深思熟虑的全民投票:一个时代已经到来的想法?

IF 3.2 3区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Administration & Society Pub Date : 2023-01-31 DOI:10.1177/00953997221140898
F. Hendriks, C. Wagenaar
{"title":"深思熟虑的全民投票:一个时代已经到来的想法?","authors":"F. Hendriks, C. Wagenaar","doi":"10.1177/00953997221140898","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While deliberative citizens’ assemblies and plebiscitary referendums have long been perceived as antithetical, the idea of combining the two democratic instruments for better connecting administration and society has come to the fore in both theory and practice in more recent years. In this article, three ways of linking citizens’ assemblies to the referendum process are distinguished, exemplified, institutionally compared, and reflectively discussed. The three—the referendum-preparing, referendum-scrutinizing, and referendum-elaborating citizens’ assembly—come with their distinctive features, potential merits, scope limits, and related design questions. Fitting the “square peg of deliberative democracy” into the “round hole of direct democracy” and embedding hybrid design in diverging political systems are overarching challenges of institutional design. The article concludes that considering recent developments in theory and practice, the idea of a deliberative referendum linking citizens’ assemblies to direct voting on issues, seems an idea whose time has come, but also comes with challenges and questions that design thinkers and practitioners have only begun to tackle and answer.","PeriodicalId":47966,"journal":{"name":"Administration & Society","volume":"55 1","pages":"569 - 590"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Deliberative Referendum: An Idea Whose Time has Come?\",\"authors\":\"F. Hendriks, C. Wagenaar\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00953997221140898\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While deliberative citizens’ assemblies and plebiscitary referendums have long been perceived as antithetical, the idea of combining the two democratic instruments for better connecting administration and society has come to the fore in both theory and practice in more recent years. In this article, three ways of linking citizens’ assemblies to the referendum process are distinguished, exemplified, institutionally compared, and reflectively discussed. The three—the referendum-preparing, referendum-scrutinizing, and referendum-elaborating citizens’ assembly—come with their distinctive features, potential merits, scope limits, and related design questions. Fitting the “square peg of deliberative democracy” into the “round hole of direct democracy” and embedding hybrid design in diverging political systems are overarching challenges of institutional design. The article concludes that considering recent developments in theory and practice, the idea of a deliberative referendum linking citizens’ assemblies to direct voting on issues, seems an idea whose time has come, but also comes with challenges and questions that design thinkers and practitioners have only begun to tackle and answer.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administration & Society\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"569 - 590\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administration & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997221140898\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administration & Society","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997221140898","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

尽管公民大会和公民投票长期以来一直被认为是对立的,但近年来,将这两种民主工具结合起来以更好地连接行政和社会的想法在理论和实践中都崭露头角。在这篇文章中,将公民大会与公民投票进程联系起来的三种方式进行了区分、举例、制度比较和反思性讨论。三者——公民投票准备、公民投票审查和公民投票制定——都有其独特的特点、潜在的优点、范围限制和相关的设计问题。将“协商民主的方钉”嵌入“直接民主的圆孔”,并将混合设计嵌入不同的政治体系,是制度设计的首要挑战。文章的结论是,考虑到理论和实践的最新发展,将公民大会与对问题的直接投票联系起来的协商公投的想法似乎时机已经成熟,但也带来了设计思想家和从业者才刚刚开始解决和回答的挑战和问题。
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 Deliberative Referendum: An Idea Whose Time has Come?
While deliberative citizens’ assemblies and plebiscitary referendums have long been perceived as antithetical, the idea of combining the two democratic instruments for better connecting administration and society has come to the fore in both theory and practice in more recent years. In this article, three ways of linking citizens’ assemblies to the referendum process are distinguished, exemplified, institutionally compared, and reflectively discussed. The three—the referendum-preparing, referendum-scrutinizing, and referendum-elaborating citizens’ assembly—come with their distinctive features, potential merits, scope limits, and related design questions. Fitting the “square peg of deliberative democracy” into the “round hole of direct democracy” and embedding hybrid design in diverging political systems are overarching challenges of institutional design. The article concludes that considering recent developments in theory and practice, the idea of a deliberative referendum linking citizens’ assemblies to direct voting on issues, seems an idea whose time has come, but also comes with challenges and questions that design thinkers and practitioners have only begun to tackle and answer.
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
Administration & Society
Administration & Society PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: Administration & Society seeks to further the understanding of public and human service organizations, their administrative processes, and their effect on society. The journal publishes empirically oriented research reports and theoretically specific articles that synthesize or contribute to the advancement of understanding and explanation in these fields. Of particular interest are (1) studies that analyze the effects of the introduction of administrative strategies, programs, change interventions, and training; and (2) studies of intergroup, interorganizational, and organization-environment relationships and policy processes.
期刊最新文献
Community Diversity and Social Media Use in Local Governments Public-Private Partnerships in the Healthcare Sector and Sustainability: Managerial Insights from a Systematic Literature Review CEO Turnover and Openness of Decision-making Processes in the Post-succession Phase: Exploring a Threat-rigidity Perspective The Adequacy of Cost-Benefit Analysis in the Assessment of Public Value: A Case Study From the Transportation Sector New Paths for Public Governance: Literature Review, Content Analysis, and Conceptual Framework Proposal in an Integrative View
×
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