在具有挑战性的背景下,公民问责行动:我们学到了什么?

IF 2 3区 经济学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Development Policy Review Pub Date : 2023-02-16 DOI:10.1111/dpr.12697
John Gaventa, Anuradha Joshi, Colin Anderson
{"title":"在具有挑战性的背景下,公民问责行动:我们学到了什么?","authors":"John Gaventa,&nbsp;Anuradha Joshi,&nbsp;Colin Anderson","doi":"10.1111/dpr.12697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Motivation</h3>\n \n <p>While much is known about how citizens mobilize and make claims for accountability in more democratic, stable, and peaceful settings, little is known about how accountability dynamics work in more challenging contexts—those more democratically weak, politically fragile, and affected by legacies of violence and conflict.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>This article introduces a special issue that brings together findings from across the Action for Empowerment and Accountability programme. The programme explored citizen action for accountability and citizens' experiences of governance in Mozambique, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan and, to a lesser degree, Egypt—countries that reflect challenging conditions now common in many places across the world.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\n \n <p>We introduce and summarize the key findings of eight commissioned articles—some which explore specific themes across the body of research, and some that report findings of particular multi-country studies. We analyse these findings in relation to what they tell us about the contextual factors that matter, the strategies adopted, and the consequences of citizen-led social and political action.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>We find a number of contextual challenges for citizen action that are common, though not unique, to these settings. Despite authoritarian governance histories, and norms of fear, low expectations, and patriarchal exclusion we see diverse examples of social and political action, both open questioning of authorities and dissent and more under the radar and mediated responses. Such efforts have led to increased visibility of grievances, increased citizen agency, some concrete responses from authorities, and evidence of progressive norm change.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\n \n <p>We argue that even in challenging contexts there are prospects for finding some space for productive citizen engagement and citizen-led social and political action. These are more likely to be found from taking a “citizen-eye” view to relevant governance dynamics, actors, and identifying the most important issues. Networks and alliances, including with donors, are significant. But accountability goals in such contexts need to be realistic and recognize the importance of small steps and establishing the building blocks of better governance.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51478,"journal":{"name":"Development Policy Review","volume":"41 S1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dpr.12697","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Citizen action for accountability in challenging contexts: What have we learned?\",\"authors\":\"John Gaventa,&nbsp;Anuradha Joshi,&nbsp;Colin Anderson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dpr.12697\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Motivation</h3>\\n \\n <p>While much is known about how citizens mobilize and make claims for accountability in more democratic, stable, and peaceful settings, little is known about how accountability dynamics work in more challenging contexts—those more democratically weak, politically fragile, and affected by legacies of violence and conflict.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>This article introduces a special issue that brings together findings from across the Action for Empowerment and Accountability programme. The programme explored citizen action for accountability and citizens' experiences of governance in Mozambique, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan and, to a lesser degree, Egypt—countries that reflect challenging conditions now common in many places across the world.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\\n \\n <p>We introduce and summarize the key findings of eight commissioned articles—some which explore specific themes across the body of research, and some that report findings of particular multi-country studies. We analyse these findings in relation to what they tell us about the contextual factors that matter, the strategies adopted, and the consequences of citizen-led social and political action.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>We find a number of contextual challenges for citizen action that are common, though not unique, to these settings. Despite authoritarian governance histories, and norms of fear, low expectations, and patriarchal exclusion we see diverse examples of social and political action, both open questioning of authorities and dissent and more under the radar and mediated responses. Such efforts have led to increased visibility of grievances, increased citizen agency, some concrete responses from authorities, and evidence of progressive norm change.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>We argue that even in challenging contexts there are prospects for finding some space for productive citizen engagement and citizen-led social and political action. These are more likely to be found from taking a “citizen-eye” view to relevant governance dynamics, actors, and identifying the most important issues. Networks and alliances, including with donors, are significant. But accountability goals in such contexts need to be realistic and recognize the importance of small steps and establishing the building blocks of better governance.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"volume\":\"41 S1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dpr.12697\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12697\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12697","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在更民主、更稳定、更和平的环境中,人们对公民如何动员和要求问责制了解甚多,但对问责机制如何在更具挑战性的环境中发挥作用知之甚少——在那些民主更薄弱、政治更脆弱、受暴力和冲突遗留影响的环境中。本文介绍了一个特刊,汇集了赋权行动和问责方案的调查结果。该方案探讨了莫桑比克、缅甸、尼日利亚、巴基斯坦以及埃及(程度较轻)的公民问责行动和公民治理经验,这些国家反映了目前世界上许多地方普遍存在的具有挑战性的状况。方法和方法我们介绍和总结了八篇受委托的文章的主要发现,其中一些探讨了整个研究体系的特定主题,一些报告了特定的多国研究结果。我们分析了这些调查结果,分析了它们告诉我们的重要背景因素、所采取的策略以及公民主导的社会和政治行动的后果。我们发现,在这些环境中,公民行动面临的一些背景挑战是常见的,尽管不是唯一的。尽管有专制统治的历史,也有恐惧、低期望和父权排斥的规范,但我们看到了各种各样的社会和政治行动的例子,既有对当局和异议的公开质疑,也有更多的不为人知和调解的回应。这些努力已经导致不满情绪的日益公开,公民机构的增加,当局的一些具体回应,以及渐进式规范变化的证据。我们认为,即使在充满挑战的环境中,也有希望为富有成效的公民参与和公民主导的社会和政治行动找到一些空间。这些更有可能从“公民眼”的角度来看待相关的治理动态、参与者和确定最重要的问题。网络和联盟,包括与捐助者的联盟,是重要的。但是,在这种情况下,问责制的目标必须切合实际,必须认识到小步骤的重要性,并建立更好治理的基石。
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
Citizen action for accountability in challenging contexts: What have we learned?

