Federalism and the Concept of Political Territoriality: Towards an Analytical Framework for Comparative Territorial Politics

The core issues comparative territorial politics addresses are how and why territory is used to delimit, maintain, or create political power; and with what kind of consequences for efficiency (output) and legitimacy (input). The aim of this article is to integrate various research strands into the comparative study of territorial politics, with federal studies at its core. As an example of a conceptual payoff, ‘political territoriality’ refers the observer to three dimensions of the strategic use of areal boundaries for political power. By focusing on territory as a key variable of political systems, the actors, processes and institutions are first analytically separated and continuously measured, enhancing internal validity, and then theoretically integrated, which allows more valid external inferences than classic, legal-institutionalist federal studies. After discussing the boundaries and substance of comparative territorial politics as a federal discipline, political territoriality is developed towards an analytical framework applicable to politics at any governmental level. The claims are modest: political territoriality does not serve so much as an explanatory concept as rather an ‘attention-directing device’ for federal studies.

Practice Movements: The Politics of Non-sovereign Power

Practice movements, that is, forms of unorganized collective action, are a central site of politics. Their defining moments are that their goals are expressed in practices rather than in words, and that these “pre-ideological” practices aim at access to or redistribution of goods, whether material or symbolic, rather than at representation. They are transgression rather than resistance in that they transgress restrictions inherent in the material organization of space, property relations, status orders, and normative regulations, be they laws, morals, or customs. Practice movements are above all about access and participation rather than about autonomy, and thus have an ambiguous relation to the transformation of the status quo. Their politics are transformative and they can produce temporary or lasting changes in the material grounds or in the regulation of the everyday life of those who pursue them, and potentially of the normativity and the organization of the wider social order.

Global evidence in local debates: the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in Swiss direct-democratic debates on school policy

This article analyses the use of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and other evidence in educational policy discourse in the context of direct-democratic votes in Switzerland. The results of a quantitative content analysis show that PISA is used by all actors to support a wide range of policy measures and ideological positions. Other evidence, however, is only used to support single specific policy positions. These findings demonstrate the ubiquity of PISA. The article discusses these results in view of the question of whether the incorporation of evidence into policy debates contributes to informed discourse.