Policy-making processes in international settings are long and complex procedures of collective decision-making. More than by rational choice making, these processes are dominated by the interactive exchange of coordinative discourse, in which not only the involved policy actors but also the contextual settings play an active role.
The proposed paper adds a new perspective to the existing research on discourse and argumentation in intergovernmental policy-making processes by proposing a methodological approach that combines elements of Argumentative Discourse Analysis (Hajer, drawing on Majone, Fischer and Forester) with the conceptual ideas of Actor-Network Theory (ANT, in particular as defined by Latour). While the first approach allows assessing the argumentative structures and narratives in the exchanges leading to the dominant policy discourse, the latter is chosen in order to ‘follow’ the involved actors and to observe the creation of power relationships through interaction: ANT enables the researcher to meticulously trace the behaviour, statements and ideas of policy actors as well as the ‘actions’ of all other elements that impact the procedures (bureaucracy, documents, conference settings etc.). In order to consider impulses emerging from networks of actors that are situated outside the policy-making body, particular attention is paid to the mutual interference of theoretical knowledge and policy discourse as well as role of epistemic communities (Haas).
In combination with an argumentative policy approach, the subject of the policy actors is reintegrated in the analysis of policy discourse and policy change, as it is possible to identify moments, when collective discourse shifts thanks to new elements in the argumentations among individuals. The main methodological ideas of the paper are illustrated through short examples emerging from a larger research project on UNESCO’s development of a policy discourse on the Information Society.
