Doing institutions. A dialectic reading of institutions and social practices and its relevance for development geography

Erdkunde

Volumn 66, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 185-195

  Etzold, Benjamin ^a   Jülich, Sebastian ^b   Keck, Markus ^a   Sakdapolrak, Patrick ^a   Schmitt, Thomas ^c   Zimmer, Anna ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

^b SWISS FEDERAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE WSL   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Development geography; Institutions; Neo institutional theory; Social practices; South Asia

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; DEVELOPMENT THEORY; FUTURE PROSPECT; INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; THEORETICAL STUDY;

SOUTH ASIA; SWITZERLAND; ZURICH [SWITZERLAND];

EID: 84867501205     PISSN: 00140015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3112/erdkunde.2012.03.01     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Anand, N. (2011): Toward an anthropology of water in Mumbai's settlements. In: Clark-Deces, I. (ed.): The Blackwell Companion to the anthropology of India. Malden.
2. Bathelt, H. and Glückler, J. (2003): Wirtschaftsgeographie. Ökonomische Beziehungen in räumlicher Per-spektive. Stuttgart.
3. Baviskar, A. (2003): Between violence and desire: space, power and identity in the making of metropolitan Delhi. In: International Social Science Journal 55 (1), 89-98. DOI: 10.1111/1468-2451.5501009
4. Bayat, A. (1997): Street politics: poor people's movements in Iran. New York.
5. Berger, P. and Luckmann, T. (1967): The social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York.
6. Bohle, H.-G. (2005): Soziales oder unsoziales Kapital? Das Sozialkapital-Konzept in der Geographischen Verwundbarkeitsforschung. In: Geographische Zeitschrift 93 (2), 65-81.
7. Bohle, H.-G. (20112): Vom Raum zum Menschen: Geographische Entwicklungsforschung als Handlungswissenschaft. In: GeBhardt, H.; GlaSer, R.; Radtke, U. and ReuBer, P. (eds.): Geographie. Physische Geographie und Humangeographie. Heidelberg, 746-763.
8. Bohle, H.-G.; Etzold, B.; Keck, M. and Sakdapolrak, P. (2009): Adaptive food governance. In: IHDP Update (3), 53-58.
9. Bourdieu, P. (1998): Praktische Vernunft: zur Theorie des Handelns. Frankfurt a.M.
10. Bourdieu, P. (2006): Das Recht und die Umgehung des Rechts. In: Florian, M. and hilleBrandt, F. (eds.): Pierre Bourdieu: Neue Perspektiven für die Soziologie der Wirtschaft. Wiesbaden, 19-41.
11. Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992): The purpose of reflexive sociology (The Chicago Workshop). In: Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. J. D. (eds.): An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago, London, 60-215.
12. Brass, P. (1997): Theft of an idol: text and context in the representation of collective violence. Princeton, NJ.
13. Büttner, H. (2001): Wassermanagement und Ressourcenkonflikte. Eine empirische Untersuchung zur Wasserkrise und Water Harvesting in Indien aus der Perspektive sozialwissenschaftlicher Umweltforschung. Saarbrücken.
14. Cleaver, F. (2000): Moral ecological rationality: institutions and the management of common property resources. In: Development and Change 31 (2), 361-383. DOI: 10.1111/1467-7660.00158
15. Cleaver, F. (2002): Reinventing institutions: bricolage and the social embeddedness of natural resource management. In: The European Journal of Development Research 14 (2), 11-30. DOI: 10.1080/714000425
16. Cleaver, F. (2007): Understanding agency in collective action. In: Journal of Human Development, 8 (2), 223-244. DOI: 10.1080/14649880701371067
17. Coelho, K. (2005): Unstating the public; an ethnography of reform in an urban water utility in South India. In: MoSSe, D. (ed.): The aid effect: giving and governing in international development. London, 171-195.
18. Corbridge, S.; Williams, G.; Srivastava, M. and Véron, R. (2005): Seeing the state: governance and governmentality in India. Cambridge.
19. Coy, M. (2001): Institutionelle Regelungen im Konflikt um Land. Zum Stand der Diskussion. In: Geographica Helvetica 56 (1), 28-33.
20. De Haan, L. and Zoomers, A. (2005): Exploring the frontier of livelihoods research. In: Development and Change 36 (1), 27-47. DOI: 10.1111/j.0012-155X.2005.00401.x
21. Dean, M. (2010): Governmentality. Power and rule in modern society. London.
22. Dörfler, T.; Graefe, O. and Müller-Mahn, D. (2003): Habitus und Feld. Anregungen für eine Neuorientierung der geographischen Entwicklungsforschung auf der Grundlage von Bourdieus "Theorie der Praxis". In: Geographica Helvetica 58 (1), 11-23.
