fail to address power in a sufficiently explicit, comprehensive and differentiated manner and how that failure translates into insufficient understandings of the drivers of consumption and the potential for and barriers to absolute reductions. Second, we develop the contours of a power lens on sustainable consumption. Third, we illustrate the value of such a power lens, with a particular focus on the case of meat consumption.

Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 2014

The language used by norm research exercises a form of epistemological violence that seeks to min... more The language used by norm research exercises a form of epistemological violence that seeks to minimise normative ambiguity, hence foreclosing alternative ways of reading and writing about norms. Taking a seminal text of constructivist literature on norms as an example, this paper examines how this research has been dominated by a specific ‘norm language’. In order to uncover the power of this language, we will look into the normalising effects and implications of a particularly influential work in norm research literature. Inspired by Derrida’s work on deconstruction and his critique of Western metaphysics, we inquire into the presuppositions of Finnemore and Sikkink’s International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. A double reading of the text traces how it relies on logocentric dichotomies that need to be frequently sustained by discursive moves of deferral, closure, and forgetting. We provide an alternative reading of some of the stories in the text that work to destabilise its underlying logics. Lastly, we will give a perspective on ‘writing norms’ that accepts ambiguity instead of the practised ‘norm language’. We call for a culture of tolerance and an ethics of ‘hospitality’ that do not seek to eliminate normative ambiguity, but celebrate it as a source for dialogue.