小型公共协商机构解决问题的潜力:来自比利时公民调查的证据

IF 3.6 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE European Journal of Political Research Pub Date : 2023-11-11 DOI:10.1111/1475-6765.12639
LISA VAN DIJK, HANNAH WERNER, SOFIE MARIEN
{"title":"小型公共协商机构解决问题的潜力:来自比利时公民调查的证据","authors":"LISA VAN DIJK,&nbsp;HANNAH WERNER,&nbsp;SOFIE MARIEN","doi":"10.1111/1475-6765.12639","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Concerns about widespread democratic dissatisfaction have prompted a search for remedies, such as increasing citizens’ role in politics. While the public seems supportive, it remains unclear whether such newly introduced procedures can effectively tackle citizens’ dissatisfaction with present-day politics. This paper develops a problem-solving approach to studying this question. It proposes that combining insights on what ‘pushes’ and ‘pulls’ people to support procedural reform is crucial: Only then can we uncover if and how people consider procedural reform as addressing the problem(s) they see in the representative system today. Using the example of deliberative minipublics and original, pre-registered survey data from Belgium (n = 1,579), we find that respondents generally think of minipublics as problem-solvers rather than problem-creators, albeit to different degrees. For instance, this perceived problem-solving potential is more pronounced among discontent citizens. This study sheds new light on the importance of studying citizens’ reasoning about the roots and remedies for political dissatisfaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":48273,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Political Research","volume":"63 3","pages":"862-883"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The perceived problem-solving potential of deliberative minipublics: Evidence from a survey of Belgian citizens\",\"authors\":\"LISA VAN DIJK,&nbsp;HANNAH WERNER,&nbsp;SOFIE MARIEN\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1475-6765.12639\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Concerns about widespread democratic dissatisfaction have prompted a search for remedies, such as increasing citizens’ role in politics. While the public seems supportive, it remains unclear whether such newly introduced procedures can effectively tackle citizens’ dissatisfaction with present-day politics. This paper develops a problem-solving approach to studying this question. It proposes that combining insights on what ‘pushes’ and ‘pulls’ people to support procedural reform is crucial: Only then can we uncover if and how people consider procedural reform as addressing the problem(s) they see in the representative system today. Using the example of deliberative minipublics and original, pre-registered survey data from Belgium (n = 1,579), we find that respondents generally think of minipublics as problem-solvers rather than problem-creators, albeit to different degrees. For instance, this perceived problem-solving potential is more pronounced among discontent citizens. This study sheds new light on the importance of studying citizens’ reasoning about the roots and remedies for political dissatisfaction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Political Research\",\"volume\":\"63 3\",\"pages\":\"862-883\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Political Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6765.12639\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Political Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6765.12639","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对普遍存在的民主不满情绪的担忧促使人们寻求补救措施,例如增强公民在政治中的作用。虽然公众似乎对此表示支持,但这些新引入的程序能否有效解决公民对当今政治的不满,仍是一个未知数。本文提出了一种解决问题的方法来研究这一问题。本文提出,将有关 "推动 "和 "拉动 "人们支持程序改革的因素的见解结合起来至关重要:只有这样,我们才能发现人们是否以及如何将程序改革视为解决他们在当今代议制中看到的问题。我们以议事型小型公共机构为例,利用比利时预先登记的原始调查数据(n = 1,579),发现受访者普遍认为小型公共机构是问题的解决者,而非问题的制造者,尽管程度不同。例如,这种解决问题的潜力在不满的公民中更为明显。本研究揭示了研究公民对政治不满的根源和补救措施的推理的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The perceived problem-solving potential of deliberative minipublics: Evidence from a survey of Belgian citizens

Concerns about widespread democratic dissatisfaction have prompted a search for remedies, such as increasing citizens’ role in politics. While the public seems supportive, it remains unclear whether such newly introduced procedures can effectively tackle citizens’ dissatisfaction with present-day politics. This paper develops a problem-solving approach to studying this question. It proposes that combining insights on what ‘pushes’ and ‘pulls’ people to support procedural reform is crucial: Only then can we uncover if and how people consider procedural reform as addressing the problem(s) they see in the representative system today. Using the example of deliberative minipublics and original, pre-registered survey data from Belgium (n = 1,579), we find that respondents generally think of minipublics as problem-solvers rather than problem-creators, albeit to different degrees. For instance, this perceived problem-solving potential is more pronounced among discontent citizens. This study sheds new light on the importance of studying citizens’ reasoning about the roots and remedies for political dissatisfaction.

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
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
5.70%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: European Journal of Political Research specialises in articles articulating theoretical and comparative perspectives in political science, and welcomes both quantitative and qualitative approaches. EJPR also publishes short research notes outlining ongoing research in more specific areas of research. The Journal includes the Political Data Yearbook, published as a double issue at the end of each volume.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Correction to (When) do electoral mandates set the agenda? Government capacity and mandate responsiveness in Germany Issue Information Patterns of democracy and democratic satisfaction: Results from a comparative conjoint experiment
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1