List of workshops:
- Lokale politiek in Vlaanderen en Nederland
- EU meets politics: actors and institutions in a multilevel democracy
- Technocracy and the politics of expertise
- Breaking Barriers, Bridging Gaps: Exploring Gender Representation in Democratic Processes
- Citizens’ attitudes towards democracy: understanding their structure, causes and consequences
- Sanctions in a shifting landscape
- The Decline of Dutch Democracy?
- Political polarization & fragmented identities
- A world in transformation? Continuity and change in comparative and international political economy
- Political Psychology
- Emerging Research in International History and Political Thought
- Legitimacy in conflict: New avenues for research
- Contested green infrastructures: The politics of charm and harm
- Interest Representation: Shifting Dynamics and New Challenges in Researching Civil Society, Interest Groups, Advocacy, and Lobbying
- On ethnicized minorities: political engagement, gender and intersectionality
#1 - Lokale politiek in Vlaanderen en Nederland
Workshop Chairs:
dr. P.G. Castenmiller, Universiteit Leiden PBLQ
prof dr. H. Reynaert, Universiteit Gent
Workshop Abstract:
Het lokale bestuur in Nederland en in Vlaanderen is altijd in beweging. Binnen die permanente woelingen zijn altijd bijzondere omstandigheden die leiden tot specifieke oprispingen. Ten tijde van het Etmaal is het nieuwe Kabinet in Nederland krap een jaar in functie. Onduidelijk is wat dit Kabinet verwacht van gemeenten, terwijl er zich wat de financiering van het Nederlandse lokale bestuur betreft donkere wolken samenpakken. Wat gaat dit betekenen voor het lokale bestuur? Bovendien, is het lokaal bestuur vanwege de veelvuldige bedreigingen van bestuurders een onveilige arena geworden? Wie wil zich in het najaar van 2025 nog kandidaat stellen voor de gemeenteraadsverkiezingen van 2026? Zullen de fragmentatie en polarisatie alleen maar verder gaan?
Het lokale bestuur in Vlaanderen is dan pas kort bezig om de gevolgen van de verkiezingen van 13 oktober 2024 te verwerken. Leiden veranderende verhoudingen ook tot ander bestuur?
Er is weer genoeg om te bespreken tijdens de ondertussen langstlopende workshop op het PoliticologenEtmaal. De workshop over lokale politiek zal ook dit jaar weer een platform bieden om over vele facetten van het lokaal bestuur van gedachten te wisselen. Peter Castenmiller (PBLQ/Universiteit Leiden/VU) en Herwig Reynaert (Universiteit Gent) zullen de workshop opnieuw organiseren. De workshop is dé ontmoetingsplaats voor alle politicologen in Nederland en Vlaanderen die zich bezighouden met het lokale bestuur. Onze insteek impliceert dat allerlei bijdragen over lokale politiek en bestuur meer dan welkom zijn. Het essentiële doel van onze workshop is immers om elke politicoloog die zich bezighoudt met lokale besturen een platform en ontmoetingsplaats te bieden waar kennis, ervaringen en inzichten uitgewisseld kunnen worden. Bovendien bieden wij weer graag de mogelijkheid om naast die uitwisseling van kennis en informatie ook de persoonlijke relaties te versterken.
Workshop Language:
Nederlands / Dutch
#2 - EU meets politics: actors and institutions in a multilevel democracy
Workshop Chairs:
Gilles Pittoors, KU Leuven
Gijs Jan Brandsma, Radboud Universiteit
Workshop Abstract:
This workshop aims to explore democratic politics in the EU, its main actors and institutions. Recent developments in Europe have put the question of EU democracy centre stage. From the EU's response to the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, over democratic backsliding in EU member states, Brexit, the rise to power of the radical right in Italy, and the re-election of Donald Trump as US President, to new powers for and corruption scandals in EU institutions — all these issues call attention to the nature of the EU as a democratic polity, and the actors and institutions involved in multilevel EU politics. Therefore, this workshop aims to bring together scholars who study the way the EU meets politics. While it approaches this topic in a broad sense, the workshop welcomes contributions which focus on one or more of the following research areas:
1. Political parties. Topics could include the cross-border and cross-level activity of national parties, the rise/fall of Eurosceptic parties and (new) pan-European parties, as well as recent advances in the development of Europarties and a European party system.
