Closing a gap or creating a new one? Comparing support for participatory instruments among different stakeholders

IF 4.2 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
BRAM WAUTERS, TESSA HAESEVOETS, BRAM VERSCHUERE, ARNE ROETS, KRISTOF STEYVERS, GILLES PITTOORS, LIESE BERKVENS, NINA DE SMEDT, WILLEM GOUTRY, RUBEN VAN SEVEREN
{"title":"Closing a gap or creating a new one? Comparing support for participatory instruments among different stakeholders","authors":"BRAM WAUTERS,&nbsp;TESSA HAESEVOETS,&nbsp;BRAM VERSCHUERE,&nbsp;ARNE ROETS,&nbsp;KRISTOF STEYVERS,&nbsp;GILLES PITTOORS,&nbsp;LIESE BERKVENS,&nbsp;NINA DE SMEDT,&nbsp;WILLEM GOUTRY,&nbsp;RUBEN VAN SEVEREN","doi":"10.1111/1475-6765.12739","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Representative democracy is perceived to be in crisis in many Western countries. Increasing citizen participation is often considered to be a remedy to close this gap between government and the people. Which instruments should be used to realize this remains, however, open for discussion. In this article, we compare attitudes of citizens, politicians and civil servants towards a number of participatory instruments. We assess to what extent these attitudes are influenced by ‘interests’ (operationalized as the formal position one takes: either politician, citizen or civil servant) and ‘ideas’ (measured as ideological beliefs), while holding the institutional context constant (the local level in Flanders [Belgium]). Analyses based on a large-scale survey (<i>N</i> = 4,168) show that although the ideological position of the respondents to some extent affects attitudes towards particular participatory instruments, especially their formal position has a considerable impact on how participatory instruments are appreciated. Indeed, different stakeholders distinctly advance different instruments as the best way to enhance citizen participation. This raises questions about the potential of citizen participation to narrow the gap between citizens and policymakers, as diverging attitudes towards particular instruments might create a new gap rather than closing one.</p>","PeriodicalId":48273,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Political Research","volume":"64 3","pages":"1351-1370"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Political Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://ejpr.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6765.12739","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Representative democracy is perceived to be in crisis in many Western countries. Increasing citizen participation is often considered to be a remedy to close this gap between government and the people. Which instruments should be used to realize this remains, however, open for discussion. In this article, we compare attitudes of citizens, politicians and civil servants towards a number of participatory instruments. We assess to what extent these attitudes are influenced by ‘interests’ (operationalized as the formal position one takes: either politician, citizen or civil servant) and ‘ideas’ (measured as ideological beliefs), while holding the institutional context constant (the local level in Flanders [Belgium]). Analyses based on a large-scale survey (N = 4,168) show that although the ideological position of the respondents to some extent affects attitudes towards particular participatory instruments, especially their formal position has a considerable impact on how participatory instruments are appreciated. Indeed, different stakeholders distinctly advance different instruments as the best way to enhance citizen participation. This raises questions about the potential of citizen participation to narrow the gap between citizens and policymakers, as diverging attitudes towards particular instruments might create a new gap rather than closing one.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

缩小差距还是创造新的差距?比较不同利益相关者对参与性文书的支持
在许多西方国家,代议制民主被认为处于危机之中。增加公民参与往往被认为是缩小政府与人民之间差距的补救办法。但是,应该使用哪些工具来实现这一点仍有待讨论。在本文中,我们比较了公民、政治家和公务员对一些参与性文书的态度。我们评估了这些态度在多大程度上受到“利益”(作为一个人采取的正式立场:政治家、公民或公务员)和“观念”(作为意识形态信仰衡量)的影响,同时保持制度背景不变(佛兰德斯[比利时]的地方层面)。基于大规模调查(N = 4168)的分析表明,尽管受访者的意识形态立场在一定程度上影响对特定参与性工具的态度,但他们的正式立场对如何评价参与性工具有相当大的影响。事实上,不同的利益相关者明显地推进不同的工具,作为加强公民参与的最佳途径。这引发了关于公民参与缩小公民与决策者之间差距的潜力的问题,因为对特定工具的不同态度可能会产生新的差距,而不是缩小差距。
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
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
5.70%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: European Journal of Political Research specialises in articles articulating theoretical and comparative perspectives in political science, and welcomes both quantitative and qualitative approaches. EJPR also publishes short research notes outlining ongoing research in more specific areas of research. The Journal includes the Political Data Yearbook, published as a double issue at the end of each volume.
×
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