Motivation

While much is known about how citizens mobilize and make claims for accountability in more democratic, stable, and peaceful settings, little is known about how accountability dynamics work in more challenging contexts—those more democratically weak, politically fragile, and affected by legacies of violence and conflict.

Purpose

This article introduces a special issue that brings together findings from across the Action for Empowerment and Accountability programme. The programme explored citizen action for accountability and citizens' experiences of governance in Mozambique, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan and, to a lesser degree, Egypt—countries that reflect challenging conditions now common in many places across the world.

Methods and approach

We introduce and summarize the key findings of eight commissioned articles—some which explore specific themes across the body of research, and some that report findings of particular multi-country studies. We analyse these findings in relation to what they tell us about the contextual factors that matter, the strategies adopted, and the consequences of citizen-led social and political action.

Findings

We find a number of contextual challenges for citizen action that are common, though not unique, to these settings. Despite authoritarian governance histories, and norms of fear, low expectations, and patriarchal exclusion we see diverse examples of social and political action, both open questioning of authorities and dissent and more under the radar and mediated responses. Such efforts have led to increased visibility of grievances, increased citizen agency, some concrete responses from authorities, and evidence of progressive norm change.

Policy implications

We argue that even in challenging contexts there are prospects for finding some space for productive citizen engagement and citizen-led social and political action. These are more likely to be found from taking a “citizen-eye” view to relevant governance dynamics, actors, and identifying the most important issues. Networks and alliances, including with donors, are significant. But accountability goals in such contexts need to be realistic and recognize the importance of small steps and establishing the building blocks of better governance.

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
Development Policy Review
Development Policy Review DEVELOPMENT STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Development Policy Review is the refereed journal that makes the crucial links between research and policy in international development. Edited by staff of the Overseas Development Institute, the London-based think-tank on international development and humanitarian issues, it publishes single articles and theme issues on topics at the forefront of current development policy debate. Coverage includes the latest thinking and research on poverty-reduction strategies, inequality and social exclusion, property rights and sustainable livelihoods, globalisation in trade and finance, and the reform of global governance. Informed, rigorous, multi-disciplinary and up-to-the-minute, DPR is an indispensable tool for development researchers and practitioners alike.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Acknowledgement of Reviewers China–Latin America relations in the context of the Belt and Road Initiative Assessing investment priorities for inclusive agricultural transformation in Tanzania Climate and development: What opportunities, what threats?
×
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