2. Decision-making. Topics could include legislative politics, administrative rule-making and inter-institutional relations in the EU, from a supranational, transnational, multilevel or other perspective.
3. Elections. Topics could include candidate selection and campaigns for EP elections, the Europeanisation of national elections, transnational electoral dynamics, and developments in the Spitzenkandidaten process.
4. Parliaments. Topics could include the extent and practice of national parliaments' involvement in EU decision-making, intra-parliamentary cooperation in the EU, as well as the organisation of the EP and its relation with other EU institutions.
5. Citizens. Topics could include voter behaviour and turnout in EP elections, the theory and practice of transnational citizenship and/or partisanship, and the development of European political identities at the individual and/or aggregate level.
The workshop accepts both empirically and theoretically focused papers. There is no methodological preference: quantitative as well as qualitative papers, from both academics and practitioners, are welcomed.
Workshop Language:
English / Dutch
#3 - Technocracy and the politics of expertise
Workshop Chairs:
Pier Domenico Tortola, University of Groningen
Reinout van der Veer, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen
Workshop Abstract:
In liberal democratic societies, political decision-making--including public policy-making, implementation, and evaluation--increasingly depends on scientists, experts and independent, non-majoritarian institutions. These technocratic actors facilitate effective and responsible problem-solving at the local, national and international level.
On the one hand, recent research points out that there is demand for, and trust in, expert-led policy-making among certain groups of citizens, who increasingly view experts and scientists as more competent and reliable decision-makers than elected representatives. On the other hand, the influence of these technocratic actors is often criticised, not the least by populists, for fostering technocratic excesses that unduly depoliticise issues and curtail democratic responsiveness by reducing citizens’ control over public decision-making.
Technological advancements, such as the expansion of social media and the rise of artificial intelligence, further intensify the tensions between expertise and democracy, by democratising access to (as well as the production of) knowledge, while simultaneously blurring the lines between accurate and misleading information.
This panel invites papers on a broad range of issues related to technocracy, the role of knowledge and experts in democratic politics, and different ways of reconciling the competing demands of democratic legitimacy and expertise-based decision-making. We invite theoretical and/or empirical contributions, especially--but not exclusively--on the following issues:
1. The relationship between knowledge and the politics of expertise on the one hand, and political representation, democratic governance and public policy-making on the other;
2. The politics of depoliticisation;
3. The role of technocratic actors in politics and government, including experts, scientists, independent agencies and international organisations;
4. The demand for, and trust in, technocratic actors and governance in society, for example among citizens or among political parties;
5. The politics and contestation of scientific knowledge and scientific consensus;
6. The tension between responsible, long-term policy-making and the short-term horizons of responsive electoral politics;
7. The crucial role of international cooperation and organisation in tackling the many transnational societal challenges facing societies, but the absence of adequate institutional structures for transnational democratic oversight.
Workshop Language:
English
#4 - Breaking Barriers, Bridging Gaps: Exploring Gender Representation in Democratic Processes
Workshop Chairs:
Elise Storme, Universiteit Gent
Merel Fieremans, Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Anne Van Bavel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Margot Thewis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Workshop Abstract:
Building on last year’s successful inaugural workshop, this second edition seeks to further dissect the intricate challenges surrounding gender (identity) and women’s political representation within democratic frameworks. By bringing together a range of scholarly perspectives and methodological approaches once again, we aim to generate deeper insights and identify practical pathways toward more inclusive governance.
