从暴徒到大亨:澳大利亚议会调查中对现代奴隶制的指责

IF 1.3 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Erin O’Brien
{"title":"从暴徒到大亨:澳大利亚议会调查中对现代奴隶制的指责","authors":"Erin O’Brien","doi":"10.1093/PA/GSAA070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Policy problems are typically framed through a representation of those who have been harmed, and those who are to blame, with parliamentary inquiries playing a key role in setting the agenda by mediating between competing problematisations. In order to reveal the politics behind policy-making through inquiries, it is necessary to examine both the aspects of the issue that are problematised and those aspects that remain unproblematised. Adopting modern slavery policy in Australia as a case study, this article utilises Bacchi’s ‘what is the problem represented to be?’ framework for analysing discourse in parliamentary inquiries on modern slavery between 2003 and 2018. I argue that across three clear phases of policy-making, problematisation has shifted and evolved, though blame has consistently been deflected away from the role of the state in contributing to the conditions that cause modern slavery.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/PA/GSAA070","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Mobsters to Magnates: Shifting Blame for Modern Slavery in Australian Parliamentary Inquiries\",\"authors\":\"Erin O’Brien\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/PA/GSAA070\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Policy problems are typically framed through a representation of those who have been harmed, and those who are to blame, with parliamentary inquiries playing a key role in setting the agenda by mediating between competing problematisations. In order to reveal the politics behind policy-making through inquiries, it is necessary to examine both the aspects of the issue that are problematised and those aspects that remain unproblematised. Adopting modern slavery policy in Australia as a case study, this article utilises Bacchi’s ‘what is the problem represented to be?’ framework for analysing discourse in parliamentary inquiries on modern slavery between 2003 and 2018. I argue that across three clear phases of policy-making, problematisation has shifted and evolved, though blame has consistently been deflected away from the role of the state in contributing to the conditions that cause modern slavery.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19790,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Parliamentary Affairs\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/PA/GSAA070\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Parliamentary Affairs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAA070\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Parliamentary Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAA070","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

政策问题通常是通过代表那些受到伤害的人和应该受到谴责的人来制定的,议会调查通过在相互竞争的问题之间进行调解,在制定议程方面发挥着关键作用。为了通过调查揭示决策背后的政治,有必要研究问题中存在问题的方面和仍然没有问题的方面。本文以澳大利亚的现代奴隶制政策为例,利用巴奇的“问题是什么?”2003年至2018年期间议会对现代奴隶制调查中的话语分析框架。我认为,在政策制定的三个明确阶段,问题化已经发生了转变和演变,尽管指责一直偏离了国家在造成现代奴隶制条件方面的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From Mobsters to Magnates: Shifting Blame for Modern Slavery in Australian Parliamentary Inquiries
Policy problems are typically framed through a representation of those who have been harmed, and those who are to blame, with parliamentary inquiries playing a key role in setting the agenda by mediating between competing problematisations. In order to reveal the politics behind policy-making through inquiries, it is necessary to examine both the aspects of the issue that are problematised and those aspects that remain unproblematised. Adopting modern slavery policy in Australia as a case study, this article utilises Bacchi’s ‘what is the problem represented to be?’ framework for analysing discourse in parliamentary inquiries on modern slavery between 2003 and 2018. I argue that across three clear phases of policy-making, problematisation has shifted and evolved, though blame has consistently been deflected away from the role of the state in contributing to the conditions that cause modern slavery.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Parliamentary Affairs
Parliamentary Affairs POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
8.30%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Parliamentary Affairs is an established, peer-reviewed academic quarterly covering all the aspects of government and politics directly or indirectly connected with Parliament and parliamentary systems in Britain and throughout the world. The journal is published in partnership with the Hansard Society. The Society was created to promote parliamentary democracy throughout the world, a theme which is reflected in the pages of Parliamentary Affairs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信