Governmental measures against the spread of the Corona virus have been met with varying levels of opposition in many countries worldwide. Existing research has claimed that some of this opposition is linked to esoteric and anthroposophical beliefs. This research note tests this in an observational study using election results from the 2021 parliamentary election in Germany and new data on the distribution of natural healers, homeopathic doctors and Steiner schools. Results show that counter to common expectations, there is no evidence that esoteric beliefs systematically lead to increased support for the established right-wing . Rather, some indicators for esoteric beliefs - in particular, the presence of homeopathic doctors and Waldorf schools - are related to higher support for the new fringe party , a single-issue party campaigning against governmental Corona measures.

Very few countries have managed to decouple economic growth from resource use and greenhouse gas emissions in absolute terms and at rates to meet the climate targets of the Paris Agreement. To achieve this, technological solutions would need to be combined with sufficiency-oriented policies in a postgrowth context. This paper develops policy ideas for a sustainable welfare-work nexus via citizen engagement and examines the level of democratic support for such ideas. Theoretically, it employs "sustainable welfare" to understand welfare and wellbeing within planetary and social limits. The paper first sketches the welfare-work nexus as developed in the postwar circumstances in Western Europe, highlighting that this model was at no point in time ecologically generalizable to the rest of the world, and then briefly reviews the existing debate on sustainable welfare. The empirical analyses start with qualitative data from 11 deliberative forums on sustainable needs satisfaction, with emphasis on policies targeted at respecting the upper and lower boundaries of a "safe and just operating space" for economic and social development. The qualitative data are then triangulated with quantitative data from a representative survey, which was constructed based on the policy suggestions from the forums, hence allowing for an exploration of their popularity in the Swedish population as a whole. We find a considerable gap between the far-reaching policy measures that forum participants consider necessary and the measures that the general public in Sweden are prepared to support, especially when it comes to policies targeting maximum levels of needs satisfaction.

Stymied by preoccupation with short-term interests of individualist consumers, democratic institutions seem unable to generate sustained political commitment for tackling climate change. The citizens' assembly (CA) is promoted as an important tool in combatting this "democratic myopia." The aim of a CA is to bring together a representative group of citizens and experts from diverse backgrounds to exchange their different insights and perspectives on a complex issue. By providing the opportunity for inclusive democratic deliberation, the CA is expected to educate citizens, stimulate awareness of complex issues, and produce enlightened and legitimate policy recommendations. However, critical voices warn about the simplified and celebratory commentary surrounding the CA. Informed by agonistic and radical democratic theory, this paper elaborates on a particular concern, which is the orientation toward consensus in the CA. The paper points to the importance of disagreement in the form of both agony (from inside) and rupture (from outside) that, it is argued, is crucial for a democratic, engaging, passionate, creative, and representative sustainability politics.

Inter- and transdisciplinarity (ITD) has been part of political science for quite some time now, but although political science regularly deals with its self-understanding, the consequences for research and researchers of ITD have not yet been systematically considered. To stimulate this debate, we conceptualize ITD as a spectrum of knowledge integration, application, and participation. We use International Relations norm research as a theoretical framework to describe, analyze, and reflect on ITD as a normative dynamic. Autoethnographically and through participatory observation, we examine ITD as a normative dynamic, with insights from three research projects in the field of sustainability. Specifically, we ask what implications ITD has for researchers and research in political science. As a result, we find that ITD offers both opportunities and challenges. In the context of knowledge integration, we discuss the importance of the participation of political science in major societal issues in contrast to ITD's preferences for a particular understanding of knowledge and research. We reflect on ITD's application bias in terms of problem-solving opportunities and output orientation. In addition, we consider the participation postulate of ITD and weigh potential democratizing effects against the conditions under which these might be realized. Finally, we address where further research seems useful to continue reflection on ITD.

The French and the German national parliaments are dominated by highly educated, older, and mostly male politicians. There are growing calls for a more balanced political representation of different social groups. This paper seeks to inform this debate by conceptualizing and measuring representation gaps for women, people of immigrant origin, the working class, and younger age groups in France and Germany and by assessing the potential of deliberative participatory fora to ameliorate underrepresentation. Based on theories of deliberative and participatory democracy, it suggests three criteria these fora must fulfill to potentially balance underrepresentation (descriptive representation in composition, deliberative quality, and coupling to politics) and explores them empirically in four recent cases of deliberative participatory fora: the and the in France and the and the in Germany. We show that significant representation gaps exist for all groups studied. They have been narrowing for women and people of immigrant origin and remain most pronounced for class. Regarding institutional features, our cases fare relatively well in terms of balanced composition and deliberative quality, but the potential to balance representation gaps is seriously limited by a lack of coupling to the political system.