Central to our discussion will be an exploration of the obstacles hindering the full political participation of women. We will examine systemic barriers, investigate the strategies fueling anti-gender movements, and analyze how these challenges affect electoral outcomes and representation. Simultaneously, we will delve into the intersectionality of gender with other identity dimensions—such as race, class, and sexuality—acknowledging that meaningful inclusion demands an understanding of the overlapping factors that shape political engagement and success.
To move beyond merely diagnosing the problem, this workshop actively seeks contributions that propose effective strategies to dismantle barriers to representation. We invite critical examinations of the roles played by political institutions, media landscapes, and candidate recruitment chains in either reinforcing or challenging the status quo. By sharing innovative approaches, participants can help chart pathways for transforming institutional cultures and mitigating bias, thereby fostering environments in which women can not only enter but also thrive in political arenas.
As with our previous edition, methodological innovation remains a core priority. We encourage quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research to bring fresh perspectives and enhance our collective understanding. Embracing methodological pluralism will help us generate richer debates and more nuanced analyses, ultimately strengthening our knowledge base.
Inclusivity and collaboration form the cornerstone of our workshop ethos. Scholars at all career stages, as well as practitioners and policy analysts, are warmly welcomed to foster a dynamic, interdisciplinary dialogue. By building on the insights gained during the first workshop, we aspire to sharpen our collective understanding and produce actionable recommendations that push forward gender equality and inclusion in democratic governance.
Through this iterative process, we hope to continue shaping a research and policy agenda that empowers more diverse voices within political spheres and, in turn, strengthens the democratic fabric of our societies.
Workshop Language:
English
#5 - Citizens’ attitudes towards democracy: understanding their structure, causes and consequences
Workshop Chairs:
Giovanni D'Agostino, University of Amsterdam
Carmen van Alebeek, University of Amsterdam
Linde Stals, KU Leuven
Workshop Abstract:
Over the past decades, citizens’ attitudes towards democracy, its institutions, and values have become central to debates on the health and sustainability of democratic systems. As nowadays, democracies face numerous challenges, including rising polarization, populism, political distrust, and authoritarianism, understanding the driving factors and consequences, as well as how to foster and sustain democratic support among the public has become a significant focus within scholarly literature. While earlier empirical research has predominantly focused on linear or direct effects, more recent evidence highlights the conditionality of the causes and consequences of citizens’ democratic support. For example, when confronted with the same degree of illiberal elite behavior, not all citizens respond in a similar way. Whereas some might withdraw their support, others may express increased trust in political institutions. This withdrawal or reinforcement of support often depends on the presence of cognitive resources (such as political knowledge) and adherence to democratic norms, which can shape whether individuals are able to accurately assess democratic malperformance and feel normatively troubled by it.
These novel insights have raised new questions about citizen engagement in democracy. For instance, under which conditions are citizens willing to trade off certain democratic principles for others? When are citizens more likely to accept anti-democratic elite behavior? Under what circumstances can political distrust foster democratic stability, and when may high political trust be conducive to the undermining of democratic institutions?
To advance this part of the literature, this workshop welcomes papers exploring various aspects of citizens’ attitudes toward democracy. Concepts of interest include but are not limited to citizens’ (normative) support for specific democratic principles (e.g., freedom of speech), trust in state institutions, authoritarianism, as well as related attitudes such as political efficacy, political cynicism, and satisfaction with democracy. We are particularly interested in studies addressing the structure of these attitudes and/or their comparability across time, countries, and sub-groups of citizens, as well as their wide range of short- and long-term causes and consequences. Papers may explore a range of questions, such as the conceptualization and measurement of citizens’ democratic attitudes, their socialization during formative periods, and/or the specific mechanisms by which democratic attitudes are expected to influence democratic quality, and vice versa.
We encourage submissions employing qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods, as well as single-case, comparative, and experimental studies. The workshop will be conducted in English, and all submitted papers should also be in English.
