 |
Analysis of argumentation in multi-level governance interactions in case studies
20.10.2014 |
 A new BESAFE report provides a synthesis of argumentation analysis in real-world cases in “multi-level biodiversity governance”, investigated within the project.
It is broadly recognised that decision-making in biodiversity policy usually involves multiple actors, operating in various configurations within and across various levels and units of governance (legal orders, service sectors, organisations, etc.). Thus, it is mainly the network relations or interactions between these actors that determine policy effectiveness, in particular to the extent to which these actors collaborate. Arguments are an inherent part of these interactions and help shape the social and political conditions under which decisions and initiatives on biodiversity are developed in practice.
The following broad research questions guided the synthesis of argumentation analysis in the report and the project case studies:
• Which (different types of) arguments can be identified at different levels and units of biodiversity governance?
• How are these arguments exchanged and put to work in multi-level and networked interactions (i.e. within and across different levels and units of biodiversity governance)?
• How are these arguments rooted in and how do they feed into different perspectives, worldviews and functioning of social groups or institutions at the different levels and units of biodiversity governance?
The aim of the comparative study was to compare the occurrence of written argumentation categories between governance levels, and more specifically at member state and EU levels. The report juxtaposes the structure of similar argument categories based on a framework of three orders of logic. The analysis compares argument categories for each of three selected claim, between countries and between countries and the EU. The document then reflects on a few general commonalities or differences between claims as well.
Read more about the research and key findings in the D3.1 Final report synthesising the analysis of argumentation in multi-level governance interactions in case studies, available in the project’s Online library: http://bit.ly/1wjLrqq
| | all news » |
|
|
|
|
news