An increasing political contestation of the existing private-property order can currently be observed. With serious demands for expropriation, even outside marginalized splinter groups, a concept is returning that has largely disappeared from the focus of political theory. In this context, the article aims at a decidedly political-scientific examination of the legal institution of expropriation by locating the concept in the architecture of the democratic rule of law. Shifting between the poles of the constitutional guarantee of private property on the one hand and a potentiality of democratic contestation of the property order on the other, it is made clear that the concept of expropriation highlights the aporias of the democratic rule of law. The thesis is presented by means of a theoretical-historical contouring using the example of the intensive discussions on expropriation in the Weimar Republic and, in particular, with a more in-depth examination of the positions of Carl Schmitt and Otto Kirchheimer, which are subsequently figured as antipodes. While Schmitt seeks to make plausible a far-reaching rejection of expropriation potentials with a narrow concept of the rule of law, Kirchheimer focuses on an extensive interpretation of democratic power of disposition over the private-property order. The Weimar crisis years are examined as a kind of "laboratory" in order to profit from the extraordinary degree of crisis-induced searching and to work out a political science theoretical language for contemporary discussions of expropriation.

This article studies how different systems of policy advice are suited to provide relevant knowledge in times of acute crisis. The notion of evidence-based policymaking (EBP) originated in the successful 1997 New Labour program in the United Kingdom to formulate policy based not on ideology but on sound empirical evidence. We provide a brief overview of the history of the concept and the current debates around it. We then outline the main characteristics of the policy advisory systems in Germany, Switzerland, and Italy through which scientific knowledge-in the form of either person-bound expertise or evidence generated through standard scientific processes-was fed into policy formulation processes before the COVID-19 crisis. Whereas EBP takes place in the form of institutionalized advisory bodies and draws on expertise rather than on evidence in Germany, the system in Switzerland focuses more on the use of evidence provided through external mandates. Italy has a hybrid politicized expert system. The article then analyzes how this different prioritization of expertise vs. evidence in the three countries affects policymakers' capacity to include scientific knowledge in policy decisions in times of acute crisis. The comparison of the three countries implies that countries with policy advisory systems designed to use expertise are better placed to incorporate scientific knowledge into their decisions in times of acute crisis than are countries with policy advisory systems that relied primarily on evidence before the COVID-19 crisis.

The integration of the social-psychological social identity approach to policy process research has recently generated new insights on policy-making. Empirical applications for established democracies and multilevel settings such as the European Union have identified five general types of social identities that are relevant for the preferences and behavior of policy actors and their stability and change over time. Social identities are based on joint memberships in social groups, such as organizations, demographic/biographical identities, sectors, locations, and informal opportunities for exchange (which may result in programmatic groups and identities). Some of these social groups, above all pluralistic interest associations and political parties, are directly related to the settings of embedded democracies. This article sheds light on the traveling capacity of the Social Identities in the Policy Process (SIPP) perspective by applying it to the Russian political system. An analysis of policy actors' social identities in two federal ministries shows that in autocracies, interest intermediation, legitimacy, and influence on policy processes run through professional and informal groups when competing organizations and democratic institutions are absent. The results indicate that the SIPP perspective is adaptable to policy processes in different contexts but that the importance of identity types varies.

The Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) builds on the concepts of timing and ambiguity and their effects on the policy process. Since its introduction to agenda-setting in the U.S. presidential system, scholars have transferred the MSF's core ideas to multiple issue areas, policy stages, and political systems. However, what has been lacking so far is a thorough discussion of the MSF's travelling capacity to nondemocratic forms of government. Building on a brief summary of the MSF's main ideas, this article discusses the challenges that policy-making in autocracies poses for MSF applications and ways to adapt it to the peculiarities that are typical for these regimes. The article focuses on the agenda-setting stage in which formal institutions are less important and introduces falsifiable hypotheses explaining agenda change. Due to tremendous differences regarding the organization of the decision-making process in autocratic regimes, the article only sketches out how the MSF could be adapted to explain policy change in this institutional setting. The article concludes with a discussion of whether the MSF is stretched too far by applying it to nondemocratic systems. It turns out that in theoretical and conceptual terms, the MSF travels surprisingly well to these systems.