Workshop Language:
English
#6 - Sanctions in a shifting landscape
Workshop Chairs:
Dawid Walentek, Ghent University
Viktor Szép, University of Groningen
Francesco Giumelli, University of Groningen
Workshop Abstract:
The Russian invasion of Ukraine led to an unparalleled wave of economic coercion targeted at Moscow. The European Union has recently adopted its 15th round of sanctions, and other major economies – for example the United States, United Kingdom and Japan – also tightened the sanction regimes aimed at Russia. More broadly, states have been increasingly weaponizing economic relations to attain political objectives since the end of the Cold War, most prominently in the form of economic sanctions. This exercise of power is actively present among actors traditionally portrayed at the forefront of liberal values in the international order, for example the European Union.
To start, there is a contrast between the statements and ambitions of Western capitals and the economic reality. In the last months, we have seen a wave of news items signalling a discrepancy between the design of economic coercion and the actual implementation. For example, researchers have identified an unseen increase in export of goods and services that are covered by EU sanctions against Russia to countries that share a customs union with Russia. This highlights a new ground in research on sanctions effectiveness and calls for a more detailed engagement with questions of how modern capitalism structures the channels of economic interactions between different actors when sanctions are put in place and to what extent our theories are suited to address this.
Next, sanctions remain largely unexamined as a broader phenomenon of coercion and recent advances in sanctions scholarship, research on geoeconomics and work on trade restrictions speak to each other in a very limited fashion, while looking at the same phenomena. This disconnection creates a fragmented understanding of how sanctions function as tools of statecraft, their implications for the global economy and their broader geopolitical consequences. Bridging this gap could show the evolving role of sanctions as instruments of both economic coercion and strategic competition, providing a more cohesive framework for understanding their long-term impacts on multilateralism, global power dynamics and interdependencies.
Finally, the advancement of economic coercion raises new questions that frequently cut across disciplinary lines. Issues of legality of trade restriction for most advanced technology and their impact on the target states call for insights from scholars working on topics that traditionally were outside the scope of research on sanctions and geoeconomics in a broader sense.
Workshop chairs are coordinators of leading sanctions research networks (MINOS at UGent and Sanctions Group at RUG).
Workshop Language:
English
#7 - The Decline of Dutch Democracy?
Workshop Chairs:
Andrej Zaslove, Radboud University
Joep van Lit, Radboud University
Workshop Abstract:
Is Dutch democracy in decline? Amidst broad public and scientific debate about democratic decline worldwide, there remains little knowledge about how to identify these declines early on, especially in liberal democracies. And like many things in politics and political science, the answer likely depends on your point of view. Therefore, this workshop seeks to answer the question from a variety of (academic and topical) perspectives to provide a broad but concrete answer.
Declines of democracy are apparent around the world, from the paradigmatic cases of Hungary and Poland to more recent research on the USA, Israel, and Greece. However, the more liberal and consolidated democracies appear, and the longer their democratic histories have been, the harder it appears to be to ascertain if democracy is in decline (and if so, when it starts). Especially when potential autocratizers are elected or enjoy a democratic mandate, the debate about democracy can be conflated with a debate about political ideology or policy preferences. On the one hand, potential autocratizers misuse this ambiguity to further undermine democracy; on the other hand, democratic systems are not static systems and so the “rules of the game” should be susceptible to change and political debate.
The Dutch context provides a crucial case to study this. On the positive side, it has a long democratic history, performs well on qualitative and quantitative measures of democracy, and has the right societal, institutional, and political environment for a sustainable, constitutional democracy. On the negative side, there are populists in government, support for authoritarian values appears to be on the rise, and political debate has hardened.
In this workshop, we aim to bring together scholars from different disciplines (e.g. political science, public administration, sociology, history, or legal studies), investigating different elements of democracy (e.g. elections, parties, attitudes, equality, or the rule of law). The aim of the workshop is (1) to provide a multifaceted yet concrete answer whether Dutch democracy is in decline, or whether current political shifts are simply ideological shifts; and (2) to set the benchmark for the study of democratic decline in liberal democracies, as we work towards a coherent special issue (or other publication format). We ask that each paper has a theoretical component (why is the topic under study necessary for a sustainable democracy?) and an empirical component (how is the Netherlands performing on the topic under study?).
