Explaining Political Efficacy in Deliberative Procedures - A Novel Methodological Approach

Brigitte Geißel, P. Hess
{"title":"Explaining Political Efficacy in Deliberative Procedures - A Novel Methodological Approach","authors":"Brigitte Geißel, P. Hess","doi":"10.16997/JDD.280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"So far, not much research has been done explaining the change of political efficacy in deliberative procedures, and case studies or experiments prevail in the field. Quantitative, systematic studies of real-life cases are missing. This article contributes to filling this gap. It identifies factors which lead to increased group-related political efficacy in deliberative procedures applying an almost novel method, i.e. a quantitative meta-synthesis combining and aggregating data from case studies. The study focuses exemplarily on Germany. The findings indicate that an improvement of political efficacy is more likely when deliberative procedures take place in a municipality, which has institutionalized citizens’ involvement in a local ‘participatory plan’ (‘local constitution’) and provides respective staff.","PeriodicalId":147188,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Deliberation","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Deliberation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16997/JDD.280","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

So far, not much research has been done explaining the change of political efficacy in deliberative procedures, and case studies or experiments prevail in the field. Quantitative, systematic studies of real-life cases are missing. This article contributes to filling this gap. It identifies factors which lead to increased group-related political efficacy in deliberative procedures applying an almost novel method, i.e. a quantitative meta-synthesis combining and aggregating data from case studies. The study focuses exemplarily on Germany. The findings indicate that an improvement of political efficacy is more likely when deliberative procedures take place in a municipality, which has institutionalized citizens’ involvement in a local ‘participatory plan’ (‘local constitution’) and provides respective staff.
解释协商程序中的政治效能——一种新的方法论方法
迄今为止,对审议程序中政治效能变化的解释研究不多,多为案例研究或实验研究。目前还缺乏对现实案例的定量、系统研究。本文有助于填补这一空白。它采用一种几乎新颖的方法,即结合和汇总案例研究数据的定量综合方法,确定导致审议程序中与群体有关的政治效能增加的因素。这项研究以德国为例。研究结果表明,当审议程序在市政当局进行时,政治效率的提高更有可能实现,因为市政当局将公民参与地方“参与计划”(“地方宪法”)制度化,并提供相应的工作人员。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信