| ID | 175557 |
| Title Proper | Independent experts with political mandates |
| Other Title Information | Role distance’ in the production of political knowledge |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Niederberger, Aurel |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Some experts take on political mandates and simultaneously base their authority on a claim to independence: this balancing act enables international organisations (IOs) to incorporate ‘independent’ experts and generate ‘objective’ knowledge around their policies. However, how do these experts reconcile the contradictory roles of a mandated expert and an independent expert? I address this question by taking recourse to Goffman's sociology and two related concepts: sociological ambivalence refers to situations in which a person faces conflicting expectations. This conflict can be remedied through role distance, that is, behaviour that signals a degree of disaffection from the role one is currently performing while one simultaneously continues to perform that role. I conduct a case study of ‘independent’ experts hired by the UN Security Council to monitor sanctions, analysing how their position is sociologically ambivalent and how their knowledge practices are interlaced with performances of role distance. The findings have two implications for macro-phenomena: first, by keeping their contradictory role constellation functional, experts make it possible for IOs to mobilise ‘independent expertise’. Second, because experts perform role distance through the way they produce knowledge, role distance leaves traces in political knowledge. |
| `In' analytical Note | European Journal of International Security Vol. 5, No.3; Oct 2020: p.350 - 371 |
| Journal Source | European Journal of International Security Vol: 5 No 3 |
| Key Words | Global Governance ; knowledge ; UN Sanctions ; Experts ; Goffman |