Deciding How to Decide: Cultural Theory and Rule Making in Collaborative Watershed Organizations

The growing field of collaborative governance has long sought to explain processes of collective decision making. Insights from institutional analysis highlight the influence of rules in shaping collective decisions. Yet, less is known about how such rules are created; in other words, how collaborative organizations decide how to decide. By drawing on concepts from Cultural Theory, we examine the connections between worldviews and decision rules across four collaborative watershed organizations in Ohio, United States. Results from this comparative case analysis indicate correlations between the group dimension of worldview and decision rules about choice, as well as between the grid dimension of worldview and two different types of decision rules, choice and aggregation. These results highlight the explanatory value of integrating aspects of Cultural Theory with the Institutional Analysis and Development framework. Results also suggest how governments might more effectively engage with collaborative organizations.     

The Conservative Critique of the Enlightenment: The Limits of Social Engineering

The conservative, mainly Anglo-Saxon, critique of “social engineering” in Enlightenment thinking, which goes back to Edmund Burke and David Hume, among others, has recently resurfaced in the works of Michael Oakeshott, Roger Scruton, and Friedrich Hayek. This article focuses on their conservative critiques and more specifically on two common issues: the unintended negative consequences of political planning, and the institutions in civil society that act as a positive counterpart to this form of engineering.     

Chemical characterization of ancient pottery from sudan by x‐ray fluorescence spectrometry (xrf), electron microprobe analyses (empa) and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP–MS)*

Sixty‐four sherds and seven natural clays from prehistoric sites in northwestern Sudan have been submitted to petrological and chemical analysis using XRF spectrometry, EMPA and ICP–MS. According to their texture, the sherds form five different groups. The high contents of P₂O₅ (more than 0.5 wt%) discerned in 19 samples and the variation of the P₂O₅ content in two samples of the same vessel can be explained by post‐depositional processes or by the ancient organic contents (e.g., milk) of the vessel. Chemical classification of the pottery bulk suggests that vessels were made locally, as only sherds from the same area show homogeneity of data.     

Red Brick in the Land of Steady Habits: Creating the Univeristy of Connecticut, 1881-2006

At first blush, the opportunity to read the history of a universityfrom which you did not graduate, for which you do not work,or near which you do not live, may not sound all that appealing.However, to dismiss Bruce M. Stave's Red Brick in the Land ofSteady Habits: Creating the University of Connecticut, 1881–2006would be a mistake of considerable proportions, for not onlyis the volume enlightening with regard to higher education inthe United States over the course of the twentieth century,it is also the proverbial "good read." Stave,     

Territorial Appeals in Post‐Wall German Filmmaking: The Case of Good Bye,Lenin!

Abstract: How do institutions, markets, and stakeholders influence what stories are feasible and profitable for filmmakers to tell? This article discusses appeals to territorial interest and identity in filmmaking in post‐wall Germany and the conditions that shape them. By tracing the emergence of the film Good Bye, Lenin! (2003), we see how the project accumulated support from some territories and not others; how filmmakers persuaded colleagues and critics of their interpretation's legitimacy; and how individuals and institutions shape how the film would be used and remembered. My objective is to draw attention to the messiness and uncertainty as multiple stakeholders align, contest, or subsume competing appeals that would be otherwise invisible in a “finished” film. Addressing those interested in the geopolitics of cultural production, the article argues for more attention to the behind‐the‐scenes negotiations in funding, production, and distribution processes in order to keep issues of power and dependence visible.