At first glance, it can be stated that bodies do not play an important role in modern Western political theory. They are mostly privatized and set as natural or prepolitical. This article argues, however, that bodies are not absent in modern political theory but that they play a crucial political role. They legitimize political orders in a subtle way. Through an examination of central arguments in the work of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, Hannah Arendt, John Rawls, and Jürgen Habermas, three ways are identified in which bodies shape modern Western political theory. First, bodies are used to legitimize the political order; second, they serve to determine political subjectivity; and third, body politics define politics. The text aims to highlight how a body-theoretical perspective that does not define the body as prepolitical but rather as a political construct is able to expand the scope of political theory.

Published findings of opinion polls are an important part of the political coverage before elections. Thus, researchers have long investigated whether the perceived popularity of political parties can lead to even more voters following this majority. However, empirical findings on this so-called political bandwagon effect are mixed. In the present paper, we integrate theories from political science and social psychology to explain these inconsistencies through social class as a potential moderating variable. Based on previous findings regarding consumer decisions, we hypothesized that bandwagon effects are greater among voters with lower social class. To investigate this hypothesis, we combined data from the German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES) Rolling Cross-Section 2021, which was collected over the 55 days before the 2021 German federal election, with the results of published preelection polls. Using separate multilevel models for each of the parties, we found no evidence for bandwagon effects. Only for the Social Democratic Party were poll results related to voting intentions assessed on the following day, suggesting that polls might have contributed to the party's electoral success. However, there was no evidence for a moderation of bandwagon effects by voters' social class. Accordingly, we could not resolve the mixed findings in this field of research. Our results point to important open questions in research on bandwagon effects in multiparty systems as well as on effects of social class in Germany.

We provide the first systematic research into the origins of subjective freedom of speech in Germany. Relying on the GLES 2021 Cross-Section Pre-Election Survey, which includes a newly designed survey item on subjective freedom of speech, we evaluate a whole range of plausible candidate hypotheses. First, we contribute to cumulative research by testing the explanatory factors in Gibson (1993)-citizens' social class, their political involvement and political preferences, and their personality dispositions-for the German case. Second, we move beyond the state of the art and test three new hypotheses that reflect more recent political developments and arguments in the free speech debate: the role of social media, increasing political and social polarization, and the rise of populism. Importantly, all hypothesis tests reported in this paper have been preregistered prior to data collection. Our results reveal that three explanatory factors are significantly, consistently, and substantively related to subjective free speech in Germany: political preferences, populist attitudes, and identification with the Alternative for Germany party.

The GLES Open Science Challenge 2021 was a pioneering initiative in quantitative political science. Aimed at increasing the adoption of replicable and transparent research practices, it led to this special issue. The project combined the rigor of registered reports-a new publication format in which studies are evaluated prior to data collection/access and analysis-with quantitative political science research in the context of the 2021 German federal election. This special issue, which features the registered reports that resulted from the project, shows that transparent research following open science principles benefits our discipline and substantially contributes to quantitative political science. In this introduction to the special issue, we first elaborate on why more transparent research practices are necessary to guarantee the cumulative progress of scientific knowledge. We then show how registered reports can contribute to increasing the transparency of scientific practices. Next, we discuss the application of open science practices in quantitative political science to date. And finally, we present the process and schedule of the GLES Open Science Challenge and give an overview of the contributions included in this special issue.

Our study on political parallelism in Germany examines the extent to which media reflect the parties' central frames in the debate on refugee and asylum migration. Thereby, we consider discursive alliances of individual media outlets and parties. In this context, we moreover address important questions of public sphere theory: Do the media function as organs of particular viewpoints, or do they set the ground for free opinion building by a broad and balanced representation of competing frames? In addition, we discuss the extent to which the media offer political parties a fair opportunity to make their positions observable to the public. Empirically, we analyze the extent of political parallelism based on a content analysis of 18 media outlets and official documents of the seven parties in the German Bundestag. At the level of issue-specific statements, we measure value-based frames. This approach enables us to describe the substance of mediated viewpoints concisely and to identify similarities between media and parties with regard to the framing of the issue. Furthermore, our method allows us to locate media and parties within the space of a basic political cleavage (integration vs. demarcation). Referring to a concept of political sociology enables us to describe the proximity and distance of media and parties in a condensed way.

