LIST OF PANELS

In the post-COVID era, the principles and practices of democracy have increasingly been under attack. More authoritarian populist leaders around the globe have been emboldened to exercise their power in destructive ways (Smith-Carrier et al. 2025), putting the very existence of all species and the planet at risk. Such leaders, and the wealthy global elite who sustain them, are continuously reshaping the global order and social relations in the interests of capital. Private actors are extracting ever-greater volumes of the Earth’s finite resources, with the profits of these enterprises hoarded by an infinitesimally small assemblage of the ultra-rich (Oxfam 2026). Deeply enmeshed in neoliberal orthodoxy, including fiscal austerity, social welfare retrenchment, and privatization (Smith-Carrier and Dionne, In Press), people around the world are subject to intensifying levels of poverty and hunger (Hickel et al. 2025). Populism often thrives by framing society as divided into opposing groups, typically the "pure people" versus a corrupt elite or marginalized others. This dynamic intensifies conflicts over who is considered as belonging or not. While "the rise in authoritarianism means policy inquiry cannot take liberal democracy for granted" (Dodge 2025, 167), we aim to discuss research that seeks to address social injustice by fostering dialogue within oppressed communities—enhancing their awareness, self-esteem, and capacity to draw on their own knowledge in relation to dominant powers and interests (cf. Bartels and Wittmayer 2018). This panel aims to consider how frequently silenced voices can be amplified in the struggle for human rights, social justice, and a more equitable and sustainable world. Presentations that highlight how interpretive policy analysis (IPA) can be used to advance insurgent democratic experiences, promote resistance and solidarity, and mobilize social movements are welcomed.

Addressing current crises effectively and sustainably requires us to critically consider not only the kinds and purposes of the knowledge we seek, but also the underlying research approaches used to produce it (cf. Bartels and Wittmayer 2018). The panel’s overarching question explores how interpretivism, grounded in reflexivity and emphasizing meaning, context, and lived experience, is particularly well equipped to challenge and disrupt power dynamics and foster alliances in the field (Bliesemann de Guevara and Ridden 2025, 20). Moreover, it seeks to probe how the support of local knowledge and situated research allows for a decolonial approach that challenges how academic knowledge production privileges Global North knowledge (Boullosa 2026; Einfeld and Sullivan, 2025).

References

Some suggest we are seeing a rupture in global relations and a retreat from the rules-based international order (World Economic Forum 2026), including the liberal democratic orientation that prevailed over the past few decades (Matlosa 2025). Others contend, however, that the neoliberal global order has always been infused with colonial, imperialistic, and anti-democratic tendencies (see, for example, Smith-Carrier and Dionne In Press). Still, recent events suggest that authoritarian populist leaders are increasingly dominating the global (and many domestic) political arena(s), seeking to control and shape the ideologies and narratives therein, particularly with the explosion of post-truth politics (Braun and Dodge 2018). With the rise of authoritarian leadership, voices of dissent are typically quashed, and not uncommonly, criminalized (Di Ronco and Selmini 2024). Contributions to this panel explore: How can IPA be used to analyze democratic backsliding, authoritarian governance, and the criminalization of dissent?

In considering the rise of geopolitical conflicts and tensions, the retreat from climate objectives, and the omnipresent drive to extract more of the world’s resources, the panel invites submissions responding to: How can IPA illuminate the policies, practices, and processes of extractivism, weak climate governance, and/or territorial conflicts, particularly considering competing narratives, legitimacy, and knowledge hierarchies?

Social movements over the past few decades have sought to hold political and private actors accountable for historic and ongoing injustices, including colonial land grabs and the exploitation of Indigenous Peoples (Idle No More, Land Back), poverty, unemployment, and income disparities (Occupy, Yellow Vests, Arab Spring), gender and racial inequities (MeToo, Black Lives Matter), and climate destruction (Extinction Rebellion, Fridays for Future). Many of these movements have captured global media attention yet have not brought about the transformative changes advocates and activists have longed to see (see Bevins 2023). This panel asks: What role can interpretive research play in supporting social movement strategies, coalition-building, and the mobilization of broader constituencies for change? In relation to action plans and change strategies, the panel also considers: How can IPA be applied to promote Indigenous or subaltern approaches to resistance and changemaking, including Indigenous resurgence, self-determination, consultation/consent struggles, and resistance to homogenizing state governance? Furthermore, how can interpretive research advance insurgent democratic experiences and community governance alternatives, locally and/or globally?

Given the privileging of certain knowledges and knowledge systems, particularly from (colonial) leaders in the global North, intersectional voices have often been excluded and/or silenced. This panel seeks to explore: What role can IPA play in amplifying intersectional voices and perspectives in resistance efforts, and how can interpretive research highlight everyday practices of solidarity, mutual support, and conviviality? Moreover, are there methodological and/or ethical reflections to consider when conducting interpretive research in contentious settings, especially in relation to material and embodied ways of expression?