A Critical Response to Kevin Stenson’s Governing the Local: Sovereignty, Social Governance and Community Safety

In his compelling case study of local governance and community safety in the UK Thames Valley, Kevin Stenson makes several important contributions to the field of governmentality studies. While the paper’s merits are far-reaching, to this reader’s assessment they can be summarized in the following key areas: 1) Empirically, the article enhances our knowledge of the political economic transformation of a region otherwise overlooked in social science research ; 2) Conceptually, Stenson offers several theoretical and analytical refrains that, while becoming increasingly commonplace, are nonetheless still germane and rightly oriented to offer push back against otherwise totalizing, reified accounts of roll back/roll out neoliberalism. A welcomed new approach is offered as a corrective, The Realist Governmentality perspective, which emphasizes the interrelated and co-constitutive nature of politics, local culture, and habitus in processes related to the restructuring of social governance; 3) Methodologically, the paper makes a pitch for the ways in which finely grained, nuanced, mixed-method/ethnographic analyses have the potential to further problematize and recast a field of governmentality studies far too often dominated by discursive and textual approaches.

Comments on Kevin Stenson’s ‘Governing the Local: Sovereignty, Social Governance and Community Safety’

It is a challenging time to be a social scientist. Many of the concepts and categories we took for granted have been revealed as temporally and geographically specific. It is now widely accepted that the nation-state is no longer the sole container for economic, political and social processes, if indeed it ever was. This is where Kevin Stenson begins his paper. He traces the re-ordering of both state and nation, highlighting recent discussions about the unbundling and rescaling of the state and outlining how increasing ethnic and cultural diversity challenge homogeneous conceptions of the nation. In Stenson’s account these are largely empirical processes that are the basis for the important questions he raises about changing understandings of publics and social order, and their implications for the local governance of community safety. He contrasts two alternative positions; the ‘universal human rights position’ which refuses to privilege the interests of majority populations, and a more ‘communitarian and nationalistic position’ which he argues is most likely to be deployed by right wing politicians and interests groups. Drawing from extensive research in the Thames Valley region of the United Kingdom, he shows how these two understandings have both shaped the local policy response to crime and disorder.

Governance of Massive Multiauthor Collaboration – Linux, Wikipedia, and Other Networks: Governed by Bilateral Contracts, Partnerships, or Something in Between?

Open collaborative projects are moving to the foreground of knowledge production. Some online user communities develop into longterm projects that generate a highly valuable and at the same time freely accessible output. Traditional copyright law that is organized around the idea of a single creative entity is not well equipped to accommodate the needs of these forms of collaboration. In order to enable a peculiar network-type of interaction participants instead draw on public licensing models that determine the freedoms to use individual contributions. With the help of these access rules the operational logic of the project can be implemented successfully. However, as the case of the Wikipedia GFDL-CC license transition demonstrates, the adaptation of access rules in networks to new circumstances raises collective action problems and suffers from pitfalls caused by the fact that public licensing is grounded in individual copyright. Legal governance of open collaboration projects is a largely unexplored field. The article argues that the license steward of a public license assumes the position of a fiduciary of the knowledge commons generated under the license regime. Ultimately, the governance of decentralized networks translates into a composite of organizational and contractual elements. It is concluded that the production of global knowledge commons relies on rules of transnational private law.

Re-conceptualizing the Global Digital Divide

The article seeks a re-conceptualization of the global digital divide debate. It critically explores the predominant notion, its evolution and measurement, as well as the policies that have been advanced to bridge the digital divide. Acknowledging the complexity of this inequality, the article aims at analyzing the disparities beyond the connectivity and skills barriers. Without understating the first two digital divides, it is argued that as the Internet becomes more sophisticated and more integrated into economic, social, and cultural processes, a “third” generation of divides becomes critical. These divides are drawn not at the entry to the net but within the net itself, and limit access to content. The increasing barriers to content, though of a diverse nature, all relate to some governance characteristics inherent in cyberspace, such as global spillover of local decisions, regulation through code, and proliferation of self- and co-regulatory models. It is maintained that as the practice of intervention intensifies in cyberspace, multiple and far-reaching points of control outside formal legal institutions are created, threatening the availabil- ity of public goods and making the pursuit of public objectives difficult. This is an aspect that is rarely ad- dressed in the global digital divide discussions, even in comprehensive analyses and political initiatives such as the World Summit on the Information Society. Yet, the conceptualization of the digital divide as impeded access to content may be key in terms of ensuring real participation and catering for the longterm implications of digital technologies.

Moodle & Co. auf dem Weg zur Personal Learning Environment

Ausgehend von der typischen IT‐Infrastruktur für E‐Learning an Hochschulen auf der einen Seite sowie vom bisherigen Stand der Forschung zu Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) auf der anderen Seite zeigt dieser Beitrag auf, wie bestehende Werkzeuge bzw. Dienste zusammengeführt und für die Anforderungen der modernen, rechnergestützten Präsenzlehre aufbereitet werden können. Für diesen interdisziplinären Entwicklungsprozess bieten sowohl klassische Softwareentwicklungsverfahren als auch bestehende PLE‐Modelle wenig Hilfestellung an. Der Beitrag beschreibt die in einem campusweiten Projekt an der Universität Potsdam verfolgten Ansätze und die damit erzielten Ergebnisse. Dafür werden zunächst typische Lehr‐/Lern‐bzw. Kommunikations‐Szenarien identifiziert, aus denen Anforderungen an eine unterstützende Plattform abgeleitet werden. Dies führt zu einer umfassenden Sammlung zu berücksichtigender Dienste und deren Funktionen, die gemäß den Spezifika ihrer Nutzung in ein Gesamtsystem zu integrieren sind. Auf dieser Basis werden grundsätzliche Integrationsansätze und technische Details dieses Mash‐Ups in einer Gesamtschau aller relevanten Dienste betrachtet und in eine integrierende Systemarchitektur überführt. Deren konkrete Realisierung mit Hilfe der Portal‐Technologie Liferay wird dargestellt, wobei die eingangs definierten Szenarien aufgegriffen und exemplarisch vorgestellt werden. Ergänzende Anpassungen im Sinne einer personalisierbaren bzw. adaptiven Lern‐(und Arbeits‐)Umgebung werden ebenfalls unterstützt und kurz aufgezeigt.