Más allá de enfoques utópicos y distópicos sobre innovación democrática. Beyond Utopian and Dystopian approaches to democratic innovation

IF 0.6 0 PHILOSOPHY
Gisela Zaremberg, Yanina Welp
{"title":"Más allá de enfoques utópicos y distópicos sobre innovación democrática. Beyond Utopian and Dystopian approaches to democratic innovation","authors":"Gisela Zaremberg, Yanina Welp","doi":"10.6035/recerca.2020.25.1.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses the myths regarding both the conceptualization and the expected effects that are implicitly or explicitly presented in analyses of the so-called ‘democratic innovations’, that is, the new institutions that aim to increase public participation beyond regular elections. It is argued that these myths, together with the (fictitious) confrontation between direct and indirect politics, have generated false oppositions and reductionisms that mask the debate and limit empirical approximations to democratic innovation. A research agenda based on the concept of ‘participatory ecologies’ is suggested as a way to gain an understanding of the mechanisms of participation in a systematic way. Este articulo analiza los mitos que se han construido, tanto en un plano conceptual como de efectos esperados, en torno a las denominadas innovaciones democraticas , entendidas como instituciones destinadas a incrementar la participacion ciudadana mas alla de las elecciones. Argumentamos que tanto estos mitos como la (ficticia) confrontacion entre politica directa e indirecta ha generado falsas oposiciones y reduccionismos que enmascaran el debate y limitan el estudio empirico de la innovacion democratica. Una agenda de investigacion basada en el concepto de ecologias participativas se sugiere para el entendimiento de los mecanismos de participacion en forma sistematica.","PeriodicalId":42552,"journal":{"name":"Recerca-Revista de Pensament & Analisi","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Recerca-Revista de Pensament & Analisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6035/recerca.2020.25.1.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This paper discusses the myths regarding both the conceptualization and the expected effects that are implicitly or explicitly presented in analyses of the so-called ‘democratic innovations’, that is, the new institutions that aim to increase public participation beyond regular elections. It is argued that these myths, together with the (fictitious) confrontation between direct and indirect politics, have generated false oppositions and reductionisms that mask the debate and limit empirical approximations to democratic innovation. A research agenda based on the concept of ‘participatory ecologies’ is suggested as a way to gain an understanding of the mechanisms of participation in a systematic way. Este articulo analiza los mitos que se han construido, tanto en un plano conceptual como de efectos esperados, en torno a las denominadas innovaciones democraticas , entendidas como instituciones destinadas a incrementar la participacion ciudadana mas alla de las elecciones. Argumentamos que tanto estos mitos como la (ficticia) confrontacion entre politica directa e indirecta ha generado falsas oposiciones y reduccionismos que enmascaran el debate y limitan el estudio empirico de la innovacion democratica. Una agenda de investigacion basada en el concepto de ecologias participativas se sugiere para el entendimiento de los mecanismos de participacion en forma sistematica.
本文讨论了在分析所谓的“民主创新”(即旨在增加公众参与超出常规选举的新制度)时,隐含或明确地提出的关于概念化和预期效果的神话。有人认为,这些神话,连同直接政治和间接政治之间的(虚构的)对抗,产生了虚假的对立和简化主义,掩盖了辩论并限制了对民主创新的经验近似。提出了一个基于“参与式生态”概念的研究议程,作为一种系统地了解参与机制的方法。从具体分析的角度来看,这是一种社会参与,一种政治参与,一种政治参与,一种政治参与,一种政治参与,一种政治参与,一种政治参与,一种政治参与,一种政治参与,一种政治参与,一种政治参与,一种政治参与。争论是政治上的直接对抗,而不是政治上的间接对抗;争论是政治上的间接对抗;争论是政治上的间接对抗;争论是政治上的间接对抗;争论是政治上的间接对抗;争论是政治上的间接对抗;联合国调查议程的基础和生态参与的概念,是对形成系统的参与机制的共同目的。
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
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
32 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信