Workshop Language:
English/Dutch
#8 - Political polarization & fragmented identities
Workshop Chairs:
Dr. Eelco Harteveld, Universiteit van Amsterdam (UvA)
Artemis Tsoulou-Malakoudi, Universiteit Antwerpen (UA)
Workshop Abstract:
This workshop seeks to advance our understanding of political polarization and social divides in the Low Countries and beyond, in particular by studying how political and social identities converge and diverge, creating novel forms of conflict and ever more apparent fault lines. We aim to bring together scholars exploring polarization broadly, as well as those investigating how social and political identities shape perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors, both within and across groups.
Politics has become a defining marker of social identity, with partisan allegiances aligning closely with other forms of social belonging. From small communities to national arenas, political fault lines now intersect with differences in culture, religion, ethnicity, lifestyle, class, and personality, often revealing deep cleavages in how citizens interact and perceive one another. At the same time, such social divisions are fueling (sometimes violent) political disagreements and shaping civic engagement in ways that extend well beyond policy debates.
Yet, the mechanics behind these divisions—and their implications for democracy—remain only partially understood. How do political identities take shape and interact with other forms of social belonging? What factors drive deepening polarization, and how do these dynamics vary across different contexts? To what extent can interventions or policy solutions alleviate these divides, and what might successful strategies look like?
We encourage submissions that engage with the topics of polarization, political and social identities, and their intersections from a wide range of perspectives. This includes studies employing diverse theoretical frameworks and methodological approaches, including both quantitative and qualitative research, as well as theoretical papers. Work that explores the relationship between political science, sociology, psychology, and related disciplines is particularly encouraged, as are submissions using innovative methods to measure polarization and (perceptions of) political and/or social identities.
By bringing together researchers from diverse backgrounds, this workshop aims to foster interdisciplinary dialogue, promote methodological innovation, and possibly contribute to new insights into the complex relationship between political polarization and identities.
Workshop Language:
English
#9 - A world in transformation? Continuity and change in comparative and international political economy
Workshop Chairs:
Floor Doppen, University of Antwerp
Lukas Linsi, University of Groningen
Aneta Spendzharova, University of Maastricht
Antonio Calcara, Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Workshop Abstract:
Today’s political economy is rapidly evolving. The re-election of Trump and inauguration of the second Von der Leyen Commission are indications of a continuation of the competitive and geostrategic global economic policy environment. At the same time, states have to navigate structural changes related to the climate and energy transition, growth of the knowledge economy, and demographic developments. While much is in motion, there are also many continuities in ongoing contestations about the present and future configuration of state-society relations. Comparative political economy (CPE) tends to study these dynamics from a domestic perspective; international political economy (IPE) from a global-systemic perspective. Contending that both approaches are necessary to understand the current state of political economy, the workshop seeks to create intellectual spaces that facilitate a bridging of CPE and IPE research about these ongoing transformations.
Themes the workshop will bring into focus:
- The influence of institutions and politics on the changing economic environment in Europe: European countries face challenges around the viability of welfare states, the structure of labour markets, rising inequality, the politicisation of central banking and monetary policy, and the resurgence of industrial policy against a backdrop of deindustrialization, which in turn have been a key source of evolving electoral demands. How can we better understand the two-way relationship between structural changes in European economies, and institutional, political, and policy adaptations?
- The political economy of the geoeconomic turn and economic statecraft: After a period of sustained liberalization, national security and geopolitical competition have returned to the centre of global economic policy debates. What domestic and international factors have been driving and shaping this ‘geoeconomic turn’? What are the determinants of different economic statecraft policies and preferences? Who are the key players behind the agenda, who benefits, and who is harmed by these developments? What similarities and differences can be observed across different regions of the world and across political coalitions?