Voting by mail is increasingly popular. Although voters enjoy the convenience of voting by mail, the public is unaware how prone to error mail ballots are. Election administrations reject mail ballots for a variety of reasons. Because German electoral laws treat rejected ballots as not having been cast, the reported number of invalid mail ballots underestimates the true share of uncounted mail ballots. Between 3.2% and 4.0% of the mailed ballots in German elections are estimated to remain uncounted, which is far higher than the share of invalid in-person votes. This paper argues that rejected mail ballots should be reported in the official records to make voters aware of the risks of an uncounted mail ballot.

This research note introduces the EPINetz Twitter Politicians Dataset, a comprehensive dataset of 2449 Twitter accounts of German parliamentarians, minsters, state secretaries, parties, and ministries on a state, federal, and European Union level for the year 2021. This hand-curated dataset not only provides up-to-date information on elected officials, but it also includes additional variables such as their party affiliation, age, and gender. Furthermore, it provides linkages to additional data sources by providing the accounts' Wikidata and Abgeordnetenwatch (Parliamentwatch) IDs. While it does not provide actual tweet data, the dataset will be a valuable resource for researchers by providing easy access to elected German politicians. We demonstrate some of the dataset's uses with an analysis of the 2021 German Federal Elections. The full dataset can be accessed via 10.7802/2415.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused massive restrictions on public life. A survey of more than 1500 local councilors showed that councils at the local level are restricted in their capacity. After a total lockdown in March 2020 at the local level, the local central committee (Hauptausschuss) took over, substituting for and representing the full city council's local decision-making capacity. Later on, in some cities, councils were able to implement council meetings with half of the councilors. In this "executive hour," several local committees and commissions as well as political events organized by the civil society could not be implemented.Before the local elections on September 22 in North Rhine-Westphalia, the pandemic affected the registration of political parties, which became problematic. Appropriate space, as well as digital infrastructure, was lacking. With more mitigated COVID-19 restrictions and new regulations for local elections by the province of North Rhine-Westphalia, electoral party registration was facilitated, and deadlines were extended. In particular, smaller political parties and new candidates for the mayoral direct election experienced problems in presenting themselves during electoral campaigns; new parties and candidates were often disadvantaged compared with the political incumbent and the established political parties.Furthermore, electoral street campaigning, panel discussions, and canvassing were extremely limited. In this time of "forced digitization," the established political parties in particular were able to focus on e‑campaigning. Because of these disadvantages, smaller parties requested postponement of the local elections. The majority in all political parties refused postal voting.

Public policy emerged as an academic subfield in the United States after the second World War. The theoretical foundations of the discipline are essentially based on analyses of Anglo-Saxon policies and politics and were originally aimed at providing knowledge for the policy process of pluralistic democracies. Given the increasing transfer of the subject and related approaches to other countries, it is necessary to clarify how suitable theories, goals, and methods of policy research are applied in other contexts. What needs to be considered when transferring theories of the policy process, and what can be learned from existing applications of the various approaches in different settings? The compilation of contributions on selected theoretical public policy lenses and their transfer to other countries and regions provides a nuanced answer to these questions.

This article explores diverse views on both the current challenges and limits as well as the reforms and innovations of existing democracies at the beginning of the twenty-first century. First, it argues that socioeconomic inequality, new populism, new forms of communication, and globalization have stimulated a renewal of interest in analyzing the "frontiers of democracy." Democracies have reacted with different innovations and reforms in order to meet these challenges. The authors trace the phases of respective research from studies on singular, standalone instances to normative as well as empirical work on participatory (direct democratic and deliberative) systems. Finally, they advocate for combining the conceptual approach of defining democracy by the fulfillment of democratic values with rigorous empirical evaluation of the contributions (old and new) that institutions and procedures provide in order to fulfill these values and meet the mentioned challenges.

Populist parties enjoy stable support in various European countries. The literature on the rise of populism argues that this support especially increases in times of crises. Surprisingly, the German right-wing populist Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) did not increase its support in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, the party even lost 2.3 percentage points in the 2021 federal election. We address this puzzle and ask why the AfD has not been able to use the crisis to its advantage. Our main argument in answering this question is that, although the AfD pursued the classic populist strategy of fundamental opposition, the support base of the AfD is strongly divided on the preference towards measures containing the spread of COVID-19. This division is reinforced by individual affectedness by the pandemic. Introducing a novel weekly dataset on voter preferences, we show that the AfD support base is strongly divided on the issue with approval of the government measures being a significant and substantial contributor to vote switching away from the AfD. Using regional-level data and a difference-in-differences approach, we further show that western German regions hit especially hard by the pandemic display a lower AfD vote share than other regions. Our findings have important implications for the impact of exogenous shocks on electoral competition and also on the future of populist parties.