23. Dupont, V. and Ramanathan, U. (2008): The courts and the squatter settlements in Delhi-Or the intervention of the judiciary in urban 'Governance'. In: Baud, I. and de Wit, J. (eds.): New forms of urban governance in India. Shifts, models, networks and contestations. New Delhi, 312-343.
24. Etzold, B. (2011): Die umkämpfte Stadt. Die alltägliche Aneignung öffentlicher Räume durch Straßenhändler in Dhaka (Bangladesch). In: Holm, A. and GeBhardt, D. (eds.): Initiativen für Recht auf Stadt: Theorie und Praxis städtischer Aneignung. Hamburg, 187-220.
25. Etzold, B. (2012): Selling in insecurity-living with violence: eviction drives against street food vendors in Dhaka and the informal politics of exploitation. In: Ha, N. and GraaF, K. (eds.): Urban street vending: a global perspective on the practices and policies of a marginalized economy. New York (forthcoming).
26. Etzold, B.; Bohle, H.-G.; Keck, M. and Zingel, H.-P. (2009): Informality as agency-negotiating food security in Dhaka. In: Die Erde 140 (1), 1-22.
27. Everts, J.; M. Lahr-Kurten and Watson, M (2011): Practice matters! Geographical inquiry and theories of practice. In: Erdkunde 65 (4), 323-334. DOI: 10.3112/erdkunde.2011.04.01
28. Florian, M. (2006): Ökonomie als soziale Praxis. Zur wirtschaftssoziologischen Anschlussfähigkeit von Pierre Bourdieu. In: Florian, M. and HilleBrandt, F. (eds.): Pierre Bourdieu: Neue Perspektiven für die Soziologie der Wirtschaft. Wiesbaden, 73-108.
29. Foucault, M. (1991): Discipline and punish. The birth of prison. London.
30. Fuller, C. and Bénéï, V. (2001): The everyday state and society in modern India. London.
31. Fünfgeld, H. (2007): Fishing in muddy waters. Socio-environmental relations under the impact of violence in eastern Sri Lanka. Saarbrücken.
32. Gebhardt, H.; Glaser, R.; Radtke, U. and Reuber, P. (2011): Geographie: Physische Geographie und Humangeographie. Heidelberg.
33. Ghertner, D. A. (2010): Calculating without numbers: aesthetic governmentality in Delhi's slums. In: Economy and Society 39 (2), 185-217. DOI: 10.1080/03085141003620147
34. Giddens, A. (1984): The constitution of society. Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge.
35. Glasze, G. and MattiSSek, A. (eds.) (2009): Handbuch Diskurs und Raum. Theorien und Methoden für die Humangeographie sowie die sozial-und kulturwissenschaftliche Raumforschung. Bielefeld.
36. Goffman, E. (1974): Frame analysis. An essay on the organization of experience. Boston.
37. Hackenbroch, K.; Baumgart, U. and Kreibich, V. (2009): Spatiality of livelihoods: urban public space and the urban poor in Dhaka. In: Die Erde 140 (1), 47-68.
38. Hall, P. and Taylor, R. (1996): Political science and the three new institutionalisms. MPIFG Discussion Paper 96/6. Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung. Köln.
39. Harriss, J.; Hunter, J. and Lewis, C. M. (1995): The new institutional economics and third world development. London.
40. Hasse, R. and Krücken, G. (2005): Neo-Institutionalismus. Bielefeld.
41. HodGSon, G. (1998): The approach of institutional economics. In: Journal of Economic Literature 36 (1), 166-192.
42. Hossain, S. (2011): Informal dynamics of a public utility: rationality of the scene behind a screen. In: Habitat International 35 (2), 275-285. DOI: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2010.09.003
43. Jepperson, R. L. (1991): Institutions, institutional effects, and institutionalism. In: PoWell, W. W. and Dimaggio, P. J. (eds.): The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago, 143-163.
44. Jervisread, C. (2010): Making Delhi like Paris: space and the politics of development in an East Delhi resettlement colony. Sussex.
45. Keck, M. (2012): Informality as borrowed security: contested food markets in Dhaka, Bangladesh. In: MacFarlane, c. and WaiBel, m. (eds.): Urban informalities. Reflections on the formal and informal. Farnham, 111-127.
46. Keck, M.; Etzold, B.; Bohle, H.-G. and Zingel, W.-P. (2008): Reis für die Megacity. Die Nahrungsversorgung von Dhaka zwischen globalen Risiken und lokalen Verwundbarkeiten. In: Geographische Rundschau 60 (11), 23-37.
47. Keck, M.; Bohle, H.-G. and Zingel, W.-P. (2012): Dealing with insecurity. Informal business relations and risk governance among food wholesalers in Dhaka, Bangladesh. In: Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 56 (1+2), 43-57.
48. Kneer, G. (2008): Institutionen/Organisationen. Über die Paradoxie des Organisierens. In: Moebius, S. and ReckWitz, A. (eds.): Poststrukturalistische Sozialwissenschaften. Frankfurt a.M., 124-140.