- Bridging CPE and IPE: How can CPE and IPE explanations and analyses be leveraged to increase our understanding of policy dynamics in today’s contested political economy environment? For example, how do institutions shape policies of economic statecraft? Does the use of sanctions galvanise domestic changes in the European economies? How does geoeconomic competition impact domestic institutions and politics, and how does that in turn impact domestic policy preferences in the geoeconomic sphere?
Workshop Language:
English
#10 - Political Psychology
Workshop Chairs:
Gijs Schumacher, Universiteit van Amsterdam
Julie Sevenans, Universiteit Antwerpen
Workshop Abstract:
Accounting for psychological processes has proven crucial to understanding how citizens behave politically. Group identities, personality traits and emotions influence who they vote for, whether or not they take to the streets to protest, which political attitudes they hold, what kinds of political information they consume, and who they can be persuaded by, to name just a few examples.
Political elites are people, too. As a consequence, psychological processes are helpful to explain political elite behavior too, ranging from how elites represent voters, over how they set up their political campaigns, to how they form coalitions. Research in this area has developed more slowly, but a steadily growing body of work addresses, for example, how politicians’ personality traits and emotions influence their representative behavior, or to what extent politicians are subject to psychological biases, just like ‘ordinary’ citizens.
The goal of this workshop is to bring together scholars who investigate political behavior—that of citizens as well as political elites—by relying on insights from (political) psychology. We welcome diverse approaches and methodologies.
Workshop Language:
English
#11 - Emerging Research in International History and Political Thought
Workshop Chairs:
António Ferraz de Oliveira, University of Groningen
Arnab Dutta, University of Groningen
Julia Costa-Lopez, University of Groningen
Workshop Abstract:
In recent years, through the joined efforts of historians and political scientists, a rich debate has emerged on the global intellectual history underpinning key ideas in international relations. Breaking international relations' disciplinary myths about its great debates and mainstream theories in the twentieth-century, new and emerging histories of international thought can help us to better understand on how influential international ideas were actually constructed, often ranging beyond the privileged halls of Western academia and including unduly erased actors. In this manner, new research on international thought can offer much in reconstructing the deeper histories of long marginalized worldviews, such as those of anticolonial, feminist, environmental or labor activists. In this workshop, we aim to gather emerging researchers in this multidisciplinary field, with a special focus on those based at Dutch and Belgian universities.
Workshop Language:
English
#12 - Legitimacy in conflict: New avenues for research
Workshop Chairs:
Tom Buitelaar, Leiden University
Marie Robin, Leiden University
Workshop Abstract:
A key aspect of contemporary armed conflicts—from Israel/Palestine to Ukraine, from Sudan to Myanmar—is the struggle over legitimacy. Legitimacy in conflict is an essentially contested good, as all conflict parties continually attempt to legitimize their own cause while delegitimizing the cause of the other. This results in a set of competing legitimacies over what the conflict is about, and the means and resources it employs. These claims matter significantly because participants often rely on legitimacy to garner material and symbolic support, both internally and externally. Internally, it facilitates mobilization of followers and (in)direct support from the citizenry. Externally, it shapes international responses to the conflict, which may lead both to material support in the form of arms or military intervention but also sanctions and non-lethal aid, and symbolic support in international fora and during peace negotiations. Conflict actors therefore try to frame and narrate their goals in a way that both mobilizes followers and persuades external backers of the rightness of their cause.
As the world order continues to fragment, legitimacy in conflict is obtaining new dimensions. Conflicts are rarely purely national in scope, and external intervention is commonplace. These developments mean that conflict actors have new external audiences they can try to persuade but also need to find frames that resonate with a larger number of actors. The exact effects of this changing landscape remain unclear. In addition, communication and information technologies, and the growing interconnectedness they create globally, further increase the outreach and impact of the legitimacy frames implemented by conflict parties, including on the other side of the globe.
