3rd International Conference in Interpretive Policy Analysis

3rd International Conference in Interpretive Policy Analysis Democracy, Governance, and Methods

Dates: 19-21 June 2008
Location: University of Essex, Colchester, UK
Call for Papers Deadline: 10 December 2007
Website:http://www.essex.ac.uk/centres/TheoStud/Conference_III/interpretation_in_policy_confere.htm

All Inquiries to: ipol@essex.ac.uk

Organizing Committee

David Howarth, University of Essex (UK)

Aletta J. Norval, University of Essex (UK)

Methodology Workshops Organizing Committee

Sarah Hartley, University of Essex (Organizing Chair)

Katharina Paul, Universiteit van Amsterdam

Jason Glynos, University of Essex

Dvora Yanow, Vrije Universiteit (Amsterdam)

Advisory Board

Frank Fischer, Rutgers University, New Jersey (US)

Herbert Gottweis, University of Vienna (Austria)
Steven Griggs, University of Birmingham (UK)

Maarten Hajer, Universiteit van Amsterdam (NL)
Navdeep Mathur, India Institute of Management (Ahmedabad)

Henk Wagenaar, Leiden Universiteit (NL)

Dvora Yanow, Vrije Universiteit (Amsterdam, NL)

Keynote Speakers

Professor Frank Fischer (Rutgers University, New Jersey US)

Professor Jean Hillier (University of Newcastle, UK)

Professor Ernesto Laclau (University of Essex, UK/Northwestern University, US)

Professor Eva Sørensen (Roskilde University, Denmark)

Professor Keith Topper (Northwestern University, US)

Professor Mark Warren (University of British Columbia, Canada)

Interpretivism today comes in many shapes and sizes. It is a broad church that challenges mainstream positivism and scientism in the name of a methodological pluralism that is sensitive to meaning, historical context, and the importance of human subjectivity. Following two successful conferences in Birmingham, UK (2006) and Amsterdam (2007), the Third International Conference in ‘Interpretive Policy Analysis’ will be held at the University of Essex on 19-21 June 2008. This conference will focus on the relationship between governance, democracy, and critical policy analysis, as well as methodological and practical research issues in the interpretive tradition. These themes will be particularly evident in the plenary sessions, which are focused on new forms of governance and their impact on various modes of policymaking, rethinking the theory and practice of democracy, and debating different methods of interpretation and critical explanation.

The relationship between governance, democracy, and critical policy analysis raises a host of interesting questions. Consider the precise character and configuration of new forms of governance and their impact on policymaking. How can we characterize new forms of governance today? What is decentered governance? What is the relationship between governance and issues of representation, deliberation and novel forms of political engagement? How can we explain and evaluate the rise of network governance? At the same time, new issues pertaining to the environment, bio-politics, security, multiculturalism, and so on, pose important challenges to the articulation and evaluation of policies. How are issues of risk and novelty factored into our understandings of policy change? What is the role of performativity and engagement in policymaking and democratic governance? Do new forms of governance suffer a democratic deficit? In short, a range of new issues and problems have led to a questioning of traditional models of government, administration and policy-making.

It is clear, then, that the issue of democracy and democratization is a pressing issue in the present. Not only are there worries about a growing democratic deficit, but there is much talk about democratizing policymaking and governance today. How do different models of democracy impact on critical policy analysis? What are the similarities and differences between aggregative, discursive, and agonistic conceptions of democracy? How do these accounts of democracy speak to issues of representation, participation, and conflict in modern societies? What is radical democracy? Do critical models of democracy suffer from an institutional and policymaking deficit? What is the relationship between normative/evaluative and descriptive/explanatory research in this field? How does one think about democracy, policymaking and public spaces? In short, the issue of democracy not only raises a crucial set of normative, evaluative and explanatory issues in conducting policy analysis, but it also poses questions about the role of the interpretive researcher and practitioner and their community.

An equally important set of methodological issues is posed by new forms of democratic governance, especially in the interpretive tradition. Interpretivists have elaborated a range of innovative methods and research techniques to challenge mainstream positivism and unthinking quantitative approaches. They have also stressed the role of reflexivity and subjectivity in the process of conducting research and analyzing social processes. Yet, there is still a range of approaches that are compatible with the interpretivist outlook. Some stress the role of self-interpretations or focus exclusively on the beliefs and desires of individual agents; others emphasize the role of mechanisms in explaining policy change; yet others have developed the role of logics, discourse theory and rhetorical analysis to critically explain policy processes and specific outcomes. What is the difference between self-interpretations, mechanisms and logics? What is the relationship between qualitative and quantitative methods? What new qualitative approaches and methodologies are becoming available for interpretive policy analysis?