49. Korff, R. and Rothfuss, E. (2009): Urban revolution as catastrophe or solution? Governance of megacities in the Gobal South. In: Die Erde 140 (4), 355-370.
50. KrüGer, F. (2003): Handlungsorientierte Entwicklungsforschung. Trends, Perspektiven, Defizite. In: Petermanns Geographische Mitteilungen 147 (1), 6-15.
51. Leach, M.; Mearns, R. and Scoones, I. (1999): Environmental entitlements: dynamics and institutions in community-based natural resource management. In: World Development 27 (2), 225-247. DOI: 10.1016/S0305-750X(98)00141-7
52. Meyer, J.; Scott, R. and Strang, D. (1987): Centralization, fragmentation, and school district complexity. In: Administrative Science Quarterly 32, 186-201. DOI: 10.2307/2393125
53. Müller-Böker, U. (2001): Institutionelle Regelungen im Entwicklungsprozess. Einführung zum Themenheft. In: Geographica Helvetica 56 (1), 2-3.
54. Müller-Mahn, D. and Verne, J. (2010): Geographische Entwicklungsforschung-alte Probleme, neue Perspektiven? In: Geographische Rundschau 62 (10), 4-11.
55. Neuburger, M. (2001): Landrechte in Brasilien. Zur Bedeutung institutioneller Regelungen für Verwundbarkeit und Überlebensstrategien kleinbäuerlicher Gruppen. In: Geographica Helvetica 56 (1), 34-47.
56. Noe, C. (2007): Soziale Netzwerke und Gesundheit. Health Vulnerability städtischer Marginalgruppen in Colombo/Sri Lanka. Saarbrücken.
57. North, D. (1990): Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge.
58. Ó Tuathail, G. (1996): Critical geopolitics. The politics of writing global space. London.
59. OSella, F. and OSella, C. (2001): The return of King Mahabali: the politics of morality in Kerala. In: Fuller, C. and Bénéï, V. (eds.): The everyday state and society in modern India. London, 137-162.
60. Revilla Diez, J.; Liefner, I.; Schiller, D.; Meyer, S. and Brömer, C. (2008): Agile firm organization and spatial division of labor in the Pearl River Delta. In: Die Erde 139 (3), 251-269.
61. Rodrik, D. (2004): Getting institutions right. In: CESinfo 2 (2), 10-16
62. Sakdapolrak, P. (2010): Orte und Räume der Health Vulnerability. Bourdieus Theorie der Praxis für die Analyse von Krankheit und Gesundheit in Megaurbanen Slums von Chennai, Südindien. Verlag für Entwicklungspolitik, Saarbrücken.
63. Schamp, E. W. (2000): Vernetzte Produktion. Industriegeographie aus institutioneller Perspektive. Darmstadt.
64. Schmitt, T. (2011): Cultural governance as a research framework. Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity. Göttingen.
65. Scott, R. W. (2008): Institutions and organizations. Ideas and interests. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi, Singapore.
66. Searle, J. (1995): The construction of social reality. London.
67. Sen, A. (1981): Poverty and famines: an essay on entitlement and deprivation. Oxford.
68. Senge, K. and Hellmann, K.-U. (eds.) (2006): Einführung in den Neo-Institutionalismus. Wiesbaden.
69. Thomi, W. (2001): Institutionenökonomische Perspektiven im Kontext der Reorganisation subnationaler Gebietskörperschaften. In: Geographica Helvetica 56 (1), 4-12.
70. Walgenbach, P. and Meyer, R. E. (2008): Neoinstitutionalistische Organisationstheorie. Stuttgart.
71. Watts, M. (2003): Development and governmentality. In: Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 24, 1-35.
72. Watts, M. and Bohle, H.-G. (1993): The space of vulnerability: the causal structure of hunger and famine. In: Progress in Human Geography 17 (1), 43-67. DOI: 10.1177/030913259301700103
73. Weichhart, P. (2008): Entwicklungslinien der Sozialgeographie. Von Hans Bobek bis Benno Werlen. Stuttgart.
74. Werlen, B. (1997): Sozialgeographie alltäglicher Regionalisierungen. Vol. 2. Stuttgart.
75. Westermann, O. (2007). Poverty, access and payment for watershed hydrological services. A social feasibility study with case in Tiquipaya watershed Bolivia. Department of Environmental, Social and Spatial Changes. Roskilde.
76. Williamson, O. E. (1975): Markets and hierarchies, analysis and antitrust implications: a study in the economics of internal organization. New York.
77. Young, O.; Agrawal, A.; King, L. A.; Sand, P. H.; Underdal, A.; Wasson, M. and Schroeder, H. (2005): Science plan. Institutional dimensions of global environmental change. Bonn.
78. Zimmer, A. (2009): Social relations in the waste waterscapes: the case of Delhi's informal settlements. In: UGEC Viewpoints 2009, 9-12.
79. Zimmer, A. (2012): Everyday governance of the waste waterscapes. A Foucauldian analysis in Delhi's informal settlements. Bonn. http://hss.ulb.uni-bonn.de/2012/2956/2956.pdf (11.09.2012)