In this workshop, we will discuss the issue of legitimacy in conflict, offering space for various research avenues, including but not limited to: the sources of legitimacy in conflict, the effects of legitimacy in conflict, internal and external perceptions, the (instrumental) use of legitimizing narratives, the effectiveness of frames, the role of international organizations and external states in enhancing or undermining legitimacy, and the effects of a changing world order on legitimization efforts.
The workshop is open to various disciplines and different methodological approaches.
Workshop Language:
English
#13 - Contested green infrastructures: The politics of charm and harm
Workshop Chairs:
Matthias Kranke, University of Kassel
Senka Neuman Stanivukovic, University of Groningen
Workshop Abstract:
Green infrastructures – sustainability-oriented socio-material arrangements, ranging from low-carbon energy infrastructures to nature-based solutions to urban and rural development – are central for the urgently needed socio-ecological transformation and, simultaneously, heavily contested. While much of the growing literature connects green infrastructures to certain (post-)growth paradigms, political ecology, social movements, and postcolonial scholarship offer alternative perspectives, highlighting diverse contestations and resistance. They reveal the complex and sometimes antagonistic relationships between green infrastructures and affected communities.
Just like with ‘brown’ (fossil-based), judgements of charm and harm are in the eye of the beholder: the same infrastructures may be warmly welcomed by one group but roundly rejected by another as greenwashing or a tool of dispossession. Conflicts about these infrastructures now abound at every level of political organization: local, regional, national, supranational, and trans- and international.
Building on research addressing the politicization of infrastructures, this workshop aims to explore different imaginaries of green infrastructures – from promises of development to prefigurative politics to speculations. We analyze forms of knowledge that make green infrastructures possible to examine how the production and contestation of green infrastructures reshape relations between humans, non-humans, and infrastructures. We invite participants to engage with political discourses, planning practices, technologies, and design processes involved in green infrastructures, as well as the varied forms and repertoires of contestation of and resistance to these infrastructures. Additionally, we extend the discussion into the realm of infrastructural citizenship, foregrounding the influence of green infrastructures on political organizing and human-wildlife coexistence, and the role of cultural productions in shaping visions of green futures.
Against this broader backdrop, we focus on the dynamics unfolding in the contestation of green infrastructures, asking among other things:
1) What aspects of green infrastructures get contested?
2) How are green infrastructures contested and defended?
3) How do these contestations and counter-contestations relate to the project of modernity (progress, growth, development)?
The workshop brings together scholars working on (green) infrastructures, infrastructural failures, infrastructural harm and violence, the politics of green transitions and transformation, post-growth/degrowth and sustainability, and more-than-human entanglements with infrastructures. We welcome submissions from various subfields of political science and cognate disciplines (such as human geography, sociology or STS), encouraging theoretical and methodological pluralism. We are particularly interested in papers that contribute to the empirical study of contested green infrastructures. Papers should be original work that is unpublished, not accepted for publication or currently under review.
Workshop Language:
English
#14 - Interest Representation: Shifting Dynamics and New Challenges in Researching Civil Society, Interest Groups, Advocacy, and Lobbying
Workshop Chairs:
Sharon van Geldere, Leiden University
Ida Hobma, Leiden University
Joost Berkhout, University of Amsterdam
Workshop Abstract:
Interest groups relate interests within society to policymaking. In this regard, interest groups are taking on increasingly visible roles in pending societal issues such as climate change, migration, and political representation. This poses interesting new venues and challenges for research on interest representation. How is policy access biased towards lobbying teams from privileged sociodemographic backgrounds? When do citizens feel represented by civil society organisations? How do interest groups experience levels of polarisation? How do LGBTQ+ interest groups strategize in varying hostile political contexts? How do different sources of civil society organisation funding affect access to the European Commission? What role do firms play in the development of European Union trade policy? These questions are yet a few examples of emerging themes and perspectives in research on interest representation.