Conference papers might engage one or more of the following themes:

* The contribution of a particular theoretical or philosophical approach to critical policy analysis (e.g., pragmatism, hermeneutics, post-structuralism)

* Clarification of approaches in use (e.g., varieties of discourse analysis or narrative analyses; the role of rhetoric and metaphor)

* Case studies from particular policy issue arenas (e.g., the new challenges of environmental politics and policymaking; bio-politics; local governance; asylum or immigration policy; food policy; urban and regional planning)

* Methodological issues in doing critical policy analysis (e.g., reflexivity in policy analytic practices; getting, and using, feedback from ‘informants’; issues in using new recording technologies; evaluating software programmes)

* The relationship between policy analytic practices and democratic and/or other theories of governance

* Interpretive perspectives on key topics (e.g., community conflict resolution practices; policy evaluation; leadership; network organizations; other public management questions)

Plenary Sessions

Plenary sessions will be organized around a number of key themes, including:

‘Governance, Participation, and Performativity’

Professor Jean Hillier (University of Newcastle)

Professor Eva Sørensen (Roskilde University)

Chair: Professor Maarten Hajer (Universiteit van Amsterdam)

‘Democracy and Critical Policy Analysis’

Professor Mark Warren (University of British Columbia)

Professor Frank Fischer (Rutgers University)

Chair: Dr Aletta Norval (University of Essex)

‘Debating Method: Interpretations, Mechanisms and Logics’

Professor Ernesto Laclau (Northwestern University, University of Essex)

Professor Keith Topper (Northwestern University)

Chair: Dr David Howarth (University of Essex)

Proposals for Papers, Panels and Roundtables

The conference organizers welcome proposals for individual papers; full panels (with papers); and roundtables (focused on discussion of a common theme rather than the formal presentation of papers). Paper, panel, and roundtable proposals (short abstracts) should be sent to ipol@essex.ac.uk no later than 10 December 2007. Inquiries may also be sent to that address. For those paper proposals that are accepted, full papers will be due one month prior to the conference date. There will be a pre-conference dinner for all doctoral students who wish to attend the evening before the conference. Please indicate if you would like to participate in this ‘no host’ event.

Further information for paper-givers will be available on the Conference website:

http://www.essex.ac.uk/centres/TheoStud/Conference_III/interpretation_in_policy_confere.htm

Papers from the conference may be considered for a special issue of Critical Public Policy: Analysis and Practice, General Editor - Steven Griggs (s.f.griggs@bham.ac.uk); Reviews Editor - Pauline Jas (p.e.jas@bham.ac.uk); Forums Editor - Navdeep Mathur (navdeep@iimahd.ernet.in).

Methodology Workshops

Some of the sessions will be devoted to methodological workshops. The 90-minute workshop sessions feature specialists in different aspects of interpretive analysis. The format of the workshop sessions builds on the idea of a “master-class” as practiced in musical studies, where two senior researchers (or “specialists”) will meet a small number of early career researchers using a particular methodological strategy or technique. The focus will be on questions raised by researchers, and their research will be treated as case studies to generate and engage a set of methodological questions.

The workshops aim at (1) creating a setting where early career researchers can benefit from focused interaction with experts in their field and (2) generating questions about and exchange experiences with interpretive methods, such as expert interviewing and discourse analysis. The sessions will be facilitated by fellow early career researchers, and the discussants will be established and renowned names in the field of interpretative policy analysis, such as Frank Fischer, Maarten Hajer, Navdeep Mathur, Jacob Torfing, Henk Wagenaar. The sessions are fully incorporated into the regular conference program, and the sessions are open to all conference participants, in order to create a collaborative learning environment for all involved.

In order to take part in a workshop session, early career researchers invited to present their work in one of these will be asked to introduce their research project in a 2-3 page summary, pointing to the particular difficulties or methodological questions that arise from their research and/or field experience that they would like to explore in the workshop. Please note it clearly in your inquiry if you wish to be considered for inclusion in a Methodology Workshop. The deadline for inquiries is 10^th of December 2007. For additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact the chair of the Methodology Workshop Advisory Board (ipol@essex.ac.uk) marking your inquiry clearly for attention: Sarah Hartley.

Conference Site

The University of Essex is located in the ancient market town of Colchester and near the picturesque village of Wivenhoe in northeast Essex. It is about 45 minutes from London by rail, 30 minutes from London’s Stansted Airport by cab or about an hour by bus. The conference programme will offer opportunities to enjoy the traditional villages and countryside in this scenic part of England. More information about accommodation, costs, and venue is available on the website (http://www.essex.ac.uk/centres/TheoStud/Conference_III/interpretation_in_policy_confere.htm).

END