一个由公民编写的节目?议程制定者和否决者起草2018年五星运动选举宣言

IF 2.2 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Contemporary Italian Politics Pub Date : 2022-01-12 DOI:10.1080/23248823.2022.2026666
Bálint Mikola
{"title":"一个由公民编写的节目?议程制定者和否决者起草2018年五星运动选举宣言","authors":"Bálint Mikola","doi":"10.1080/23248823.2022.2026666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Bottom-up policy development is integral to the concept of direct democracy and has been advertised by parties advocating this ideal as a ‘revolution’. However, as election manifestos are complex documents that embrace a wide range of policy areas, such processes typically involve external advisors or party politicians specialized in a narrow policy field. Thus, the task of writing the programme is shared among several stakeholders. This raises the question of the extent to which ‘citizens’, i.e. party activists, can serve as agenda-setters in this process, and whether they can exclude proposals they oppose from the manifesto. The article contributes to the agenda-setting literature by exploring this puzzle through analysing the case of the 2018 election manifesto of the Five-star Movement which was ‘written by citizens’ and ratified in several membership ballots. A detailed analysis of the policy development process determines the distribution of agenda-setting capacities and veto powers in the construction of the M5s’ election manifesto, which is contrasted with elite narratives gained from qualitative interviews with party representatives, and the findings of an online membership survey (n = 187). The findings suggest that although party members’ contribution to the agenda is negligible, some of the membership ballots granted them a substantial share of veto power. At the same time, the data indicates that few of them used this opportunity, which relegated membership ballots to a mere approval of top-down proposals. The findings challenge formalistic interpretations of direct democracy and highlight the importance of focusing on actual party practices instead.","PeriodicalId":37572,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Italian Politics","volume":"14 1","pages":"293 - 313"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A programme written by citizens? Agenda-setters and veto players in drafting the 2018 election manifesto of the Five-star Movement\",\"authors\":\"Bálint Mikola\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23248823.2022.2026666\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Bottom-up policy development is integral to the concept of direct democracy and has been advertised by parties advocating this ideal as a ‘revolution’. However, as election manifestos are complex documents that embrace a wide range of policy areas, such processes typically involve external advisors or party politicians specialized in a narrow policy field. Thus, the task of writing the programme is shared among several stakeholders. This raises the question of the extent to which ‘citizens’, i.e. party activists, can serve as agenda-setters in this process, and whether they can exclude proposals they oppose from the manifesto. The article contributes to the agenda-setting literature by exploring this puzzle through analysing the case of the 2018 election manifesto of the Five-star Movement which was ‘written by citizens’ and ratified in several membership ballots. A detailed analysis of the policy development process determines the distribution of agenda-setting capacities and veto powers in the construction of the M5s’ election manifesto, which is contrasted with elite narratives gained from qualitative interviews with party representatives, and the findings of an online membership survey (n = 187). The findings suggest that although party members’ contribution to the agenda is negligible, some of the membership ballots granted them a substantial share of veto power. At the same time, the data indicates that few of them used this opportunity, which relegated membership ballots to a mere approval of top-down proposals. The findings challenge formalistic interpretations of direct democracy and highlight the importance of focusing on actual party practices instead.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37572,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary Italian Politics\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"293 - 313\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary Italian Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23248823.2022.2026666\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Italian Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23248823.2022.2026666","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自下而上的政策发展是直接民主概念的组成部分,并被倡导这一理想的政党宣传为“革命”。然而,由于选举宣言是涵盖广泛政策领域的复杂文件,因此此类程序通常涉及专门从事狭窄政策领域的外部顾问或政党政治家。因此,编写方案的任务由几个利益攸关方分担。这就提出了一个问题,即“公民”,即政党活动家,在多大程度上可以在这一过程中担任议程制定者,以及他们是否可以将他们反对的提案排除在宣言之外。这篇文章通过分析2018年五星运动的竞选宣言的案例来探索这个谜题,为议程制定文献做出了贡献,该宣言是“由公民撰写的”,并在几次成员投票中获得批准。对政策制定过程的详细分析决定了M5竞选宣言构建过程中议程制定能力和否决权的分配,这与从对党代表的定性采访中获得的精英叙事以及在线会员调查的结果形成了对比(n=187)。调查结果表明,尽管党员对议程的贡献微不足道,但一些党员投票赋予了他们相当大的否决权。与此同时,数据表明,他们中很少有人利用这个机会,这使得会员投票只不过是对自上而下的提案的批准。调查结果挑战了对直接民主的形式主义解释,并强调了关注实际政党实践的重要性。