Research on interest representation typically focusses on civil society, advocacy and lobbying, or on interest groups such as businesses and social movement organisations, and their (potential) impact on policy-making. However, scholars study interest representation from different perspectives and traditions. Venturing into new research topics related to interest representation presents opportunities for innovative research methods. We aim to depart from these traditional perspectives and research traditions on interest representation, whilst engaging with (and integrating) emerging themes and perspectives to gain new insights into the shifting dynamics and new challenges in interest representation.
We invite contributions that focus on (but not limited to) these emerging themes and perspectives:
1) Contributions that focus on under researched governance levels, such as the global, regional and local governance levels but also the executive bureaucracy (Albareda et al., 2023; Hanegraaff et al., 2015);
2) Contributions engaging with challenges that have implications for advocacy and political decision-making such as the extreme right, polarisation or changing political attitudes such as political trust, but also on environmental and sustainability politics, and social justice issues such as the representation of different disadvantaged societal groups (Aizenberg et al., 2023; Colli, 2024; De Bruycker, 2024; Redert, 2024);
3) Contributions that incorporate new or different methodological approaches such as mixed method or computational approaches (Aizenberg & Binderkrantz, 2021; Nastase, 2016; Junk et al., 2024).
In this panel, we aim to bring together different scholars from various (sub)fields that study interest representation such as political science, public administration, political economy and history. We encourage scholars in all career stages (senior, mid-career, early career, student, etc.) to join, share, and discuss their work (in progress) with us.
Workshop Language:
English
#15 - On ethnicized minorities: political engagement, gender and intersectionality
Workshop Chairs:
Niels Spierings, Radboud University
Samira Azabar, Universiteit Antwerpen/Radboud University
Floris Vermeulen, Universiteit van Amsterdam
Workshop Abstract:
One cannot understand current politics without a proper understanding of the roles played by ethnicized minority political actors, as well as their anti-migrant counterparts. Despite an expanding knowledge base on ethnicized minority participation and voting behavior, an ever-changing context leads to new questions. This workshop aims to explore research linked to debates on Islamophobia, the rise of radical right parties, intersectionality and/or minorities’ resistance, all while unraveling the complex agency of ethnicized minorities in shaping political narratives. What explains ethnicized minorities’ political choices (for instance religiosity, Islamophobia, gender)? Do minority candidates play a distinct role in the political arena? What are the prevailing threats in anti-migration politics? And, how do intersecting power dynamics, i.e., ethnicity/race, religion, class and/or gender impact minorities’ mobilization?
Second, not only ethnicized minorities’ political participation has been scrutinized, but also the complex divergent views on gender and sexuality of ethnicized minorities going against the Orientalist notions of a patriarchal Muslim community. Which differences are present among ethnicized minorities, particularly Muslims, regarding traditional values and attitudes towards homosexuality? What explains Muslims’ attitudes towards gender equality and homosexuality? How do Muslims understand these concepts? How are topics related to gender and sexuality utilized in constructing ‘the Muslim Other’?
This workshop focuses on the contemporary role of ethnicized minorities in the political arena in relation to public outcries about a threatened national identity. This workshop aims to foster a comprehensive understanding of the challenges and opportunities that shape the political landscape for marginalized communities in the low countries. Among others, we welcome (theoretical, overview, qualitative, quantitative or mixed method) papers focusing on:
• the political participation and representation of ethnicized minorities
• the political belonging of minorities
• the influence of racist, anti-migration and anti-Islam politics on the mobilization of ethnicized minorities, and vice versa;
• ethnicized minorities’ views on gender equality or sexuality, and explanations hereof;
• the ways in which the intersections of ethnicity, religion and gender shape the political behavior and gender attitudes of ethno-religious minorities;
• the impact of the narratives of radical right parties on minorities’ belonging in western countries
Workshop Language:
English / Dutch