The “Indefinite Discipline” of Competitiveness Benchmarking as a Neoliberal Technology of Government
Minerva 47 (3):261-280 (2009)
|Abstract||Working on the assumption that ideas are embedded in socio-technical arrangements which actualize them, this essay sheds light on the way the Open Method of Co-ordination (OMC) achieves the Lisbon strategic goal: to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world . Rather than framing the issue in utilitarian terms, it focuses attention on quantified indicators, comparable statistics and common targets resulting from the increasing practice of intergovernmental benchmarking, in order to tackle the following questions: how does the OMC go about co-ordinating Member States through the benchmarking of national policies? And to what extent does this managerial device impact the path of European construction? Beyond the ideological and discursive construction of the competitive imperative, this technology of government transforms it into an indefinite discipline (Foucault) which constantly urges decision-makers to hit the top of the charts. This contribution thus argues that the practice of intergovernmental benchmarking is far from being neutral in purpose and effect. On the contrary, it lays the foundation for building a competitive Europe which unites Member States through competition.|
|Keywords||Benchmarking Competitiveness Lisbon strategy Foucault Neoliberalism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Matthew Lee & Jillian Kohler (2010). Benchmarking and Transparency: Incentives for the Pharmaceutical Industry's Corporate Social Responsibility. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 95 (4):641-658.
Johan J. Graafland, S. C. W. Eijffinger & H. SmidJohan (2004). Benchmarking of Corporate Social Responsibility: Methodological Problems and Robustness. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 53 (1-2):137-152.
Sibylle Gaisser & Thomas Reiss (2008). Biopharmaceutical Innovation Capacities – Benchmarking Europe and Implications for CEE. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 2 (2).
John A. Parnell, Gregory J. Scott & Georgios Angelopoulos (forthcoming). Benchmarking Tendencies in Managerial Mindsets: Prioritizing Stockholders and Stakeholders in Peru, South Africa, and the United States. Journal of Business Ethics.
Annette Kleinfeld (2001). Benchmarking the Moral Decision-Making Strength of European Biotech Companies: A European Research Project. Business Ethics 10 (2):122–139.
Ruben Berrios (2006). Government Contracts and Contractor Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 63 (2):119 - 130.
Sang-Chul Park (2012). Competitiveness of East Asian Science Cities: Discourse on Their Status as Global or Local Innovative Clusters. [REVIEW] AI and Society 27 (4):451-464.
Naomi Hodgson (2012). 'The Only Answer is Innovation …': Europe, Policy, and the Big Society. Journal of Philosophy of Education 46 (4):532-545.
Steven Dorrestijn (2012). Technical Mediation and Subjectivation: Tracing and Extending Foucault's Philosophy of Technology. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Technology 25 (2):221-241.
Gavin Michael Barrett, Brigid Laffan, Rodney Thom, Daniel C. Thomas & Ben Tonra, Ireland's Future in Europe: Scenarios and Implications.
Jos C. N. Raadschelders (2011). Public Administration: The Interdisciplinary Study of Government. OUP Oxford.
Antonio Marturano (2002). The Role of Metaethics and the Future of Computer Ethics. Ethics and Information Technology 4 (1):71-78.
Edward Hackett & Diana Rhoten (2011). Engaged, Embedded, Enjoined: Science and Technology Studies in the National Science Foundation. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):823-838.
Added to index2010-12-11
Total downloads10 ( #114,274 of 722,698 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,006 of 722,698 )
How can I increase my downloads?