Democracy Transformed: Perceived Legitimacy of the Institutional Shift from Election to Random Selection of Representatives

S. Pek, J. Kennedy, Adam Cronkright
{"title":"Democracy Transformed: Perceived Legitimacy of the Institutional Shift from Election to Random Selection of Representatives","authors":"S. Pek, J. Kennedy, Adam Cronkright","doi":"10.16997/JDD.293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While democracy remains a firmly-held ideal, the present state of electoral democracy is plagued by growing disaffection. As a result, both scholars and practitioners have shown considerable interest in the potential of random selection as a means of selecting political representatives. Despite its potential, deployment of this alternative is limited by concerns about its perceived legitimacy. Drawing on an inductive analysis of the replacement of elections with random selection in two student governments in Bolivia, we explore stakeholders’ perceptions of the legitimacy of random selection by investigating both their overall support for randomly selecting representatives as well as the views that inform this support. Overall, we find that random selection is indeed accepted as a legitimate means of selecting representatives, with stakeholders broadly preferring random selection and recommending its use in other schools—views which are informed by a critical assessment of random selection’s relative merits. Moreover, we find that perceptions may be affected by contextual factors that extend beyond individuals’ own values. Our findings thus contribute to work on random selection, its contextual embeddedness, and on the values underpinning democratic structures.","PeriodicalId":147188,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Deliberation","volume":"75 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Deliberation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16997/JDD.293","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

While democracy remains a firmly-held ideal, the present state of electoral democracy is plagued by growing disaffection. As a result, both scholars and practitioners have shown considerable interest in the potential of random selection as a means of selecting political representatives. Despite its potential, deployment of this alternative is limited by concerns about its perceived legitimacy. Drawing on an inductive analysis of the replacement of elections with random selection in two student governments in Bolivia, we explore stakeholders’ perceptions of the legitimacy of random selection by investigating both their overall support for randomly selecting representatives as well as the views that inform this support. Overall, we find that random selection is indeed accepted as a legitimate means of selecting representatives, with stakeholders broadly preferring random selection and recommending its use in other schools—views which are informed by a critical assessment of random selection’s relative merits. Moreover, we find that perceptions may be affected by contextual factors that extend beyond individuals’ own values. Our findings thus contribute to work on random selection, its contextual embeddedness, and on the values underpinning democratic structures.
民主转型:从选举到随机选择代表的制度转变的感知合法性
虽然民主仍然是一个坚定的理想,但选举民主的现状受到日益增长的不满情绪的困扰。因此,学者和实践者都对随机选择作为选举政治代表的一种手段的潜力表现出相当大的兴趣。尽管这种替代方案具有潜力,但由于人们对其合法性的担忧,其部署受到了限制。通过对玻利维亚两个学生政府以随机选择取代选举的归纳分析,我们通过调查利益相关者对随机选择代表的总体支持以及支持这种支持的观点,探讨了利益相关者对随机选择合法性的看法。总的来说,我们发现随机选择确实被接受为选择代表的合法手段,利益相关者普遍倾向于随机选择,并推荐在其他学校使用随机选择——这些观点是通过对随机选择相对优点的批判性评估得出的。此外,我们发现感知可能会受到超出个人自身价值观的背景因素的影响。因此,我们的发现有助于研究随机选择、其上下文嵌入性以及支持民主结构的价值观。
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