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
A programme written by citizens? Agenda-setters and veto players in drafting the 2018 election manifesto of the Five-star Movement
ABSTRACT Bottom-up policy development is integral to the concept of direct democracy and has been advertised by parties advocating this ideal as a ‘revolution’. However, as election manifestos are complex documents that embrace a wide range of policy areas, such processes typically involve external advisors or party politicians specialized in a narrow policy field. Thus, the task of writing the programme is shared among several stakeholders. This raises the question of the extent to which ‘citizens’, i.e. party activists, can serve as agenda-setters in this process, and whether they can exclude proposals they oppose from the manifesto. The article contributes to the agenda-setting literature by exploring this puzzle through analysing the case of the 2018 election manifesto of the Five-star Movement which was ‘written by citizens’ and ratified in several membership ballots. A detailed analysis of the policy development process determines the distribution of agenda-setting capacities and veto powers in the construction of the M5s’ election manifesto, which is contrasted with elite narratives gained from qualitative interviews with party representatives, and the findings of an online membership survey (n = 187). The findings suggest that although party members’ contribution to the agenda is negligible, some of the membership ballots granted them a substantial share of veto power. At the same time, the data indicates that few of them used this opportunity, which relegated membership ballots to a mere approval of top-down proposals. The findings challenge formalistic interpretations of direct democracy and highlight the importance of focusing on actual party practices instead.
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
Contemporary Italian Politics
Contemporary Italian Politics Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: Contemporary Italian Politics, formerly Bulletin of Italian Politics, is a political science journal aimed at academics and policy makers as well as others with a professional or intellectual interest in the politics of Italy. The journal has two main aims: Firstly, to provide rigorous analysis, in the English language, about the politics of what is one of the European Union’s four largest states in terms of population and Gross Domestic Product. We seek to do this aware that too often those in the English-speaking world looking for incisive analysis and insight into the latest trends and developments in Italian politics are likely to be stymied by two contrasting difficulties. On the one hand, they can turn to the daily and weekly print media. Here they will find information on the latest developments, sure enough; but much of it is likely to lack the incisiveness of academic writing and may even be straightforwardly inaccurate. On the other hand, readers can turn either to general political science journals – but here they will have to face the issue of fragmented information – or to specific journals on Italy – in which case they will find that politics is considered only insofar as it is part of the broader field of modern Italian studies[...] The second aim follows from the first insofar as, in seeking to achieve it, we hope thereby to provide analysis that readers will find genuinely useful. With research funding bodies of all kinds giving increasing emphasis to knowledge transfer and increasingly demanding of applicants that they demonstrate the relevance of what they are doing to non-academic ‘end users’, political scientists have a self-interested motive for attempting a closer engagement with outside practitioners.
期刊最新文献
La justice en examen La justice en examen , by Cécile Vigour, Bartolomeo Cappellina, Laurence Dumoulin and Virginie Gautron, Presses Universitaires de France - P.U.F., Paris, 2022, 436 pp., €28.00 (Hardback), EAN 9782130836056 Neoliberal transformations of the Italian State: understanding the roots of the crises Neoliberal transformations of the Italian State: understanding the roots of the crises , by Adriano Cozzolino, Lanham, MD/London, Rowman & Littlefield, 2021, 216 pp., $110.00 (hardback), ISBN: 9781786614735. Come votano le periferie. Comportamento elettorale e disagio sociale nelle città Italiane Come votano le periferie. Comportamento elettorale e disagio sociale nelle città Italiane , by Marco Valbruzzi (ed.), Bologna, Il Mulino, 2021, 344 pp., €28 (paperback), ISBN: 978-88-15-29435-7 Il presidente del consiglio dei ministri. mediatore o decisore? Il presidente del consiglio dei ministri. mediatore o decisore? by Francesco Clementi, Bologna, Il Mulino, 2023, 240 pp., €16,00 (paperback), ISNB: 9788815386359 Mussolini’s grandchildren: fascism in contemporary Italy Mussolini’s grandchildren: fascism in contemporary Italy , edited by David Broder, London, Pluto Press, 2023, 240 pp., £17.99 (paperback), ISBN: 9780745348025
×
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